FabSwingers.com mobile

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 Swingers Chat

A "No Thank You Button" would be good!

Jump to newest
 

By *ennythelion OP   Man
over a year ago

Derby

In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?"

Yes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?"
yes what a great idea

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Yes! It would be my most used button.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eady and Willing 9Man
over a year ago

Wherever the party is @

Great idea. Wonder how many guys woukd use it? Lol. Not many i'd suspect hehe

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?"

some wouldnt take the hint even with that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r.BlondeMan
over a year ago

Chester/Wirral


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button "
but that could of been accidental

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inkyLondonpairCouple
over a year ago

London


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button "

Exactly.

My view is that an automated "no thanks" button would cause even more anguish and resentment. You get all excited seeing you've got a reply and then discover its actually yet another. "sod off".

I still can't fathom why people want to be explicitly told someone doesn't fancy them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r.BlondeMan
over a year ago

Chester/Wirral


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button

Exactly.

My view is that an automated "no thanks" button would cause even more anguish and resentment. You get all excited seeing you've got a reply and then discover its actually yet another. "sod off".

I still can't fathom why people want to be explicitly told someone doesn't fancy them. "
I don't get it either why do you want false hope.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button

Exactly.

My view is that an automated "no thanks" button would cause even more anguish and resentment. You get all excited seeing you've got a reply and then discover its actually yet another. "sod off".

I still can't fathom why people want to be explicitly told someone doesn't fancy them. "

Between the vile "no thanks. we don't meet ugly people", the well meaning but botched "no thanks. I know we're no oil painting either. but we don't like the look of you", and a simple delete... I'll take the delete every time.

It's just a shame that it is literally every time

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Oh god this button would be my dream!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tirluvMan
over a year ago

the right frame of mind -London

Yeah -like guys understand the concept of "no" alright

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I'd rather just have them deleted than have an inbox full of 'no thanks.'

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inkyLondonpairCouple
over a year ago

London


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button

Exactly.

My view is that an automated "no thanks" button would cause even more anguish and resentment. You get all excited seeing you've got a reply and then discover its actually yet another. "sod off".

I still can't fathom why people want to be explicitly told someone doesn't fancy them.

Between the vile "no thanks. we don't meet ugly people", the well meaning but botched "no thanks. I know we're no oil painting either. but we don't like the look of you", and a simple delete... I'll take the delete every time.

It's just a shame that it is literally every time "

When at least one of you has a vagina, you are clearly royalty on here and you expect penis holders to bow down at your command. Thus, when of such people messages you and says "no", it's as if everything you ever thought about the world had been proved wrong.

In order to avoid such trauma no reply is always preferable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Filters in place stop those I don't want to hear from already

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Nah - it’s fine as it is

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r.BlondeMan
over a year ago

Chester/Wirral

I think I've got it, is it because some then want to reply to the no thanks thanking them for it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Dear Sir. Today you have 576 unread "no" messages. Have a nice day

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mp411Man
over a year ago

chester

Or just a big red one deletes and blocks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rban-NitesCouple
over a year ago

LONDON (SE)


"In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?"

Yes we would and an excellent idea! But it'll be A mammoth task of getting it actually added to the site features

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"In stead of ignoring messages or marking them as unread would you use a "no thank you" button?"

I sometimes set and unset message filters. I don’t reply to say “no thanks” to the ones I’m not interested in because when I set filters again to stop unwanted messages coming through, the user I have replied to, to say “no thanks” can continue to message even when the filters have been set again because of the fact I have replied to them.

So I think this would be a great idea as long as a standard “no thanks” reply would not allow the user to then bypass message filters when I set them again

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emini ManMan
over a year ago

There and to the left a bit

Whilst in principle it's a good idea - in practice it would create an alternate problem - those that moan about not getting a reply, would then moan about getting an automated one that said no thanks or worse still would follow up that automated message with either a question as to why it was no thanks, or the abuse they send now when they are turned down.

A far better feature would be that those that get butt hurt over not getting a reply simply accepted that no reply means no interest

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Whilst in principle it's a good idea - in practice it would create an alternate problem - those that moan about not getting a reply, would then moan about getting an automated one that said no thanks or worse still would follow up that automated message with either a question as to why it was no thanks, or the abuse they send now when they are turned down.

A far better feature would be that those that get butt hurt over not getting a reply simply accepted that no reply means no interest "

Perhaps a simple set of options after you press the "no thanks" button...

- Too Ugly

- Too Far Away

- Too Lewd

- Too Fawning

- Too Fake

- Too Married

- You Didn't Bother To Read My Profile, So I Can't Be Bothered To Reply

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

Perhaps a simple set of options after you press the "no thanks" button...

- Too Ugly

- Too Far Away

- Too Lewd

- Too Fawning

- Too Fake

- Too Married

- You Didn't Bother To Read My Profile, So I Can't Be Bothered To Reply

"

That last option might as well come automatically ticked for the majority of messages we get.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *xMFM3sumsxxWoman
over a year ago

SouthWest Lancashire


"Alternatively how about one convenient button that not only tells the person you're not interested but deletes their message at the same time, thereby helping you keep on top of your inbox. We could call it something like the "delete" button

Exactly.

My view is that an automated "no thanks" button would cause even more anguish and resentment. You get all excited seeing you've got a reply and then discover its actually yet another. "sod off".

I still can't fathom why people want to be explicitly told someone doesn't fancy them. "

It's to control our behaviour. We must acknowledge their plea for sex.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top