Possible Tickle Meet

[ShaggyMan]

I have no idea where you came up with that... why is it okay to form opinions about people, but not their intentions?

Even so, please don't take this the wrong way, but you don't dictate around here what we can and can't form opinions on. I'm really not trying to be a "know-it-all," this is just the way it is. You might want to read some other threads around here to get a feel for the way things operate.

I can empathize with you in a way... people say stuff on here all the time that I don't agree with, and it drives me nuts, but all I can do is say what I think (or say nothing at all). I can't stop the others from thinking or saying what they want.

Ok, I can agree with you an that. The whole opinions about people, not their intentions works like this:

If you see someone aacting like an idiot, its safe to assume, they are an idiot. But if someone is walking down the street with a baseball bat, no uniform, you cant assume hes going to play baseball. For all you know he could be preparing to rob someplace.

Also I do understand that dvnc did define "gathering". But thats his definition, not everyone's. To me gathering = a large group of peope getting together. And besides, if dvnc is going to moderate the quote he made(look 2 or 3 posts above for mine, i have it quoted) was unecessary. In this fight I don't want his definition of a gathering, I'll use my own thank you very much.

 

[Wolv420]

I don't. That was my point. If Super said it was a gathering, none of us have any justifiable evidence that he's lying, regardless of what his other posts may be. Now if had actually carried out one of those other posts, then I can see reason as to why some might assume this wasn't a gathering. But from what I could see, none of his other posts were ever carried out.

And about stating your opinions freely. That's perfectly fine. But I do not agree with stating your opinion that shows you saying that the poster wasn't out for what he said he was, but for something else. Why? Because of one simple, easy-to-understand fact: You Are Not The Original Poster! Got it? Good.

hey i got some swamp land for sale in california.............wait how does that con go?

My understanding is you frown on common sense and educated guesses.

Think about it this way............he wanted to have a gathering consisting of multiple one on one sessions. But in order for it to work he needed to personally test out a one on one session ahead of time. What could he possibly be testing for? To see if a man when paired up with a woman could tickle her belly. I think there is plenty of proof of this posted all over the forum; vid clips as well as previous experiences had by others. What about the event of a one on one meeting needed to be tested? Would love to hear your response on this.

 

[ShaggyMan]

hey i got some swamp land for sale in california.............wait how does that con go?

My understanding is you frown on common sense and educated guesses.

Think about it this way............he wanted to have a gathering consisting of multiple one on one sessions. But in order for it to work he needed to personally test out a one on one session ahead of time. What could he possibly be testing for? To see if a man when paired up with a woman could tickle her belly. I think there is plenty of proof of this posted all over the forum; vid clips as well as previous experiences had by others. What about the event of a one on one meeting needed to be tested? Would love to hear your response on this.

First off, do you enjoy complicating things? Secondly, seeing as you so desperately wanted an answer. Many things could go wrong. For instance: there could be some uncomfortability. Or maybe having the as he called them "specialists" focus on one spot was a bad idea. Maybe he wanted to see if larger or small rooms were needed. While those things may seem stupid to you, they are true possibilities of what could go wrong. Look at it from this side: had he tested the one-on-one session, he would know whether more space was needed, whether to let specialists focus on one spot or wherever the liked, and to see if first the lee and ler should talk and get to know one another or if just heading right on into the tickling was ok. Happy now?

 

[sabaki]

Some years ago I had a conversation with a layman about flying saucers — because I am scientific I know all about flying saucers! I said "I don't think there are flying saucers'. So my antagonist said, "Is it impossible that there are flying saucers? Can you prove that it's impossible?" "No", I said, "I can't prove it's impossible. It's just very unlikely". At that he said, "You are very unscientific. If you can't prove it impossible then how can you say that it's unlikely?" But that is the way that is scientific. It is scientific only to say what is more likely and what less likely, and not to be proving all the time the possible and impossible. To define what I mean, I might have said to him, "Listen, I mean that from my knowledge of the world that I see around me, I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence." It is just more likely. That is all.

-- Richard Feynman

 

[ShaggyMan]

So what your saying is you don't have to prove anything to me and that I am just to assume that you know Super's intentions more than me?

 

[Wolv420]

First off, do you enjoy complicating things? Secondly, seeing as you so desperately wanted an answer. Many things could go wrong. For instance: there could be some uncomfortability. Or maybe having the as he called them "specialists" focus on one spot was a bad idea. Maybe he wanted to see if larger or small rooms were needed. While those things may seem stupid to you, they are true possibilities of what could go wrong. Look at it from this side: had he tested the one-on-one session, he would know whether more space was needed, whether to let specialists focus on one spot or wherever the liked, and to see if first the lee and ler should talk and get to know one another or if just heading right on into the tickling was ok. Happy now?

first off do i enjoy complicating things? You weren't involved in the original "dispute" but you through your 2 cents in. Now it just seems to be people arguing with you. Not sure how i made things anymore complicated than you.

You did make some good points about the complications that could come into play. You also forgot lighting, what if during the real gathering there is not enough lighting there. Very important. What about food and beverage, gotta have a food testing, to make sure everyone likes what you are getting. What if they don;t like the color of the sheets on the bed?

As far as your point of a specialist concentrating on one spot and the person not enjoying it;........everybody has different likes and dislikes, not sure how one person being tested out by a "specialist" could determine what everyone who would attend this gathering would like. Same with roomsize. Same with every point you make. They are all something that would differ from person to person.

 

[ShaggyMan]

first off do i enjoy complicating things? You weren't involved in the original "dispute" but you through your 2 cents in. Now it just seems to be people arguing with you. Not sure how i made things anymore complicated than you.

You did make some good points about the complications that could come into play. You also forgot lighting, what if during the real gathering there is not enough lighting there. Very important. What about food and beverage, gotta have a food testing, to make sure everyone likes what you are getting. What if they don;t like the color of the sheets on the bed?

As far as your point of a specialist concentrating on one spot and the person not enjoying it;........everybody has different likes and dislikes, not sure how one person being tested out by a "specialist" could determine what everyone who would attend this gathering would like. Same with roomsize. Same with every point you make. They are all something that would differ from person to person.

Technically you did complicate things for me. Remember the whole "dude in a ski mash with a saw"? Yeah, that started me into something I didn't want to be a part of. As far as why Super wanted to test, I stated what I thought. I have no idea what he wanted, but I, unlike everyone else, am not going to form an opinion of what I think his intentions were.

 

[Wolv420]

Technically you did complicate things for me. Remember the whole "dude in a ski mash with a saw"? Yeah, that started me into something I didn't want to be a part of. As far as why Super wanted to test, I stated what I thought. I have no idea what he wanted, but I, unlike everyone else, am not going to form an opinion of what I think his intentions were.

Hey, I have 1.5 billion dollars in a bank account. However i can't withdrawl the balance unless i pay a $10,000 premium. Do you think you can loan me the money? I promise i will give you back $50,000 next week when i get the money out. My INTENTIONS are to give you $50,000. Such a good investment opportunity for you. 500% return; why wouldn't you do it. I explained my intentions.........so it must be true.

Nobody has a right to reply to this with what they believe my intentions are. They already have been stated, and you don't know me so you have to take me at my word.

 

[ShaggyMan]

Hey, I have 1.5 billion dollars in a bank account. However i can't withdrawl the balance unless i pay a $10,000 premium. Do you think you can loan me the money? I promise i will give you back $50,000 next week when i get the money out. My INTENTIONS are to give you $50,000. Such a good investment opportunity for you. 500% return; why wouldn't you do it. I explained my intentions.........so it must be true.

Nobody has a right to reply to this with what they believe my intentions are. They already have been stated, and you don't know me so you have to take me at my word.

