Welcome Back, Marylander

[Diverdan]

If my eyes don't deceive me, I believe that Marylander's time out is over and that he is back posting. I for one am very glad to see him back, as I love his commentary (or at least most of them) and especially appreciate all the work that he has done to post exquisite photos in the Gallery. If I am correct, a great big WELCOME BACK.

[bigvalboy]

If my eyes don't deceive me, I believe that Marylander's time out is over and that he is back posting. I for one am very glad to see him back, as I love his commentary (or at least most of them) and especially appreciate all the work that he has done to post exquisite photos in the Gallery. If I am correct, a great big WELCOME BACK.

 

I just did a members search and it comes up "Member not found"...Where do you see he logged on DD?

[+ dutchmuch]

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3018/2316695314_b083b32146_z.jpg

 

That Penalty Box is a mean thing.

[Irtwo]

You sure they aren't just old posts being bumped up? I haven't seen any new posts, unless I just missed them.

[Diverdan]

You guys are right... I went back to double check, and it was an old post that had been bumped up... I guess we just have to wait a bit longer !!!!!!! But hope he does return soon....

[TruHart1]

If my eyes don't deceive me, I believe that Marylander's time out is over and that he is back posting...

You sure they aren't just old posts being bumped up? I haven't seen any new posts, unless I just missed them.

 

I have word from a reliable source that Marylander will not be eligible to return to the forum until September 7 due to some ill-advised personal posts he made about someone else on the forum. Therefore, any post you run across before that date will indeed be an older post which has been bumped up.

 

Just a FYI - "The more you know" and all that.

 

TruHart1

[bigvalboy]

Thanks for the info TruHart1...

[+ quoththeraven]

*sigh* This is why I believe that once the boom's been leveled and the penalty incurred, there should be more transparency and openness about what happened, including a notation on the individual's profile of their membership status and what they did that got them banned, including a link to the post if applicable. (PM abuse obviously can only be discussed in general terms.) It would make these kind of posts unnecessary, make it clearer what kind of behavior is and isn't tolerated (not to say that some things might slip through the cracks because no one reports them), and increase the spirit of community. I believe lack of transparency is one of the reasons the kind of snarky microaggressions that make this place less pleasant than it could otherwise be persist until someone has a time-out inducing meltdown.

[Irtwo]

But those time-out inducing meltdowns are part of the fun of these forums!

[+ purplekow]

Well I for one am not missing the random postings of the daily news items but I know that some are, so on Sept 8 Marylander will be welcomed back with open hooves.

[+ SundayZip]

*sigh* This is why I believe that once the boom's been leveled and the penalty incurred, there should be more transparency and openness about what happened, including a notation on the individual's profile of their membership status and what they did that got them banned, including a link to the post if applicable. (PM abuse obviously can only be discussed in general terms.) It would make these kind of posts unnecessary, make it clearer what kind of behavior is and isn't tolerated (not to say that some things might slip through the cracks because no one reports them), and increase the spirit of community. I believe lack of transparency is one of the reasons the kind of snarky microaggressions that make this place less pleasant than it could otherwise be persist until someone has a time-out inducing meltdown.

 

Agreed. It would be helpful to know the rules, especially for PMs. The rules for posting to a public forum seem fairly obvious to me, but I was under the impression that PMs did not require the same level of disgression. They are after all, "private". Sounds like that is not the case. But now I'm guessing.

[Diverdan]

As has often been said, this is Daddy's place, he sets the rules, and if someone doesn't like them they can go elsewhere. I am a great fan of Marylander and miss his posts, and I certainly don't know what caused him to be timed out for such a long time... but I guess most of us will never know....

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

Agreed. It would be helpful to know the rules, especially for PMs. The rules for posting to a public forum seem fairly obvious to me, but I was under the impression that PMs did not require the same level of disgression. They are after all, "private". Sounds like that is not the case. But now I'm guessing.

 

I would assume that most of the basics that would apply to both the forum and PM. For example, if I have hired a well-reviewed escort using the name "Mr. XXL" for his escorting business and I know his real name, home address, and phone number; I would not be permitted to publish that information on the forum, nor should I be allowed to share it via PM. However, if I wanted to tell you about my personal experience with him via PM, that would be acceptable.

[+ deej]

*sigh* This is why I believe that once the boom's been leveled and the penalty incurred, there should be more transparency and openness about what happened, including a notation on the individual's profile of their membership status and what they did that got them banned, including a link to the post if applicable.

 

The status of YOUR account is YOUR business and nobody else's. We make that same promise to every other member here. You are not entitled to know anyone else's business and they are not entitled to know yours.

 

If you find this policy troublesome to you we can easily remove your burdensome membership.

[+ SundayZip]

Here's the lesson that I infer from this thread: behavior on this forum should be based on general principles of legality, privacy and mutual respect.

 

I can live with this.

 

PS: I can refer to "Terms of Service and Rules" under the "Help" link for additional clarity.

[+ quoththeraven]

The status of YOUR account is YOUR business and nobody else's. We make that same promise to every other member here. You are not entitled to know anyone else's business and they are not entitled to know yours.

 

If you find this policy troublesome to you we can easily remove your burdensome membership.

 

I understand the privacy issues, but still disagree with the policy for the reasons enumerated. Moreover, the fact that someone is on a time-out is not really private. As I understand it, this forum is an open one for expressing opinions, including opinions about the forum itself, and I've read far more vicious and polarizing posts here than mine in that regard that were not met with this type of response.

 

I realize that this is Daddy's forum and we have to play by Daddy's rules. That means that if Daddy is unwilling to consider my point of view on this on any level, I either have to live with it or stop participating. Since I continue to participate, that's a sign that while I still think it's the wrong decision, there are other benefits that outweigh that factor. I recognize there's no point in discussing it further on the forum itself. From your tone, I guess that approaching you or Daddy privately about it would be equally pointless.

[Frequentflier]

*sigh* This is why I believe that once the boom's been leveled and the penalty incurred, there should be more transparency and openness about what happened, including a notation on the individual's profile of their membership status and what they did that got them banned, including a link to the post if applicable. (PM abuse obviously can only be discussed in general terms.) It would make these kind of posts unnecessary, make it clearer what kind of behavior is and isn't tolerated (not to say that some things might slip through the cracks because no one reports them), and increase the spirit of community. I believe lack of transparency is one of the reasons the kind of snarky microaggressions that make this place less pleasant than it could otherwise be persist until someone has a time-out inducing meltdown.

 

Gesh, that sounds harsh, do you want the Administrators to track down and tar and feather the member in a public square as well, maybe posting a video of that? I'm guessing the purpose of a time out is to encourage the member to change his/her approach but give them the opportunity to be retained as a member, if not that their account could simply be closed by the Administrator. If you were to screw up on the site and receive a time out would you want to be branded a transgressor and your act publicized? And if your act was so offensive to another member that it resulted in the time out, maybe the other member is better off if the Administrator deletes it instead of allowing it to remain public?

[+ quoththeraven]

Gesh, that sounds harsh, do you want the Administrators to track down and tar and feather the member in a public square as well, maybe posting a video of that for you to see? I'm guessing the purpose of a time out is to encourage the member to change his/her approach but give them the opportunity to be retained as a member, if not that their account could simply be closed by the Administrator. If you were to screw up on the site and receive a time out would you want to be branded a transgressor and your act publicized? And if your act was so offensive to another member that it resulted in the time out, maybe the other member is better off if the Administrator deletes it instead of allowing it to remain public?

 

1. If I did something that got me put on a time out, I have no problem with others knowing generally what the reason was rather than guessing and speculating. It may therefore cut down on the e-mails (from those who know my e-mail address) or phone calls (ditto) asking what's going on. Not having to respond to those would be more of a benefit to me than general knowledge is a detriment. If it has to do with something I posted, it's likely people who were paying attention to that thread at that time will know or have a pretty good idea anyway, making for a good source for a PM gossip chain that includes some but not others. For another, I own my screwups. It also makes it harder for me to spin it however I want to others, assuming we have some other way of communicating besides through the forum, which it seems to me is in the forum's interest.

 

2. Your second point, about deleting missteps, is a good one. That occurred to me just before I posted but I didn't address it because I didn't think it appropriate to get into those weeds. But that doesn't mean that the general gist can't be shared.

 

Something I wasn't thinking about initially, and which I should point out, is that the identity and misdeed need not be linked and in fact should not be linked, although in many cases it may be obvious to some. In other words, when someone is on a timeout, list the date on which they'll be able to return on their profile but note the offense and penalty separately. If the offense is a common one and the penalty for it has been noted before, there's no reason to keep republicizing it unless special circumstances arise in which a lighter or harsher penalty is called for, in which case just noting that there were special circumstances (or if it was a combination of misdeeds, the other factors) should be enough.

[+ sf westcoaster]

If I have been following a thread for which someone eventually gets a time-out or the thread is locked, the cause (infraction)has almost always been evident.

[TruHart1]

I've noticed on the forum that one member and another member will sometimes get into a negative shouting match about some disagreement or other but I am a bit surprised that someone would continue to post hurtful comments about a member who is on time out and really does not even have the ability to defend themselves. It just seems like kicking someone when they are down and therefore somewhat cruel, IMHO!

 

TruHart1

[TruHart1]

Irony?

 

TruHart1

[TruHart1]

Reading the posts you link to, that entire thread was asking whether members would hire an escort who barebacks, whether in films or in escorting.

 

TruHart1

[TruHart1]

I'm sorry if you thought I was defending one member and I apologize. My point was that whatever may have happened, I do not think it is right to make hurtful comments publicly about a member who cannot explain his side. There are two sides to every story!

 

TruHart1

[Scorpio]

Reading the posts you link to, that entire thread was asking whether members would hire an escort who barebacks, whether in films or in escorting.

 

TruHart1

 

Yes, in which Marylander revealed personal information about ChrisW from one of Chris' social media profiles...before Daddy edited it out and sent Marylander packing. Revealing personal, private information is not allowed....and Marylander is a repeat offender on said violation. His actions are undefensible.

[Steven_Draker]

Yes, in which Marylander revealed personal information about ChrisW from one of Chris' social media profiles...before Daddy edited it out and sent Marylander packing. Revealing personal, private information is not allowed....and Marylander is a repeat offender on said violation. His actions are undefensible.

 

The "personal, private information" you're referring to, was available online to everyone who wanted to see it.

 

The way the post was constructed (I saw it before it was edited out) appeared in a very threatening and menacing way.

 

I think we should all calm down and give this a rest.