FabSwingers.com forum: Addition to verifications

By *yx_Inanna OP Woman
over a year ago

Burslem

While verifications are good to see that the person is a human being and that they've been enjoyable company there should also be a system in place that focuses on balance.

My suggestion is an anonymous meter or meters.

Pressing green being that a person/s had a good experience of the person whose profile it is. Red being bad experience.

It would be then up to the individual to make sure their meter is of a majority green.

If a person is abusive etc the person who had engaged with them can click red and however they were encountered, be it chatroom, inbox, meeting or club visit.

If good then they can click green with the same options.

That way a person whose meter or meters if breaking them into online parts and in the real world, if there is more red than green they can be seen to be of risk in what ever form.

This way there's no naming and shaming and should the case may be spiteful marking of another user marking them red their good behaviour will outweigh their bad marks. Only ones who would worry about this are those who for the majority of the time are bad.

This seems to be the only plausible option to out the good people from the bad on fab. Women could at least feel more inclined to message a man whose more green than red. I know this isn't fool proof but more than what it is now.

Verifications don't help because few people may have had a good experience of the person/s but many more had bad. This way we can assume to avoid someone with largely red meter.

In turn it means people would be on their best behaviour more often and need to engage more in the swinging community online and going to parties, clubs and socials in order to promote themselves and balance their meter.

It would also give moderators and admin chance to see the effect an individual has on fab and investigate should a person become a concern.

As if selling on internet the vendor has 97% positive feed back you'd be happier purchasing from that vendor than one with only 64% positive feed back. I'd say the same would go about a potential meet or new companion you'd want someone proven to be trustworthy, reliable, safe, and polite.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

I don't see how the spiteful bit would be eliminated. If I have 20 fantastic meets and choose not to meet 200 spiteful people, I'm 200 red to 20 green, avoid.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This isn't eBay...what you are suggesting is ridiculous and would be wide open to abuse x

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *LIRTWITHUSCouple
over a year ago

Chester

It's like TripAdvisor as it is

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no.

but a social verification part would be helpful.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I don't see how the spiteful bit would be eliminated. If I have 20 fantastic meets and choose not to meet 200 spiteful people, I'm 200 red to 20 green, avoid. "

Thought exactly that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

nor is it amazon asking for negative feed back

my advice is okay shit happens just block and move on

we are not all here to get on and yes some people we may have a conflict with block them it is okay to block and no harm done

life is full of experience good and bad and just remember the good times

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yx_Inanna OP Woman
over a year ago

Burslem

It can't be eliminated, it can be avoided for those who message you and you check them out not for you don't reply but just block. The blocked user submit a red mark for being blocked.

As stated in the rules a message delete or block is a polite no thank you.

Just don't reply to the initial message.

If they red mark you for something else then I'd open a ticket to request it looked into. Chatroom are saved to servers it's easy to find if two users ever interacted

The red mark giver would be found and receive one of their own from moderator. Why should they not receive a mark for their bad behaviour?

This way it is a deterrent you can't go round giving bad marks spitefully

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Or someone could give you a spiteful review because they wanted anal and you said no, or on and on.

I don't see this taking off.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It can't be eliminated, it can be avoided for those who message you and you check them out not for you don't reply but just block. The blocked user submit a red mark for being blocked.

As stated in the rules a message delete or block is a polite no thank you.

Just don't reply to the initial message.

If they red mark you for something else then I'd open a ticket to request it looked into. Chatroom are saved to servers it's easy to find if two users ever interacted

The red mark giver would be found and receive one of their own from moderator. Why should they not receive a mark for their bad behaviour?

This way it is a deterrent you can't go round giving bad marks spitefully"

Tracking back all the right and wrong negative marks requires extra admin work. Extra admin costs extra money. Knowing theres around 30000 members online every day on average - most of the spiteful buggers have no membership support which means there's no magical money falling out of the sky to pay for that extra admin work caused by free trolls.

Pof puts a ban on the account after you receive 10 blocks.

Does it stop people from joining over and over again? No.

My best advice is - if you're that unsure about who you're talking to, or genuinely have your doubts - private message people who have verified the user in question. You'd have better chances of hearing an honest opinion.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yx_Inanna OP Woman
over a year ago

Burslem

"Or someone could give you a spiteful review because they wanted anal and you said no, or on and on.

I don't see this taking off. "

But then goes on to take their anal anyway you've said no they don't care?

