Protecting New Users

[Aivey]

I think that it's not a bad idea, but it could be rather controvertial if there was a specific "list" of people who were to be looked out for because it would put them at a dissadvantage. It's not fair, because it's like declining someone a job just because they were in jail before. It would give people less incentives to start over, and mods would have a new problem with people creating new accounts just to get off the list. Determining who should be on the list would also be a very difficult process.

What I think getDare should do is to assign a new occupation, similar to being a moderator, but with the job as being someone who people can go to for advice. Certain reputable users that are trustworthy, such as Leo, Loman, Lazyfox, Starshadows, just to name a few (pretty much the more well known users) could be assigned positions so that people know and believe what they say is true. The whole point of this is so that people know who to trust and listen to when it comes to advice.

As a relatively new user here, I remember how it was quite hard for me to decide who was trustworthy or not. If getDare were able to point out to the others "hey, this is a good person, and knows how the people here are like, and it's pretty good idea to listen to what this person has to tell" then it would save lots of confusion. These people could have a label as "guardians" (or something similar to that name) similar to how the moderators have that "moderator" sign on their profiles and below their usernames. It would be told to ALL new getDare users, if someone unkown approaches them about things such as looking for a slave/master that they are encouraged to ask one of these people for some advice so they can get a general idea on what sort of person the PMer was...

I know many people like Leo have already taken up this job personally, but they don't recieve the proper titles on actually doing this job, causing many people to not know who to believe. As I said before, i went through the receiving side of being "randomly PMd and being pulled into a S/M relationship i wasnt ready for" I was really pissed when certain users came out and said "hey, this isn't a great guy to be with" because i was thinking "who the heck are these people anyways?!" if getDare had a way to let me know that these were regulars who knew what they were talking about, then it would've saved me from a lot of stress and pain on trying to find out who to listen to.

So summed up, I think that getDare should create new occupations for Reputable regulars who know most people on gD, along with warning messages to the newer users when they recieve a PM so that whenever a new user joins or receives ANY PM of any sort, the would be told something like "If you ever receive a request of an S/M nature from an unknown user, it is highly advised for you to contact one of that "guardians (or whatever they will be called)" to ask around a bit and get to know the users of getDare better so you won't be hurt" That way, people will be automatically warned, and they will know who to go to if they were placed in a similar situation.

[Loman]

So what you're saying Aivey, is that an auto-generated message working from a list, telling a user to be cautious is totally different from a dedicated user telling a user to be cautious?

I fail to see the logic.

At the end of the day as Star said before, whether it be a list, or a user, it is all based on opinion.
Fantastic idea. In practice, it will be harder to pull off.

[Aivey]

holy crap i wrote a whole fucking essay xD

I think the point is, is that even if there was a list or not, along with the warnings when new users recieve a PM we should also assign more people who have the specific job of giving advice that's worthwhile, whether it may be "is this person a creeper?" or "how do I whisper to someone in chat?" to something like "I have a horrible master and I want to leave, how should i do that?" or someone there to offer advice in general to people who need moral support. It's a good idea because it would create a more positive atmosphere in getDare and people can know where to go for advice.

[Loman]

<offtopic> wait... you have a horrible master and want to leave? </offtopic>

point taken

[Aivey]

Originally Posted by Loman

<offtopic> wait... you have a horrible master and want to leave? </offtopic>

point taken

Nono of course not D:
+snuggles you tightly+
we all know that you're amazing and I love you :3

[Leopard]

I actually really like Aivey's idea to have both the warning I suggested and some approved users who people can message with questions without bothering the mods, with some sort of title thing so they know it's not just some liar on the site.

[yorkshirelad]

I think the list is a bad idea. It's too objective.

Users for advice is a good idea.

A pop up for new users is a good idea.

But it still won't stop people from pretending who they're not, IMHO. After speaking to someone on chat for days only to find out they are not who they say they are and may not even be the same gender is pretty shitty to be honest.

[honeyness]

I really Like Aivey's idea of users that people know they can trust, I think it would be very useful for new users. When I was new, and knew very little about M/s, or even dares I ended up trusting the wrong groups of people and had a very narrow escape from being dragged into something I was neither ready for, nor knew alot about.
How would people be appointed to these roles though? Mods don't always know the people who are helping the most, but if it came down to nominations it could become a popularity contest. Also, if someone PMed someone on the "trusted" list who was inactive, they may not get a reply and so go ahead into a dangerous relationship, even more confused who to trust. (Playing Devil's advocate - i think it's a great idea.)

I also think the original Idea of a short message for new users telling them how to block users is an excellent idea. It is very scary getting 20 million messages telling you they now own you, especially for the younger users. It is hard to navigate yourself around the site to the useful threads so something that slaps you in the face would be great. Even if it's as simple as a welcome pm warning people, if the pop up message is too complicated.

[Aivey]

Yes, honeyness does have a point, it would be hard to appoint these people, but it can't be harder than picking out mods, although i do understand that it's still quite a difficult process...

[Blank]

Originally Posted by Aivey

I think that it's not a bad idea, but it could be rather controvertial if there was a specific "list" of people who were to be looked out for because it would put them at a dissadvantage. It's not fair, because it's like declining someone a job just because they were in jail before. It would give people less incentives to start over, and mods would have a new problem with people creating new accounts just to get off the list. Determining who should be on the list would also be a very difficult process.

What I think getDare should do is to assign a new occupation, similar to being a moderator, but with the job as being someone who people can go to for advice. Certain reputable users that are trustworthy, such as Leo, Loman, Lazyfox, Starshadows, just to name a few (pretty much the more well known users) could be assigned positions so that people know and believe what they say is true. The whole point of this is so that people know who to trust and listen to when it comes to advice.

As a relatively new user here, I remember how it was quite hard for me to decide who was trustworthy or not. If getDare were able to point out to the others "hey, this is a good person, and knows how the people here are like, and it's pretty good idea to listen to what this person has to tell" then it would save lots of confusion. These people could have a label as "guardians" (or something similar to that name) similar to how the moderators have that "moderator" sign on their profiles and below their usernames. It would be told to ALL new getDare users, if someone unkown approaches them about things such as looking for a slave/master that they are encouraged to ask one of these people for some advice so they can get a general idea on what sort of person the PMer was...

I know many people like Leo have already taken up this job personally, but they don't recieve the proper titles on actually doing this job, causing many people to not know who to believe. As I said before, i went through the receiving side of being "randomly PMd and being pulled into a S/M relationship i wasnt ready for" I was really pissed when certain users came out and said "hey, this isn't a great guy to be with" because i was thinking "who the heck are these people anyways?!" if getDare had a way to let me know that these were regulars who knew what they were talking about, then it would've saved me from a lot of stress and pain on trying to find out who to listen to.

So summed up, I think that getDare should create new occupations for Reputable regulars who know most people on gD, along with warning messages to the newer users when they recieve a PM so that whenever a new user joins or receives ANY PM of any sort, the would be told something like "If you ever receive a request of an S/M nature from an unknown user, it is highly advised for you to contact one of that "guardians (or whatever they will be called)" to ask around a bit and get to know the users of getDare better so you won't be hurt" That way, people will be automatically warned, and they will know who to go to if they were placed in a similar situation.

Leopard should be a mod, am I right?

[Star Shadows]

Originally Posted by Leopard

I actually really like Aivey's idea to have both the warning I suggested and some approved users who people can message with questions without bothering the mods, with some sort of title thing so they know it's not just some liar on the site.

I agree with you Leo, I think its a brilliant Idea.

[nellybell]

*Note I didn't make it all the way through reading all the comments and idea's added so bear with me here*

I agree that leo's original idea is very good. I know when I joined this site almost a year ago, I had absolutely no idea what was going on. I was ignorant, and took the first "dom" that offered. If there is anyway to help stop new people from having to go through that I'm all for it and I think most people should be.

As for the "wall of shame" idea, if there was anyway that only the mods could add people to it, but have it visable to everyone it could have possiblities without it becoming one of those things where people put other people there without any real reason other than their unjustified hate. It could serve as a little warning for people around here that are new and don't really know how bad some of the people on here can be. I have heard horror stories about some of the so called "doms" on here and later found out I had come in conact with them myself, thinking I could have been one of the people to have become victims to them. It could very much help out those who are young and new to things like this.

[Mephistopheles]

oh hey look the moderator who never posts in public is going to weigh in I bet you kids love that!

Anyways: the first idea (an automated "hey here is how to report rule violators" message is a very good idea and I think it could be implemented, maybe? I do absolutely none of the technical side work for gd so I cannot actually say--but I have seen similar things on other sites and depp is as fine a site architect as any, so. Yeah.

I am violently opposed and will fight to the death any idea of shame walls and/or guardians for a number of reasons. The main one, however, is this: getdare has a policy of not endorsing, condoning, or condemning content which is within the already established site rules.

If they are breaking the rules, report them--and they will likely be banned if the offense is serious or repeated.

If somebody is doing something that is considered "unhealthy" in the s/m community or "unsafe" but is not breaking any site rules (note, age requirements are a site rule)? There is no reason to put them on a "wall of shame" because certain users feel that they are unhealthy/unsafe. Getdare has a long established policy of NOT condoning/condemning content which fits within the parameters of the site rules. We (as a site, that is. individual users are welcome and encouraged to give opinions all the time) do not tell you what is or is not good or bad to try. Users are expected to rely on their own judgment and preferences. And, note, a great deal of what the s/m segment of the site considers "safe" or "psychologically healthy" IS largely a matter of preference. The parts of it that are not preference are codified in law/site rules (e.g., age requirements).

To make this shorter: I don't want a wall of shame because we don't tell users what they should or should not do or like or want or not want so long as it is within the site rules.

If it isn't within the site rules? The user needs to be banned or infracted (which is a step on the raod to ban-hood).

I dislike the "guardian" idea for a similar reason: it gives the appearance of official site approval to highly subjective content. Just because a user is well-liked and popular and is considered to have good ideas DOES NOT mean that the site should put a stamp of endorsement on their subjective opinions. Again: we aren't (rightly so, in my opinion) in the business of endorsing things as good or bad or desirable so long as they are within the rules.

There is also the issue of petty drama. Simply put, I don't want to create tools--whether it be a wall or guardians--which can be used by users to further petty drama. And yes, there is tons of petty drama all the time. And yes, people use every feature of the site to take advantage of it. And yes, even good and active and popular and well-liked users who might be a candidate for guardian engage in petty drama.

This is, for the record, why numerical repute is a dead and ancient thing.

So in short: I dont want a wall or guardians because that would require getdare to endorse subjective rule-abiding content. We don't need those things for the non-rule abiders; we just need people to report them so we can infract and ban them.

ever wondered what some of the older users mean when they talk about the libertarian model of getdare? well, the above sentiments: the idea of a base ground-line of rules within which users are expected to exercise their own due diligence and responsible thinking rather than have the site actively police subjective content

[BettyBoop]

I really dislike the "wall of shame" idea, that's just cruel.
I do like the idea of an automated messaged when people register just to help them out. I, like Meph, don't deal with the technical things on the site but I'm pretty sure it isn't difficult to add in a short message.
It would also be helpful for it to perhaps describe how to report and maybe link to a list of moderators they can PM for any help. I know being new to a site can make it hard to find your way around.

[depp]

The introduction message is a great idea and I'll work something up!

THIS:

Originally Posted by Mephistopheles

ever wondered what some of the older users mean when they talk about the libertarian model of getdare? well, the above sentiments: the idea of a base ground-line of rules within which users are expected to exercise their own due diligence and responsible thinking rather than have the site actively police subjective content