What does Love-based bdsm look like?

[Keroin]

See, we can go over to the SDC right now and see what a SDC thread consists of.

Most threads begin with a rundown of a story, a link to the story and then the OP opens up the floor with a question concerning the story over in SDC. So does this thread and the other threadlet in SF.

Then there's this thread http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=571450 moved by a moderator into SDC, featuring that Indian Giver, Cloudy. Let's look at the consistency. It's not about writing, it's about how people perceive erotica. So a thread in SDC doesn't even have to be on the topic of writing or feedback for a specific story.

Yes, except the SDC has a very specific set of guidelines to follow. You have to have first participated in other discussions, then you have to put your story in the queue, then you have to present your story in a prescribed fashion, THEN it gets critiqued. I know the SDC crew would not be happy having this thread just dumped in there either.

IMO, Etoile made the right choice. She moved the thread to story feedback forum then moved it back here when BL followed the guidelines she set out for him. Easy peasy. This forum has also had its share of threads "dumped" here from other forums, many of which have left us all scratching our heads, wondering what we did to deserve having someone else's nuisance foisted off on us. (Hey, we're not ALL masochists). But, meh, it's not the end of the world. I just ignore that kind of shite and BL is, for all intents and purposes, dead to me.

There are a lot of worthwhile causes in this world that I can focus my energy on. Arguing about whether a thread belongs in forum A, B or C is simply not one of them.

And with that, I'm gone.

 

[sr71plt]

See, we can go over to the SDC right now and see what a SDC thread consists of.

Most threads begin with a rundown of a story, a link to the story and then the OP opens up the floor with a question concerning the story over in SDC. So does this thread and the other threadlet in SF.

Then there's this thread http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=571450 moved by a moderator into SDC, featuring that Indian Giver, Cloudy. Let's look at the consistency. It's not about writing, it's about how people perceive erotica. So a thread in SDC doesn't even have to be on the topic of writing or feedback for a specific story.

Tell me again about how I'm the one who wants to keep arguing about this.

Until/unless the thread is moved again, I have nothing to argue about.

 

[Epmd607]

I'm not just some jester, this thread I keep mentioning actually exists over in SF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=711605

Love, Part I: Endings

How do you deal with survivor's guilt?

And this is one of the many reasons Love matters: so no one need die alone, unloved.

Until my wife met me she was unloved.

She attended nearly every 'play party' for a year before meeting me.

She was treated as a freak, no doubt because of her weight and her eagerness to please.

She was told that by being willing to perform for anyone she would find someone who would love her.

Never happened. They just used her, abused her and then ignored her.

That's how the casual community operates.

If not for me she would not have been married, would not have had a child, would not have been loved right up to the end.

It is small consolation for what I have lost.


--------------------------------------And here's the beginning of the thread we're in:
I wrote "Endings" for many reasons, one of which was to illustrate the nature of love-based bdsm.

Love-based bdsm is, in many ways, no different than any life-long loving relationships. We experience the same losses and must wrestle with the consequences when a beloved dies.

Too often people get the impression from reading on-line bdsm boards that those who practice bdsm really don't care about their partners, that bdsm is nothing more than a no-strings attached one-night stand with no emotional involvement worthy of mention.

However, for a lot of us who practice bdsm, I dare say most of us, bdsm is a means by which we express our love for each other in loving, life-long committed relationships.

In my experience it is rare that death itself is ever discussed, and when it is, it is more along the lines of "what am I going to do next".

With "Endings" I wanted to address the loss itself, the emotional impact it has on the survivor.

I wanted to bring home to the reader that those of us who practice bdsm within a loving, committed relationship feel the loss just as keenly as anyone else.

We are no less human than anyone else.

Love, Part I: Endings
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Why are there two threads? Because the first got moved to SF, the TS started a second in BDSM Talk, the first was moved back, the second still resides in SF. The second thread is covered in the first, entirely. There would've been a third and fourth thread dealing with the additional chapters if this thread was never moved back to BDSM Talk.

 

[Epmd607]

There are threads in SDC that were moved by Mods. Cloudy didn't have to sign up to get a new thread, she just had to complain that James was wrecking hers by starting a new topic. I see precedent.

 

[BLoved]

Not that I have to justify myself to anyone, but in the interest of fairness, I sent Laurel a PM to verify that I was interpreting Rule 11 correctly. She confirmed that I am.