What then? Police do fuck all, no one cares really do they? The person will still have great veris because the person has got what they wanted they didn't say no, what of the other people who said no but they take it anyway? That doesn't get documented or counted

Even if the meters were invisible at least hopefully someone from fab would take interest surely? Like do they from reporting??

But yeah worry about the spiteful people that's more important than finding dangerous people on fab and eliminating them

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yx_Inanna OP Woman
over a year ago

Burslem

"It can't be eliminated, it can be avoided for those who message you and you check them out not for you don't reply but just block. The blocked user submit a red mark for being blocked.

As stated in the rules a message delete or block is a polite no thank you.

Just don't reply to the initial message.

If they red mark you for something else then I'd open a ticket to request it looked into. Chatroom are saved to servers it's easy to find if two users ever interacted

The red mark giver would be found and receive one of their own from moderator. Why should they not receive a mark for their bad behaviour?

This way it is a deterrent you can't go round giving bad marks spitefully

Pof puts a ban on the account after you receive 10 blocks.

Does it stop people from joining over and over again? No.

There has to be something and moderators don't get paid to moderate. Why would you need admin to police fab when there is many free fab moderators who are trusted and many who can be trusted to be moderators.

Cost of policing it is minimal with safety improved even slightly is a bonus

Also why ask the people who left verifications?? They had a good experience didn't they why would they complain? Verifications disappear when blocked.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The whole verification system is flawed and open to abuse. I’ve seen some people with three figure verifications which upon closer viewing turns out to be the same people verifying them multiple times. It is meant to confirm someone is genuine not to act as an ego boosting dating diary.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yx_Inanna OP Woman
over a year ago

Burslem

"The whole verification system is flawed and open to abuse. I’ve seen some people with three figure verifications which upon closer viewing turns out to be the same people verifying them multiple times. It is meant to confirm someone is genuine not to act as an ego boosting dating diary. "

I'd say that good multiple verifications could indicate they are valued playmate. Especially if by several others leaving multiple verifications.

The verification system is flawed I agree. But so is the assumptions that every verification was a sexual one when from what I've seen from many clubbers is they are a social one.

What ever way people aren't happy be it the fact someone has "too many", "not enough", "all from one person", hidden, or all on a profile. Can't please everyone

What should be important is every individual on here safe to meet? How to get rid of those who aren't. Is enough being done to make sure that happens.

Do people need reminding of news articles? When people can seem so genuinely honest and open because they've honed their skills. No one knows how unsafe a person is because all we get to see are glowing verifications.

It's all fine and dandy going on gut instinct. Till you meet them and you're hurt or worse but they've done it to others it's just not known.

What other way can people stay safe? Not meeting? Not swinging? Not going to clubs? Staying in and locking the doors? Every chance to meet is a risk but lessening that risk is surely not ideal?

I'd rather be red marked for telling someone I don't want a cock pic than something much worse.

It's too late when it's happened. Then you'd wish something was in place to enlighten you to the risk that someone is

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It can't be eliminated, it can be avoided for those who message you and you check them out not for you don't reply but just block. The blocked user submit a red mark for being blocked.

As stated in the rules a message delete or block is a polite no thank you.

Just don't reply to the initial message.

If they red mark you for something else then I'd open a ticket to request it looked into. Chatroom are saved to servers it's easy to find if two users ever interacted

The red mark giver would be found and receive one of their own from moderator. Why should they not receive a mark for their bad behaviour?

This way it is a deterrent you can't go round giving bad marks spitefully

Pof puts a ban on the account after you receive 10 blocks.

Does it stop people from joining over and over again? No.

Cost of policing it is minimal with safety improved even slightly is a bonus

Also why ask the people who left verifications?? They had a good experience didn't they why would they complain? Verifications disappear when blocked."

They do it for free so may as well give them extra work to do? Perfect logic.

And yes, disputing every single wrongly given red mark would take up a LOT of work.

Admins have lives of their own to maintain too without getting involved into every Joe's given red mark for no reply or deleted message.

I get what you're saying about extra safety, but we're all adults here and do take somewhat of a risk by meeting strangers online. It's up to us to make it as safe as possible.

If anything at all doesn't add up or seems fishy - block.

About veris - some people can be pressured in leaving nicer veris than they would like. Also - nobody posts bad veris. If you would be that concerned about your safety - you would leave it up to yourself to do your own homework. I do.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread