
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
| Back to forum list |
| Back to Fabswingers.com site feedback |
| Jump to newest |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would be better if the veri text stayed but it just said user as left the site in the name part?" Agreed!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would be better if the veri text stayed but it just said user as left the site in the name part? Agreed!!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I just think it's a huge flaw in the site. Veris are ultimately the best way of finding out more about what a people are truly like and into, and for them to keep disappearing is crazy. Any chance of an admin response? " Totally agree. Like others above, I've lost some verifications due to people leaving the site. I don't have many to lose anyway! I know the summary remains unchanged but the text of the verifications themselves is important. I also wish they would remain but just show as being from 'User no longer on site'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...Veris are ultimately the best way of finding out more about what a people are truly like and into...,," No they aren't : All they do is say that you exist, that you are who you (say) you are. All the rest is additional bullshit. They aren't worth anything else ; the write ups are just subjective opinion It would be better if the veri was just a yes/ no form : 1. Is the person the sex described yes/no 2. Do they match the description in thier profile ? Yes/no 3. If the verification was for a meet, did they turn up as planned? Yes/no 4. Do you endorse them as genuine? Yes/ no. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...Veris are ultimately the best way of finding out more about what a people are truly like and into...,, No they aren't : All they do is say that you exist, that you are who you (say) you are. All the rest is additional bullshit. They aren't worth anything else ; the write ups are just subjective opinion It would be better if the veri was just a yes/ no form : 1. Is the person the sex described yes/no 2. Do they match the description in thier profile ? Yes/no 3. If the verification was for a meet, did they turn up as planned? Yes/no 4. Do you endorse them as genuine? Yes/ no." The 4th question is redundant if the others are answered. It would make for far less lurid and spicy descriptions and accounts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The 4th question is redundant if the others are answered. It would make for far less lurid and spicy descriptions and accounts" Ah yes; you are right about 4 th question. I never look at veris anyway, or even look for them if thinking about meeting. I must admit I do occasionally look at some, just because they are just so Ludicrously lurid that they are funny. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The people wrote those words so with them not being here neither should their words, if people accuse you of hiding veris then do you really want to meet them? Block and move on " They also wrote the words in their forum posts, yet they remain when a user leaves. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The people wrote those words so with them not being here neither should their words, if people accuse you of hiding veris then do you really want to meet them? Block and move on They also wrote the words in their forum posts, yet they remain when a user leaves." Yeah but its not on someones personal profile | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They send messages to a personal profile and they remain too. Don't see why s veri is different. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They send messages to a personal profile and they remain too. Don't see why s veri is different. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They send messages to a personal profile and they remain too. Don't see why s veri is different. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x " Thanks for responding. This is interesting. 1) How could retaining the veris be a bad thing? If they've been permitted to be placed there, and are after all such an integral element of the site, why not retain them? I see your point about keeping things current, but they're dated, so people can see exactly how old they are. 2) If people have made posts, they know they'll be read. What's the difference between this and the fact that they have verified someone (the veri summary) remaining? Their profile will disappear when they leave, and as a previous poster suggested, the veri could just display "user no longer on site". I see the argument for removing them as fundamentally flawed and believe the site would be a better place for longstanding members for retaining the verifications | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would be better if the veri text stayed but it just said user as left the site in the name part?" I agree, there forum post stays so cant see why verification text cant stay | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also someone could make up 6 fake profiles, give themselves great veris then delete the fakes. Anyone looking at the profile wouldn't think twice about UNLOS's" Fake veries will always happen regardless of the system in place | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would be better if the veri text stayed but it just said user as left the site in the name part? I agree, there forum post stays so cant see why verification text cant stay" Forum ousts are different, because they are part of a conversation; if you removed an UNLOS forum post, then when you read through the thread, it would make no sense at all , because great chunks of the discussion would not follow each other ( and what about quotes?) Since veris are simply ( supposed to be) only to show that the receiver of the veri actually exists, then why on earth do you need to have the text at all? If I was running this, I should remove the text part of the veri altogether ; you would simply tick that you verified someone, by a meet or a cam , or whatever, so the only thing you would ever have would be the verification summary. The write ups are, just utterly pointless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreed 100%. Admin response?" This is all a matter of judgement, we've posted ours above. We continue to listen and we'll post if we make changes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hi I'm verified myself and had a meet the start of January and when I verified her it says saved yet she is telling me it's not showing up on her profile any1 no why ?" Did you verify her using the same internet connection? