How to avoid online creepsters

[graceanne]

. . . . but there are some people who are just too stupid to raise children.

Let's be honest - they have MORE children. My best friend's ex sister in law has . . . five children? (And about that many mid term miscarriages - also because of her drug use.) They were all born drug addicted, and are all in foster care. If it came up for vote I'd vote against it, cause I wouldn't trust the govt with the power of choosing who gets to have children and who doesn't, but still THAT WOMAN SHOULD BE CASTRATED.

 

[FurryFury]

I agree Grace, I wouldn't trust the government to make these sorts of distinctions.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Avoid Him/Her if:

-His/Her first line is: "GET DOWN ON YOUR KNEES SLUT"
-He/She seems to only to be interested in your kinks/physical attributes rather than your personality traits
-His and yada yada, etc

It's not the inept creeps^^ you need to be worrying about.

Word to the wise.

 

[naxalite0906]

This is good stuff.

Also, if the perv's username has the words "raw" or "humor" in it, he's probably one to be avoided.

Or "cuntbuster" as their title.. lol


The main issue I have as I look for a sub is that I do not want someone to just vanish after a few weeks of contact.

Other things that are to be avoided are people who are not willing to be detailed when they type a pm/email to you. I mean, if they cannot make an effort to do that, they will definitely not make an effort as a sub for you.
Also, and this is not always the case, but it is nice to get in touch (this is on forums anyway and someone has already made this point) with someone who has more than a handful of posts to their name so you can see how genuine they are and how they interract with others.

 

[KuriousTina]

Two things I've noticed help in wheedling out the sharks - language, as good spelling and grammar definitely lend themselves to credibility, and also how other people react to them posting on a forum.

 

[FurryFury]

It's not the inept creeps^^ you need to be worrying about.

Word to the wise.

*chuckles*

That's so true.

 

[graceanne]

I agree Grace, I wouldn't trust the government to make these sorts of distinctions.

If the govt had the power to choose who gets to have children and who doesn't only the rich would be able to afford to cut through the red tape. I recently tried to adopt a friend of mines baby. (My friend is mentally handicapped, their was no way the state was going to allow her to keep a baby.) At the time we had the money to raise another child, but I did not have several thousand dollars jsut laying around for FUCKING LAWYER FEES. So, in the US, you can only adopt if you're rich. While 100's upone 1000's of children sit in foster care, hoping for an adoption.

 

[liberatedslave]

A friend of mine tried to adopt her sister's kids. My friend L had 2 boys aged 3 and 1 at the time and was living on benefit because her partner had died suddenly some months before. Her home is a happy one and she's a good mother. Her sister M has had 3 kids taken into care and subsequently adopted because she's has mental health issues, violent relationships, a cannabis habit that takes priority over everything else and a HUGE selfish streak.

L tried to adopt her sister's kids each time they were taken away and each time was told she wasn't affluent enough to support another kid. Never mind that foster care costs the government even more money and the adoptive parents will get money in child support and tax relief that could just as easily have gone to L. Now she and her kids have lost 3 members of their family to strangers for no good reason and her sister M has recently had another abortion (i think she's had 3 over the years, one at 23 weeks) after being told by social services that if she had another baby she wouldn't even leave the hospital with it.

Things like that really piss me off. Grrr!

 

[cobblestonefog]

Two things I've noticed help in wheedling out the sharks - language, as good spelling and grammar definitely lend themselves to credibility, and also how other people react to them posting on a forum.

Good points. It's better to get involved with someone that you see is well-respected by others on the site. It's a bad idea to get involved with someone that joined just the other day and has not posted at all or made an attempt to get involved in the website. That usually means that the person is just randomly PMing anyone because they are horny and don't want to take the time to get to know anyone for real. That signals 'pathetic' and 'predator' and sometimes both.

 

[WriterDom]

If they specify they're looking for inexperienced subs only

can you say PREDATOR?!

It's kind of nice seeing someone go through sub frenzy for the first time. But level of experience isn't really a criteria in my book. First Editions can be a little more work. Experienced subs are less likey to bail when it's time to meet.

 

[FluteMaster]

It's kind of nice seeing someone go through sub frenzy for the first time. But level of experience isn't really a criteria in my book. First Editions can be a little more work. Experienced subs are less likey to bail when it's time to meet.

Good points.

Of course...with more experienced subs, you sometimes have to deal with the crap from their less than experienced previous owners.

 

[WriterDom]

Good points.

Of course...with more experienced subs, you sometimes have to deal with the crap from their less than experienced previous owners.

Or, they still have some unnatural attachment to the old Dom who is married and has a girlfriend and two subs on the side, and he keeps popping into the picture.

Bad habits are made to be broken. They don't concern me much.

 

[FluteMaster]

Or, they still have some unnatural attachment to the old Dom who is married and has a girlfriend and two subs on the side, and he keeps popping into the picture.

Bad habits are made to be broken. They don't concern me much.

Habits?? I was thinking more of damage...