Comment on Forum Rules Here

[Redneck3565]

Here's a suggested (and will probably be ignored!) rule!: Mongers need to know some damn geography! Its pathetic to see a post about an SW/AMP in one area that is NOWHERE NEAR the area of that forum (e.g. a post about Pomona, CA in the "Los Angeles" section!). Of course if this board was more "geography-friendly", this would not be a problem. Then again, if the MODERATOR actually paid attention to what the problem is, and FIXED IT, it would not be a problem!

[Tequila Kid]

Jackson,

Ignore my previous post regarding 'search' function. I just read the 'Letters to the Editor' topic and understand the situation.

Thanks for a great site.

ER

[Rock Dog]

DL,

I understand where you're coming from. There's been lot's of times when I've seen pics posted and I really felt like adding my own encouraging comments. But, I almost always hold back because I see what happens to a photo section when everyone piles on with their 2 cents worth. You end up with 3 or 4 pics in a row separated by a whole page worth of non-contributing comments where everyone is saying pretty much the same thing.

It's easy to express your comments be they postive or negative. There's a simple way to do it. Just send the guy a private message. You get to express your opinion. It reaches the person without any delay and the photo section stays fairly clear.

Sometimes, I get the feeling that a lot of the posts going up are done because the member is just trying to get some attention or jack up the number of their posts. Not naming any names, but I know of at least a couple of WSG members with well over 100 posts who contributed maybe 7 or 8 quality posts, got their senoir memberships and have been BS'ing ever since.

BTW, I was just kidding around about Nibu. He just happens to represent the most extreme example of what I was talking about. I never advocated a ban on such postings anyways. All I suggested was that Jackson could easily discourage it by delaying or not posting some of them at all. That would seem to have the additional benefit of actually reducing his workload.

It was just an idea. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. In the end, it's all Jackson's show anyways.

Rock

[Daddy Lows]

rolly,

ditto.

ryck and rock,

sometimes, i agree with the "woof, woof" stuff and whatnot but wtf, if one cannot express their own opinions, then the boards would be totally lifeless. in addition, banning commentary would entail another duty for the overworked jackson! if anything, posting opinions (along with field reports) makes the boards better overall. in a way, we're getting feedback from our peers. i've gotten lots of good advice concerning a rob i've encountered last week. it's all part of the sharing aspect of the boards. btw, jackson gave nibu his own forums across the boards for his rants. he explained it himself in the letters to the editor a while back. if you don't want to be bothered by nibu's extreme questions and posts, then don't click on his forums. simple, huh? that said, the thai photo gallery is beyond help. at least eltib's movie posting temporarily stalled the long missives. i miss the pics of the thai humpers a lot.


jackson,

thanks for a great site and all the work you do for us.

peace

[Rolly Polly]

So there should be absolutely no social interaction on the open forum? Kind of rediculous don't you think?

Now if there is a poster who only gives props and conversational type posts without ever adding to the useful database this site exists for, then you may have an individualized complaint.

A forum with nothing but facts has no personality and would become obsolete.

[Rock Dog]

Greetings to everyone,

I don't see what's wrong with Ryck's suggestion. There are so many frivolous postings being made all the time. Many, if not most, of them are being made by senior members.

One guy will post a pic in a photo section. Then you get 5 or 6 guys piling on with posts saying "great pic, you da man" or "she's ugly, woof woof". Pretty soon you have a photo section filled with B.S. postings rather than pics.

If someone really needs to comment on a pic, why not ask them to do so by pm? It would clean up a lot of the clutter and reduce Jackson's workload. It seems like it could be easy to enforce also. If it's a worthless post, Jackson could simply delay posting it for a week or not even post it at all.

After a while, the clutter posters would give up because the reward of seeing their dumb comments would no longer be there.
Nibu Raphael might go into shock from "posting withdrawal" but that's a small price to pay .

Just my 2 cents worth on this subject.

Rock

[Lover Boy]

Ryck,

Good try but failed attempt.

Ryck
Regular Member
Reports: 8

Just a small suggestion:

Forums are generally full of messages between two members that are really not giving any information on how to find pros or non-pros in the given area. I think those messages should be forbidden as the members can send Private Messages to each other.

Ryck

[Ryck II]

Just a small suggestion:

Forums are generally full of messages between two members that are really not giving any information on how to find pros or non-pros in the given area. I think those messages should be forbidden as the members can send Private Messages to each other.

Ryck

[Visaman]

What's "draconian" about asking people to use correct capitalization and puncutation?

I wouldn't go as far to say it's draconian, but it has a certain Niles Crane quality to it. I can see you fliting around the room your face red, because someone forgot to add a period at the end of a sentence. : -)

[Warpig2000]

I know I'm flogging a dead horse here, but I have a wonderful picture that says it all about the filtered word that spelled phonetically would be: Bee Eye Tee Sea eightch.

This was found on an SP's website; http://www.westsidepet.com and is cross-posted with permission. I found it a refreshing example of a sexworker 'reclaiming' a derogatory word to make it something complimentary.

[Brownout]

I urge Admin to refine the already-existing policy about posting photos of women in Islamic countries and about treatment of repetitive postings.

What would you suggest?

[Atlanta Monger]

Brownout,

Jackson has already given the matter of posting Muslim photos serious review, as evidenced by his policy statement below dated 03-13-04:

http://www.wsgforum.com/vforum/showt...236#post189236

Personally, I think he sums it up quite well.

- AM

[Brownout]

in the midst of rows about sex with **** i have noticed that jackson has banned at least 3 users in a row because of their responses to the photos of muslim women. i think the policy of posting photos of muslim women needs serious review.

[LoveLOS]

Rev,
I see now why you are pissed at AM, but AM is not defending your antangonist (the T word), nor child prostitution in his comment. On the other hand, he is in complete agreement with you on those matters. I don't see the conflict?

I ask you, as a friend on this forum, to back down on this one.

LoveLOS

[Joe Zop]

Jackson, please note again that Skinless cannot understand the difference between disliking with his hyperbolic lynch mob posts and being against sex with minors. He feels one cannot possibly be against sex with minors and still manage to disagree with his disgusting and divisive McCarthy-like smear tactics.

Skinless, I said I was finished with you because you stopped being the reasonable and delightful poster with whom I had many interesting back-and-forth discussions over the last couple of years and decided instead to lash out at anyone who at all disagreed with you in the slightest way. Your last post simply reinforces that fact.