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x " Thanks admin. In your first response you stated the above. So what does it take for a change to be made? Some form of poll? Is there a way? Thanks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x " Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent." It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. Personally if Veri's go (which we agree with), then all entries from an account must go including forums posts, club reviews and private messages, since they are the individuals own content. Cant see why it's one rule for one (veri's) and a confused ruling for the rest. Since you stated your T&C's earlier in the thread regarding this issue of keeping content/changing your T&C's. You may want to review your T&C's since they do not give clear guidance on content ownership and editing/removal anyway. Your T&C's say you have the right to do as you wish with the content displayed on the site (for site purposes). 5.10 You will understand that we have to reserve the right to vet or monitor any Content and to reject, suspend or remove from our site However the terms also say content can be removed on account cancellation. 7.1 You may at any time cancel your Membership and remove all of your Content publicly displayed on our site by following the instructions on our site. But you don't give full powers of deletion of that content when you delete the profile, only the profile content. It's rather ambiguous at best. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The veri summary stays the same tho. Nothing comes of that" no it changes I had 7 veris at one point | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. You're about to be flooded with "I'm really happy with....." messages now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"just my view, but I think the meet count should also be adjusted, as a lot come back, you meet again, and although the same person, it adds to your total, makes it look like you have more different people then you have " Agreed! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is prefer people not to leave me feedback an those that do I don't display anyway. Like to appear pure and untouched on here and don't really like the idea of everything I've done being discussed. " That's your choice, which you could retain under an altered system. Nothing would change for you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"just my view, but I think the meet count should also be adjusted, as a lot come back, you meet again, and although the same person, it adds to your total, makes it look like you have more different people then you have Agreed!" Not so good for people who have very few meets and lose all/most of them due to people leaving the site. It's not just losing all meets, you might lose the most recent one or two and then it could look like you haven't had one in several years. Some people judge on that criteria. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The veri summary stays the same tho. Nothing comes of that no it changes I had 7 veris at one point ?? I've lost about three verifications due to people leaving the site (a big proportion of the total for me!), but my verification summary has definitely remained the same. There have been previous posts/comments confirming this should be the site behaviour. If your summary has changed, I'd suggest something has gone wrong in your case and you should take it up with site support. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri." Some people actually put a lot of effort into veris...its a way of showing appreciation/affection for the recipient that may not be appropriate to bring up at the time...they can also provide a nice little reminder for the recipient about the meet. Just as a thought, how about the possibility of offering the member going UNLOS the opportunity to choose to remove any verifications they have written as part of the account deletion process? If they are happy to leave them up then they can be marked as UNLOS, if not then they can be removed. **cough***admin***cough** | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri." Yeah, that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri. Some people actually put a lot of effort into veris...its a way of showing appreciation/affection for the recipient that may not be appropriate to bring up at the time...they can also provide a nice little reminder for the recipient about the meet. Just as a thought, how about the possibility of offering the member going UNLOS the opportunity to choose to remove any verifications they have written as part of the account deletion process? If they are happy to leave them up then they can be marked as UNLOS, if not then they can be removed. **cough***admin***cough**" Really? I thought that verifications were to verify that the person/ people in question are genuinely who they represent themselves to be. That they meet when they say they will. The clue being in the name...verify genuine Performance reviews belong on trip advisor, nice little reminders or shows of affection actually would make me doubt the verification was objective enough to be called such | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri. Some people actually put a lot of effort into veris...its a way of showing appreciation/affection for the recipient that may not be appropriate to bring up at the time...they can also provide a nice little reminder for the recipient about the meet. Just as a thought, how about the possibility of offering the member going UNLOS the opportunity to choose to remove any verifications they have written as part of the account deletion process? If they are happy to leave them up then they can be marked as UNLOS, if not then they can be removed. **cough***admin***cough** Really? I thought that verifications were to verify that the person/ people in question are genuinely who they represent themselves to be. That they meet when they say they will. The clue being in the name...verify genuine Performance reviews belong on trip advisor, nice little reminders or shows of affection actually would make me doubt the verification was objective enough to be called such" By default any verification is completely subjective..as already stated you could distill the veri system to a checkbox(which would makd it more objective). But where is the fun in that? A big part of the veri system is that it allows others to get a feel for both writer and recipient..this can then be weighed up alongside the profile and possibly forum posts to allow someone to make a more informed choice as to a meet. It can also be useful in working out if someone has plagiarised a profile, as it can be easy to detect differences in writing styles etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri. Yeah, that. That depends if they could speak coherently by the time you have finished | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x Really great to see an admin response. It's good to see the reasoning behind a decision. (Appreciating that some things should be confidential of course) Just one thought on the reasoning behind the no position, if it's been discussed for the last 8 years, it kind of suggests it's something the membership would like if it keeps coming up? Tuppenceworth spent. It's only because some people are obsessed with the text in their veris.... Which has no bearing whatsoever on the actual purpose of the veri. Some people actually put a lot of effort into veris...its a way of showing appreciation/affection for the recipient that may not be appropriate to bring up at the time...they can also provide a nice little reminder for the recipient about the meet. Just as a thought, how about the possibility of offering the member going UNLOS the opportunity to choose to remove any verifications they have written as part of the account deletion process? If they are happy to leave them up then they can be marked as UNLOS, if not then they can be removed. **cough***admin***cough** Really? I thought that verifications were to verify that the person/ people in question are genuinely who they represent themselves to be. That they meet when they say they will. The clue being in the name...verify genuine Performance reviews belong on trip advisor, nice little reminders or shows of affection actually would make me doubt the verification was objective enough to be called such By default any verification is completely subjective..as already stated you could distill the veri system to a checkbox(which would makd it more objective). But where is the fun in that? A big part of the veri system is that it allows others to get a feel for both writer and recipient..this can then be weighed up alongside the profile and possibly forum posts to allow someone to make a more informed choice as to a meet. It can also be useful in working out if someone has plagiarised a profile, as it can be easy to detect differences in writing styles etc." To be honest, I think the tick box option would be far better. Some people can't tell the difference between verification and validation... I take your point on the other use though, it's useful to an extent | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" A big part of the veri system is that it allows others to get a feel for both writer and recipient..this can then be weighed up alongside the profile and possibly forum posts to allow someone to make a more informed choice as to a meet. It can also be useful in working out if someone has plagiarised a profile, as it can be easy to detect differences in writing styles etc." Nail on head | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Could a poll of the membership be undertaken Admin?" Could it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How about this.. when a user leaves, the veri changes to.. By (user no longer on site), Woman on 8 February 2016 by Meeting in person: **user no longer on site - content removed** This will show who they met in terms of profile type, and show they had actually been verified, and it's real and not hidden cos they are hiding something, as others have suggested. User decided if they choose to show it or not like we do already. " Yes, I agree. Although you do get that information in the verification summary (if you choose to show it on your profile), by having it there only, it can easily be interpreted as hiding something. No idea if this is a helpful or smart thing to do, but I'm on the verge of adding a line to my profile to explain that most (of the very few verifications I have) are from users no longer on the site, hence the reason they are not displayed! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can't see why the verification cannot be left, even if the verifier has left the site...can't be that difficult to do, as I know at least one other site that does that. " I don't think it's so much about whether it's difficult to do, more whether the site admins agree it's a good idea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would be better if the veri text stayed but it just said user as left the site in the name part? I agree, there forum post stays so cant see why verification text cant stay Forum ousts are different, because they are part of a conversation; if you removed an UNLOS forum post, then when you read through the thread, it would make no sense at all , because great chunks of the discussion would not follow each other ( and what about quotes?) Since veris are simply ( supposed to be) only to show that the receiver of the veri actually exists, then why on earth do you need to have the text at all? If I was running this, I should remove the text part of the veri altogether ; you would simply tick that you verified someone, by a meet or a cam , or whatever, so the only thing you would ever have would be the verification summary. The write ups are, just utterly pointless." I disagree When you block someone in chat, chat in a chatroom doesnt become disjointed so no reason forums would either | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It makes absolutely no sense: if the veri summary remains then why not the veris themselves!?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It makes absolutely no sense: if the veri summary remains then why not the veris themselves!?" Because they have left the site If their profile goes they go and they take everything with them How can you be verified by somebody who's not even a member | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It makes absolutely no sense: if the veri summary remains then why not the veris themselves!? Because they have left the site If their profile goes they go and they take everything with them How can you be verified by somebody who's not even a member Apart from their forum posts..... They oddly stay?! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How about this.. when a user leaves, the veri changes to.. By (user no longer on site), Woman on 8 February 2016 by Meeting in person: **user no longer on site - content removed** This will show who they met in terms of profile type, and show they had actually been verified, and it's real and not hidden cos they are hiding something, as others have suggested. User decided if they choose to show it or not like we do already. PERFECT " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The people wrote those words so with them not being here neither should their words, if people accuse you of hiding veris then do you really want to meet them? Block and move on " I've heard that reasoning before but for me it doesn't really stack up due to forum posts staying on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The people wrote those words so with them not being here neither should their words, if people accuse you of hiding veris then do you really want to meet them? Block and move on I've heard that reasoning before but for me it doesn't really stack up due to forum posts staying on" And technically a veri could be classed as being 'gifted' to the recipient as it is posted onto their profile, not the writers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The people wrote those words so with them not being here neither should their words, if people accuse you of hiding veris then do you really want to meet them? Block and move on I've heard that reasoning before but for me it doesn't really stack up due to forum posts staying on And technically a veri could be classed as being 'gifted' to the recipient as it is posted onto their profile, not the writers." And the writer never has access to it again once it's sent. Sometimes I'd like to be able to see what I wrote about someone if they don't display it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is clearly appetite for change in the membership. What does it take to get change admin?" Not entirely sure where you draw that conclusion from. The forum is a miniscule part of the whole site and you have a small handful of people agreeing on one thread... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The veris are left genuinely, and indicate the kind of person / meet the recipient is. They're a useful indicator. What is the harm in retaining them on profiles after other users have left? What does it take to secure change / a poll / a trial? Admin?" You understand of course that repeating the question isn't going to change the answers above. Do you not understand them, or just think that your preference means that other people's privacy, preference and choice doesn't matter? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The veris are left genuinely, and indicate the kind of person / meet the recipient is. They're a useful indicator. What is the harm in retaining them on profiles after other users have left? What does it take to secure change / a poll / a trial? Admin?" They've already answered you twice above, I would just let it drop! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is brought up regularly, since 2008. We appreciate it's frustrating to "lose" a verification (although we introduced the verification summary so the data could still be shown). We'd need two things to be true to change this: 1) We'd need to believe as a whole, retaining text from deleted users was good thing. We taken a view that only showing verifications from users who are on the site, is preferable. 2) We'd have to be convinced that users who are leaving would want their verifications to remain, and we'd need to change our terms of service to specifically reflect that. We're not yet convinced on either point. Admin x " if i left here i don't think i would want my verifications still on the site. if people were getting sentimental over my veris then they should've become more than a verification on this site to me and therefore not need to get sentimemtal over any veri i'd left. we can call this the verification paradox. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |