Log in

View Full Version : Who Doesn't belong on SCJunkie?



Pages : 1 [2]

Perry
06-11-2008, 10:52 PM
Aww, thanks! :) Funny story, about 5 minutes after that pic was taken my friend tripped and fell in the hallway, without letting go of the leash. Since my hands were tied I couldn't catch myself and went face first onto the floor, lol.

crizgolfer
06-11-2008, 11:23 PM
Aww, thanks! :) Funny story, about 5 minutes after that pic was taken my friend tripped and fell in the hallway, without letting go of the leash. Since my hands were tied I couldn't catch myself and went face first onto the floor, lol.

According to the SCJ bylaws you must post a NATO for the above story. I really hate to be a stickler for rules and all, but it is the law...;)

Perry
06-11-2008, 11:47 PM
^^ Done ;)

crizgolfer
06-12-2008, 04:57 AM
^^^

hehehe....you rock!;D

xdamage
06-12-2008, 06:00 AM
How is that at odds?


I think you misunderstood. The point was that sometimes what people complain about is the very drama they really love the most. If the villains were removed from the site, you'd find some seeking them out over here because the fun is in having a villain to be the scapegoat (that would be we, us, customers or men sometimes).



Yeah, so? You just want to set that up as a strawman so you can gloat later when it's knocked down. ... If pink is restricted to professionals only, the reason should be to make that its focus. Period. No other results necessary. If it doesn't diminish drama, BFD; that's practically inherent in Internet forums.


-Ev

The problem with the Pink side is only about 50% or less is about industry related material. The rest of it is socialization threads, personal threads, politics, religion, relationship issues, emotional issues, and so on.

The dancers have in common a profession, XX chromosomes, and maybe an age range of 18-40s (which is quite large). Most of the heated disagreements and loses have nothing to do with the industry specific topics and everything to do with having forums about the rest of life.

I'm pretty sure if the pink side was Professional topics ONLY, no personal/life business, emotional support, religion, politics, etc., it would be nearly drama free.

But there is sort of a mythical belief that it can be some kind of full-life support forum too, where the one and only significant tie between everyone is dancing for a living, and maybe the XX chromosome. And when that mythical belief fails over and over, a scapegoat is looked for (that would be either customers, or those with the XY chromosomes).

Sure, I'd gloat if the scapegoat was proven wrong, the same way I'd gloat if a forum of professional male firemen tried to find all of their life support needs on a common forum, and were proven wrong that the presence of homosexuals (or women, or even fire fighter fans) in their midst is not the cause of their internal strifes.

evan_essence
06-12-2008, 05:02 PM
If you want to know what would happen, peek into Ladies Only. That's a pretty good working model to judge by.

-Ev

xdamage
06-12-2008, 09:26 PM
If you want to know what would happen, peek into Ladies Only. That's a pretty good working model to judge by.

-Ev

It's considered bad form to read L.O., so best avoided. But I've indirectly read that various members leaving though have been over disputes with other dancers that got heated, quite rarely over disputes with customers.

I just think we are all very different people, and the scope of many internet forums is less. For example I partake in various hobbyist forums, but the vast majority of the topics are about the hobby, and topics that diverge into personal matters, religion, politics, how to raise children, feelings about criminal activity for a living, sexual relationships and a thousand other charged topics are simply not allowed.

Even support forums that delve into tough support topics would not allow many of the types of heated and totally off-topic type of discussions that are hosted on SW.

S.W. though seems to be based on some idea that it's one stop shopping. That every and all of life's most intimate and often drama charged life topics are to be discussed, no matter how loosely related they are to "dancing for a living". It's fun and interesting I suppose, but hardly surprising that members end up getting butt hurt at times.

VegasPrincess
06-13-2008, 11:00 AM
^^^ True dat on all accounts!

mr_punk
06-14-2008, 06:36 AM
LOL..Huh??? I'm not under the impression I'm your first, nor do I care that I'm not, as long as I'm enjoying the sniper fire.<double-take> LOL..of course. i did say you broads come down here to work out your daddy issues.

I think you misunderstood. The point was that sometimes what people complain about is the very drama they really love the most. If the villains were removed from the site, you'd find some seeking them out over here because the fun is in having a villain to be the scapegoat (that would be we, us, customers or men sometimes).isn't it funny how some girls profess to have nothing to say to a customer. yet, they'll come down here and talk and talk and talk until our ears fall off. LOL..and people wonder why i call these girls flaky.

evan_essence
06-14-2008, 07:21 PM
It's considered bad form to read L.O., so best avoided. But I've indirectly read that various members leaving though have been over disputes with other dancers that got heated, quite rarely over disputes with customers.Again, I don't see how that should be the driving element in the decision. If it's true, big deal. If it continues to be true after changes, again, BFD.


I just think we are all very different people, and the scope of many internet forums is less. For example I partake in various hobbyist forums, but the vast majority of the topics are about the hobby, and topics that diverge into personal matters, religion, politics, how to raise children, feelings about criminal activity for a living, sexual relationships and a thousand other charged topics are simply not allowed.And that's the niche they serve. The scope is arbitrarily decided, presumably by the operators of the forum based on what they think the majority of the community wants or based on the niche they're trying to serve or some balance of those two measurements. Which is all that's being considered here. Redefine the scope to not include customers.


Even support forums that delve into tough support topics would not allow many of the types of heated and totally off-topic type of discussions that are hosted on SW.They also likely would try to discourage someone who had no experience with the topic from coming in and speaking as if they were knowledgable.


S.W. though seems to be based on some idea that it's one stop shopping. That every and all of life's most intimate and often drama charged life topics are to be discussed, no matter how loosely related they are to "dancing for a living".That's because it functions as a social site; it is not strictly business. With this lament, you're practically making the argument that the forum has no good reason to exist in the first place because it's too broadly defined. If that's true, then narrowing its scope to strippers only certainly wouldn't make that problem any worse.

You also left out a key common denominator in your calculations. Strippers are predominantly women and we share certain life experiences from that perspective. Again, it's similar to keeping men out of the women's dressing room. Has that ever stopped drama from occurring? No. Do women still want to keep men from being there? Yes. Heck, if it would shut you guys up because you weren't able to see the drama, that would make the change worth it on that reason alone. :P


It's fun and interesting I suppose,Don't underestimate that as having value in and of itself.


but hardly surprising that members end up getting butt hurt at times.Well, you sound like it's some sort of problem that rivals the crisis in Darfur and thus, making a decision that might not work will kill thousands. I don't really care which way the decision goes. I'm shrugging my shoulders, rather than breaking out the popcorn and drooling, because I see cases can be built either way. If the majority of the community wants it restricted and the owner determines that's the niche he wants the site to serve, then so be it. That's all that's really relevant. Success doesn't have to be measured by producing a result that you've chosen for it.

It's just a message board. In the big scheme of things, it's not unreasonable on the Internet to make changes, determine how they're working and tweak tweak tweak. If it doesn't work and needs to be modified or even totally reversed, that's simply part of the journey.

-Ev

xdamage
06-14-2008, 08:20 PM
That's because it functions as a social site; it is not strictly business. With this lament, you're practically making the argument that the forum has no good reason to exist in the first place because it's too broadly defined. If that's true, then narrowing its scope to strippers only certainly wouldn't make that problem any worse.


Nah, I'm not making that argument. That is an all or nothing argument and not how my brain works. There is something between the extremes of "no reason", and very focused reason.

The polls make it clear that those who think it should be a social site for "strippers only", no males or customers at all, are in the minority.

My point is much simpler. There is a minority that really does not want to interact with customers at all. Fine. They also aren't spending time on SCJ. It would be interesting to prove once and for all that the exclusion they want actually won't work, and the social aspects of the site may well be worse off, although I think it would be interesting to experiment. That is all I was saying about that.

However there is also a group, like yourself, who we have to wonder, because they are the few who spend a significant amount of time over here on the blue customer site telling us how they don't want customer interaction while doing the exact opposite. I honestly think that behavior is on the verge of what you were accusing mr. p off... a strange kind of territorial entitlement. This group is basically seeking drama, nothing more and who cares what they want? Pryce shouldn't because they will never really be satisfied. Even if SW blocked all customers, they would just come to SCJ to cause drama.

The rest I'm guessing are fine with the boundaries that exist or are looking for minor refinements, not absolute exclusions. Customers and men should (and mostly do) stay out of the industry related forums, and their activity is censored in the socialization forums, not on the blue side. The polls show that the majority of dancers don't feel they are overwhelming the site, and many have said repeatedly in open that the guys add interesting input they enjoy.

mr_punk
06-15-2008, 06:54 AM
However there is also a group, like yourself, who we have to wonder, because they are the few who spend a significant amount of time over here on the blue customer site telling us how they don't want customer interaction while doing the exact opposite. I honestly think that behavior is on the verge of what you were accusing mr. p off... a strange kind of territorial entitlement. This group is basically seeking drama, nothing more and who cares what they want? Pryce shouldn't because they will never really be satisfied. Even if SW blocked all customers, they would just come to SCJ to cause drama.ROTFLMAO.....daddy issues, check.

evan_essence
06-18-2008, 07:01 PM
My point is much simpler. There is a minority that really does not want to interact with customers at all. Fine. They also aren't spending time on SCJ. It would be interesting to prove once and for all that the exclusion they want actually won't work, and the social aspects of the site may well be worse off, although I think it would be interesting to experiment. That is all I was saying about that.Since it's a small minority lodging such a complaint, I don't understand why you put so much emphasis on it. To me, only if a large minority or a majority were actually lobbying for it would it seem to rise to the level of proposing an experiment.


However there is also a group, like yourself, who we have to wonder, because they are the few who spend a significant amount of time over here on the blue customer site telling us how they don't want customer interaction while doing the exact opposite.There's a group now? Just Jenny and I, or do we have other volunteers waiting to be drafted? Seriously, I think you're embellishing so you can wring your hands over some feminist army marching into your territory when there is none. Besides, it's not correct to say I'm arguing against customer interaction. I could use a little less of yours maybe, but I'm fine with most. I'm talking hypothetically, just as you are.


I honestly think that behavior is on the verge of what you were accusing mr. p off... a strange kind of territorial entitlement. This group is basically seeking drama, nothing more and who cares what they want? Pryce shouldn't because they will never really be satisfied. Even if SW blocked all customers, they would just come to SCJ to cause drama.So what? Again, and this is purely hypothetical, it's a perfectly viable model to have pink be strippers only and blue be mixed. There's nothing strange about an arbitrary focus like that. It's just a business model. Bottom line is, however, that's so hypothetical that it's really a moot point because there's no groundswell for it. Thus, no need to worry or gloat over what if.

-Ev

evan_essence
06-18-2008, 07:08 PM
ROTFLMAO.....daddy issues, check.Yeah, yeah, and you resent the woman who kicked you out of the womb. (I mean most recently in the strip club, not at birth.) We all have issues. BFD.

-Ev