FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swingers Chat > Verification System?
Verification System?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
How do people feel the verification system works?
Do you think it would benefit from a "rating" system.
By that we mean, for example, say a verification 1 would mean, has met and had "fun", i.e. done the swap/same room/whatever. But basically interacted.
And a verification 2 would be an informal meet, like a face to face chat over a coffee or at a social event, but not actually interacting physically?
Verification 3 could be cam or phone verifying.
We bring this up as we have spent a long time chatting to people who are verified but haven't actually done a full meet.
We can all be verified for chatting - thats the easy part. But, could this be another way for timewasters to get in the back door and get verified into the bargain?
We do meets for coffees, etc, but we do engage in full meets if the cpl/whatever is right for us. But we feel a better system would aide the site and the participants therein.
Just a thought, comments would be welcomed.
Milf and Handsome |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
we think that the only verification worth the name, are the met in person ones, the other ones prove or verify very little, apart from the person in question owns a phone or a web cam, met in person at least proves that they have gone out into a swinging situation, be that a meet/social/or even just a chat with a prospective couple |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"we think that the only verification worth the name, are the met in person ones, the other ones prove or verify very little, apart from the person in question owns a phone or a web cam, met in person at least proves that they have gone out into a swinging situation, be that a meet/social/or even just a chat with a prospective couple"
Agreed..Has to be at LEAST a meet in person. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The verification system, in our opinion, works well exactly as it is.
We were on a site which had 'star ratings' and to be frank, the stars meant Jack shit.
Bottom line is that a verification system is only a guide, a very rough and ready guide, and will always be open to abuse no matter what.
If it ain't broken - don't fix it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
Forum Mod |
Well we all started off with none and would that have made others who were verified think we were timewasters?
There will always be timewasters,I don't believe that people who are verified are incapable of being timewasters themselves
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It’s ok as it is, it’s only a guide after all, most people perform their own checks before arranging any fun, normally via a phone call, social meet, cam etc, if nobody ever took a chance without having to rely on verifications then nobody would have any to start with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We never even wanted any lol... people can make up their own minds with us..
To grade us still further .. nahhhh
Leave alone.. Says all it needs to now. Sometimes we read more than we need to anyway... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i think the verifaction should only count when met in person xx"
I agree with that, when we was quite new, we verified someone via webcam, as we had been talking for a while and putting plans of a meet into action, however, soon after that verification, we have heard nothing since and see they still have just the two web cam verifications.
W  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think that a site needs 2 types of verification.
Firstly, a verification that the person or people are who they say they are. I.e. couples are couples and females are females. Most of the timewasters are wasting time because they are not what they claim. This can be done by phone or by web cam.
The photo verification also helps with this.
As for the second type of verification to determine if the people are ok, this needs to be done in person.
On the site i used to be a moderator on, only once a person had a number of verifications, could they then verify others.
I'm sure a base group of couples could be found to start the ball rolling.
Even that system had holes in it though, as one single woman turned against the site owners after she'd been verified and went on to verify people knew weren't genuine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To be honest a site doesn't need any, the fact that we constantly read posts moaning about timewasters on a site that does have a verification system in place proves this.
We think to many people rely on verifications to much, feel free to flame us, but it does seem that everyone wants everything at there feet nowadays with no effort expected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *achaCouple
over a year ago
manchester |
you lot make me laugh. however much you have a 'verification' system on a swinger site, the responsibility is on YOU to confirm if someone is gen.
its quite easy to do early on by cam/phone etc.
verifications will never replace the need you will have to confirm by cam/chat etc.
also, you might have met someone who YOU dont get on with. they are still gen, but they get less 'verifications' than the ones you 'liked'.
'verification' is just a guide, come on guys, you should know this!!!!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
the verification system works very well as it is. Why change it. Not everyone puts the sex part of a meet on the verification for everyone to read. I think it is more honest when they verify what the person is actually like. YOU can find out about the sex part if you meet them then lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you lot make me laugh. however much you have a 'verification' system on a swinger site, the responsibility is on YOU to confirm if someone is gen.
its quite easy to do early on by cam/phone etc.
verifications will never replace the need you will have to confirm by cam/chat etc.
"
Read my post, just 3 posts above yours. :/
W |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
All comments are good and valid in varying degrees and its good to get peoples' feedback so thanks.
The subject was borne of our frustrations of chatting and chatting. verifying on phone and cam. meeting for a coffee, etc, then when it gets to the nitty gritty, they shy away. But are still always on the site, and never seem to progress.
We understand some genuine people have genuine reasons and we also appreciate we are not everyones cuppa T, which is where honesty comes into it.
We have been on this site 2 years approximately, having ditched it previously due to timewasters and boredom and we are feeling like that again.
Anyway peeps, have fun. And if you are gonna arrange a meet - follow through ;- )
Mwahs x x x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
verification is one step towards helping surely?? ...especially the 'self verification' - anyone who wont (or cant) verify themself/selves cant be that bothered about portraying themselves as genuine can they?
Why not do everything you can to portray yourself properly, put on your profile exactly what you are looking for, cpls with a photo of them both together !!, (facial pics can be put in private), guys with just cock pics.
Suppose everyone has their own opinions , but we aint interested in anyone who doesent verify themselves.
After all, we have all seen the profiles with 'scanned in' polaroid 70's pics, pics of shoes, cars, boats, the odd nipple or close up cropped to death fanny pics - list is endless.
Wont harp on anyhow - good luck to those who are genuine and hope you find what you are looking for.
xxx
Trev & Julie (real names, real people and nothing to hide) xxx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *achaCouple
over a year ago
manchester |
we find it amazing that most people with an ounce of 'common' cant suss people out from first couple of contacts. a verification cant tell you if you get on with anyone.
we ditch anyone who are not to our taste straight away.
x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
personally i don't think it needs to be stated wether you have played or not, i actually get put off by people who feel the need to put how many times they'd cum and if she took it up the arse in a verification, and if i get guys verifying me in that way i don't put them on show, so i don't feel we need a rating system to say what kind of meet we had, ie sex or just social no |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I agree that it works well. But do any people make contact with people with others that aren't photo verified?"
Absolutely...... I am living proof of that!
I made the effort to get myself know, I made the time in the chatrooms and at various socials.. I dont see why I should have to jump thru another hoop!
All that photo varification says to me is that someone took a picture with "fab swingers" on it
It doesn't tell me if they are correct about there height for example
It doesn't tell me if they will turn up or not for meets
It doesn't tell me if they are a nice people or complete arses
I don't see what another level of "varification" would do to help... like others have said, if you are going to use varifications as your be all and end all as oppose to actually getting to know people and using a certain amount of gut instinct then no amount of "rejigging" is going to help.....
can I ask the OP if they are just trying to find a sure fire way of trying to find out who plays and who doesn't... just people decide that you both maybe aren't what they are after in the e-mailing/ meeting stage, it doesn't mean they are timewasters... I think that is highly unfair
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Agree with Fabio, I am not verified but have met people from the site. Doesn't bother me particularly about verification. As he says, it still does not mean they will turn up ! If you do have verification I think the only one that counts at all is the met in person one. But it is still down to you to make your choice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i think an i only think mind u lol
wat do u think about verifaction with
1)if a cpl..the fem must call 2 verify its a cpl an there real a fem there anno just a single guy pretenting 2 be a cpl??
2) as said above only verify if a meet ha taken place?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We agree that verification is only one thing in a long list that people can use before they actually decide to arrange a meet and think making it more complicated by ratings etc is fruitless.
We think all the current forms of verification are useful. The difficulty with verification is the three ways people can get a verified ‘tick’ on their profile.
For new people in the scene the webcam and phone verifications are really good as it shows others they are genuinely interested about getting into the scene without the pressure of actually going out for that 1st very scary meet. The meeting in person shows they are reliable and turn up as arranged.
The difficulty is that all 3 of these automatically provide a green tick on the profile and some people, to be discrete, choose not to display the form of verification.
Many of us get a gut feeling, if there is a profile that has been active for a long time (subjective as to how long lol) without any form of verification, that the person or persons, MAY not be genuine and MAY therefore choose to pass them by. We sometimes view green tick profiles without any written verifications and we do wonder whether the people would actually ever meet or if they are the type who will only want to chat about meeting (be it on phone or cam) but never actually go through with it (something we have found). We fully realise and respect that some people wish to be discrete and not post written feedback. Therefore, we feel that to replace the single green tick with 3 other symbols depending on ‘phone, webcam, in person’ would mean that people could still be discrete whilst allowing others a little bit more detail before contact.
Just our opinion and hope it makes sense
Xxx
PS: Just wanted to add that we do not want people who are verified by phone or cam only to think that we are calling them timewasters. The post did start with the idea that we agree with all the forms of verification. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
