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 The Lounge |
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 |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I could change one thing about fab it would be their message board. It frustrates me as a woman no end when l see men rant about messages going unresponded or unopened and deleted. Can I set the record straight to those who rant. If a pic has 1000 fabs in 12 hrs you can bet it had the same in messages. Can that said person who has not responded really get through all those NO. The best thing fab can do would be to have a much smaller restriction to an in box" Currently showing the last 100 but holding capacity over 1,000. My concept would be a max of 50 any other senders receive a "message board full try again later" option. Thus allowing a higher % for contact between sender and recipient without anyone taking offence. Did I say change just one thing.... Make that two....fab give uses one week to verify themselves to site otherwise remove. " Could also explain my non read message the other day | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Only some men rant, and kind of ones that do, aren't the men who go on the forums. I would say that's a small amount, so maybe allow the person to choose their inbox size... Or maybe make people read the FAQ's, as it says a non read/reply is a no. There's no one size fits all way to fix people being an ass" Yes I like your idea more, choose your own in box size because filters aren't always sufficient. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've never messaged you. Would you like me to.? " hahaha I think you just did | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's better to improve than restrict x" Definitely, as people with full inboxes could actual end up missing ones interesting to them, due to the sheer volume of messages. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Only some men rant, and kind of ones that do, aren't the men who go on the forums. I would say that's a small amount, so maybe allow the person to choose their inbox size... Or maybe make people read the FAQ's, as it says a non read/reply is a no. There's no one size fits all way to fix people being an ass Yes I like your idea more, choose your own in box size because filters aren't always sufficient. " I like the idea of choosing our own box size! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I could change one thing about fab it would be their message board. It frustrates me as a woman no end when l see men rant about messages going unresponded or unopened and deleted. Can I set the record straight to those who rant. If a pic has 1000 fabs in 12 hrs you can bet it had the same in messages. Can that said person who has not responded really get through all those NO. The best thing fab can do would be to have a much smaller restriction to an in box" Currently showing the last 100 but holding capacity over 1,000. My concept would be a max of 50 any other senders receive a "message board full try again later" option. Thus allowing a higher % for contact between sender and recipient without anyone taking offence. Did I say change just one thing.... Make that two....fab give uses one week to verify themselves to site otherwise remove. " I don't agree with either of those suggestions, sorry. Members are perfectly capable of managing their own message boxes. And I totally disagree that a member should have to verify themselves within a week or get kicked off. Don't forget that this is a free site unless members choose to become supporters, admin are volunteers and the workload in throwing members off after a week would be immense. Plus it would be unfair, I am meet verified but have not photo verified myself so that would be me gone. | |||
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 |
"But the current system is very exposed to fake accounts... We've all experience those so surely better controls will help admin in the long run. " I know its a filter, but there are ones for verified etc. to help cut down on the crap mail you get. Ive been messaged by real people without any verifications, and fake people with them. Like I said, no one size fits all unfortunately | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's better to improve than restrict x" I agree in a way. There is a problem, but people are the cause of it, and not the website. But, there could be improvements made rather than people making excuses and being content with the way things are. Deleted/unread is a polite no?? No it's not. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I could change one thing about fab it would be their message board. It frustrates me as a woman no end when l see men rant about messages going unresponded or unopened and deleted. Can I set the record straight to those who rant. If a pic has 1000 fabs in 12 hrs you can bet it had the same in messages. Can that said person who has not responded really get through all those NO. The best thing fab can do would be to have a much smaller restriction to an in box" Currently showing the last 100 but holding capacity over 1,000. My concept would be a max of 50 any other senders receive a "message board full try again later" option. Thus allowing a higher % for contact between sender and recipient without anyone taking offence. Did I say change just one thing.... Make that two....fab give uses one week to verify themselves to site otherwise remove. I don't agree with either of those suggestions, sorry. Members are perfectly capable of managing their own message boxes. And I totally disagree that a member should have to verify themselves within a week or get kicked off. Don't forget that this is a free site unless members choose to become supporters, admin are volunteers and the workload in throwing members off after a week would be immense. Plus it would be unfair, I am meet verified but have not photo verified myself so that would be me gone. " The delete after a week function could be written into the site code . | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dont like facial hair but 99% of my messages are from the full bearded fashionistas. More filters for personal tastes would be the icing on the cake for me. " Haha, I'm with you here!!! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dont like facial hair but 99% of my messages are from the full bearded fashionistas. More filters for personal tastes would be the icing on the cake for me. Haha, I'm with you here!!! " What about those that only shave when going on meet, as they have no real need to for day to day life? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I could change one thing about fab it would be their message board. It frustrates me as a woman no end when l see men rant about messages going unresponded or unopened and deleted. Can I set the record straight to those who rant. If a pic has 1000 fabs in 12 hrs you can bet it had the same in messages. Can that said person who has not responded really get through all those NO. The best thing fab can do would be to have a much smaller restriction to an in box" Currently showing the last 100 but holding capacity over 1,000. My concept would be a max of 50 any other senders receive a "message board full try again later" option. Thus allowing a higher % for contact between sender and recipient without anyone taking offence. Did I say change just one thing.... Make that two....fab give uses one week to verify themselves to site otherwise remove. " Good ideas I think... which won't just help the un/lucky women who have to work through thousands of messages, but also the guys and girls who do put an effort into their messages but don't hear back because it's got lost under a pile somewhere. This seems like something which could be optional? Users who have the time and don't mind manually filtering everything will still get to do so... I'm of course in this category of people with my mighty 8 unread messages | |||
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 |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"if you put a limit on message characters, like POF allows, that's most of the shit messages gone already." Good one. I'd argue for a minimum number too! We've all had plenty of two syllable messages in our time! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Theses type of threads always make me think of a cake shop where the customer gets shouted at for trying to buy a cake. " I'll never shout at anyone buying me cake! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Theses type of threads always make me think of a cake shop where the customer gets shouted at for trying to buy a cake. " | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Post new Message to Thread |
back to top |