You're not fooling anyone, Etoile.

If it is illegal to discuss a story in BDSM Talk, then it doesn't matter whether the story is posted verbatim or whether it is posted by link.

You've yet to point to the 'rule' that says a story can be discussed if referred to by link, but not if it is posted verbatim.

I understand your need to save face, but arguing from such an illogical and inconsistent position isn't going to establish your credibility.

It will, however, demonstrate your bias against me personally.

You've harassed me since I arrived, there is no reason to believe you wouldn't ban me if you could.

 

[Etoile]

You don't have to believe me, you just have to follow the rules as I have explained them to you. You've been told what will happen if you don't.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh stop your empty threats, Etoile, or show that you have the power to do something about it. All you've done so far is be the only one to violate the rules of the forum as actually stated (although, Epmd607 openly admits to being in violation of forum rule #9, I might note).

This is the stated bottom-line forum rule"

"Anything else goes. You may post whatever you like. Consequently, so can everyone else. The administrators here don't believe they are anyone's parents nor are they anyone's Jiminy Cricket. It's not their responsibility to make sure that everyone on the site uses free speech responsibly. It's up to individual users to be responsible for themselves. For those who are not, the programmers at Jelsoft have added an ignore function for your convenience. Just go here and add the user you don't want to deal with anymore.

"In short, we believe in the First Amendment, and offensive content will not be removed unless it breaks one of the rules."

You've been repeatedly asked to specify what existing forum rule Bloved's post violated--and you haven't been able to point to one. (And, no, rule #11 doesn't say a damn thing about using stories as a basis of a thread discussion of a concept/theme.)

As far as I can see, your threats of banishment are totally empty--and they most certainly show you as anything but a "moderator."

 

[Epmd607]

Oh stop your empty threats, Etoile, or show that you have the power to do something about it. All you've done so far is be the only one to violate the rules of the forum as actually stated (although, Epmd607 openly admits to being in violation of forum rule #9, I might note).

This is the stated bottom-line forum rule"

"Anything else goes. You may post whatever you like. Consequently, so can everyone else. The administrators here don't believe they are anyone's parents nor are they anyone's Jiminy Cricket. It's not their responsibility to make sure that everyone on the site uses free speech responsibly. It's up to individual users to be responsible for themselves. For those who are not, the programmers at Jelsoft have added an ignore function for your convenience. Just go here and add the user you don't want to deal with anymore.

"In short, we believe in the First Amendment, and offensive content will not be removed unless it breaks one of the rules."

You've been repeatedly asked to specify what existing forum rule Bloved's post violated--and you haven't been able to point to one. (And, no, rule #11 doesn't say a damn thing about using stories as a basis of a thread discussion of a concept/theme.)

As far as I can see, your threats of banishment are totally empty--and they most certainly show you as anything but a "moderator."

Following your logic you'd have to point to a definition within rule number 9 that coincides with any one of my actions. We can't possibly know what disruption looks like besides for what BLoved did by flooding the forum that one morning.

 

[Epmd607]

Are you going to say that these aren't identical threads?

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=713062

 

[sr71plt]

Following your logic you'd have to point to a definition within rule number 9 that coincides with any one of my actions. We can't possibly know what disruption looks like besides for what BLoved did by flooding the forum that one morning.

No problem. You stated your violation yourself. Up the line you stated that your goal with Bloved was to disrupt. Look at the wording of rule #9. At the mininum, you've violated that rule by your own admission. Don't need anything else beyond a confession here.

 

[Etoile]

I'm sure Laurel will give you a citation if you ask. Shame you're too pussy to contact her.

 

[sr71plt]

Are you going to say that these aren't identical threads?

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=713062

That's only one thread.

But we've already been through your idiocy of claiming a one-page thread would be identical to what was then a four-page thread.

You're just posting now to continue your lunacy (and, I guess to purposely violate forum rule #9 ).

 

[BLoved]

I'm sure Laurel will give you a citation if you ask. Shame you're too pussy to contact her.

I want a public citation.

Too bad you don't have one to give.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm sure Laurel will give you a citation if you ask. Shame you're too pussy to contact her.

We've already been over that ground. I don't mind the light of day--and you haven't responded to the strategic challenges here. Point to the citation yourself.

(If Laurel gave two figs for this discussion she would have posted and cleared everything up. Don't be a chump or think that your shell game has any validity. So far, Laurel is following the stated forum rules here--and you aren't. )

 

[BLoved]

You don't have to believe me, you just have to follow the rules as I have explained them to you. You've been told what will happen if you don't.

You mean the rules you invent to give yourself an excuse to threaten me with banishment.

It's called "harassment".

 

[sr71plt]

You mean the rules you invent to give yourself an excuse to threaten me with banishment.

It's called "harassment".

And what's insidious and that other posters to the forum should focus on is that what she can get away with doing to someone lots of other folks don't like, she can get around to doing to anyone at all who doesn't hup to to her nazi demands and "secret" rules.

The forum rules are provided in a link to this forum. Those are the only forum rules.

To respond to something Keroin posted, by her own admission Etoile didn't move this thread back to BDSM Talk. Someone in more authority than she is did that. That should be a clue as to what the rules are and who follows them--and who doesn't.

There's no such rule that she is claiming (and won't cite) and she does not have the power herself to banish anyone from this forum (or subforum). And claimed backing by Laurel will materialize when Laurel does.

 

[BLoved]

And what's insidious and that other posters to the forum should focus on is that what she can get away with doing to someone lots of other folks don't like, she can get around to doing to anyone at all who doesn't hup to to her nazi demands and "secret" rules.

Her friends don't care because they view this as their own personal domain and couldn't care less about free speech or diversity.

 

[sr71plt]

Her friends don't care because they view this as their own personal domain and couldn't care less about free speech or diversity.

Well, as of this moment, her "personal" domain has this thread in it that she doesn't want here and tried to get rid of. That should give said friends "a clue" about what she's claiming.

 

[BLoved]

Well, as of this moment, her "personal" domain has this thread in it that she doesn't want here and tried to get rid of. That should give said friends "a clue" about what she's claiming.

Oh, they know:

Laurel does not care that there is a community here. She believes that free speech includes the oinking of pigs if pigs wish to oink.

Trust me on this.

Never under-estimate the obsessive/compulsive nature of a pack of trolls.

Unlike some of us, their ego depends on getting their way.

 

[Epmd607]

That's only one thread.

But we've already been through your idiocy of claiming a one-page thread would be identical to what was then a four-page thread.

You're just posting now to continue your lunacy (and, I guess to purposely violate forum rule #9 ).

You're going to look at the second post, see the evidence that it's basically word for word the exact same thread and say that it's not? You still haven't recognized that there is a thread in SF. Now there are three identical threads. You're the plainest of morons. Now I really do understand how you can argue with the Scouries for three years nonstop.

 

[sr71plt]

You're going to look at the second post, see the evidence that it's basically word for word the exact same thread and say that it's not? You still haven't recognized that there is a thread in SF. Now there are three identical threads. You're the plainest of morons. Now I really do understand how you can argue with the Scouries for three years nonstop.

"basically" vs. "identical." We don't really need to get into the nonsense again. You're just throwing flak in the air.

This is the exact thread that was initially moved (by Etoile). This exact thread is back (moved by someone more in the know/do than Etoile). Reality sucks, doesn't it?

 

[Epmd607]

"basically" vs. "identical." We don't really need to get into the nonsense again. You're just throwing flak in the air.

This is the exact thread that was initially moved (by Etoile). This exact thread is back (moved by someone more in the know/do than Etoile). Reality sucks, doesn't it?

I'm not worried. You'll lose eventually, BLoved and his self-same threads will be merged, just like they were before you stuck your nose in.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm not worried. You'll lose eventually, BLoved and his self-same threads will be merged, just like they were before you stuck your nose in.

I didn't "stick my nose in." You lot tried to use one of the threads I post to as your trash can.

 

[BLoved]

I didn't "stick my nose in." You lot tried used one of the threads I post to as your trash can.

Think of the scene where William Wallace is dragged out before the crowd on his way for his "Purification" in Braveheart.

It's like that 24/7 here.

 

[sr71plt]

Think of the scene where William Wallace is dragged out before the crowd on his way for his "Purification" in Braveheart.

It's like that 24/7 here.

I never thought William Wallace was all that bright. And only knew about him at all because of the movie--not because of whatever "up yours" he was pushing.

The principal I'm pushing here doesn't include supporting your behavior--just your right, by the established rules here, to post.