I believe you, but I don't want the money, because I don't need it.

 

[Wolv420]

It's understandable, but to me coming out and saying what you seem to actually know(or think in this case) what Super meant is arrogant to me. If you guys had said he's out to look for 1-on-1 then fine. But did you? No. You attacked his intentions. And to me, it looks as if you are trying to be a "know-it-all" and I personally hate "know-it-alls". All I'm saying is had you attacked him and not his intentions, then maybe this would have gone easier, at least if I had been Super things wouldn't have gone this far.

you mention how you hate know-it-alls. I strongly dislike people that make fools of themself while being unable to admit they are wrong.

 

[ShaggyMan]

you mention how you hate know-it-alls. I strongly dislike people that make fools of themself while being unable to admit they are wrong.

i wasnt being a know-it-all, now was i?

 

[dvnc]

Actually, ShaggyMan, I *do* know best the use of the term "gathering" as applied to a group event for ticklephiles.

I coined the term.

If you wish to research the history on this, I can advise you to start a decade ago, on USENET. I used it to describe a group event for us, similar to a BDSM play party, without the overt sexuality of those events. The possibility of play within a social environment.

As you're indicating, you've not been here before, and thus can't be familiar with this history.

You also don't frequent many boards, as the moderators of this board, me included, are far less stringent than many boards to which I belong. Tech boards, kink boards, focus-group boards, etc. I've personally experienced VERY heavy hands, whereas I've happily left his posts, and yours. I don't wish anything more than to clarify the situation.

As this thread's originator has left his comments as they were, and thereafter only you defend this, it is yours and his to "fight". I've no quarrel with either of you. I *do* have authority to declare, here, what is and isn't a gathering in the tickling community here, and if you disagree, I do encourage you to "report" the thread as errant, and leave it to the moderators, who already have a copy of this thread in hand. We do that sort of thing.

Do please carry on your dispute as you see fit. It displays, for all viewing Pen Pals, exactly what you feel is appropriate, and thus helps others to see you as you present yourself. This can only be positive for all.

 

[ShaggyMan]

Actually, ShaggyMan, I *do* know best the use of the term "gathering" as applied to a group event for ticklephiles.

I coined the term.

If you wish to research the history on this, I can advise you to start a decade ago, on USENET. I used it to describe a group event for us, similar to a BDSM play party, without the overt sexuality of those events. The possibility of play within a social environment.

As you're indicating, you've not been here before, and thus can't be familiar with this history.

You also don't frequent many boards, as the moderators of this board, me included, are far less stringent than many boards to which I belong. Tech boards, kink boards, focus-group boards, etc. I've personally experienced VERY heavy hands, whereas I've happily left his posts, and yours. I don't wish anything more than to clarify the situation.

As this thread's originator has left his comments as they were, and thereafter only you defend this, it is yours and his to "fight". I've no quarrel with either of you. I *do* have authority to declare, here, what is and isn't a gathering in the tickling community here, and if you disagree, I do encourage you to "report" the thread as errant, and leave it to the moderators, who already have a copy of this thread in hand. We do that sort of thing.

Do please carry on your dispute as you see fit. It displays, for all viewing Pen Pals, exactly what you feel is appropriate, and thus helps others to see you as you present yourself. This can only be positive for all.

Let me be honest. I don't honestly care whether you invented the definition. You cnt tell us what definiton to use. But, and as much as I hate to say this, this forum appears more like you want us to accept you definitons and drop ours. If that's truely the case, dvnc, then I'm going to leave because it's very apparent that I will always do the illegal thing: Have and use my ouwn definitions to terms. And that's just something you do not want me to do is it?

All in all my opinion of TMF has gone from being a paradise to now TMF being a place where you own thoughts and definitions of things DO NOT APPLY.

dvnc, to be blunt, I don't care if you know the best definition of "gathering" because I do not agree with it and therefore to me it is NOT the best. And since I personally deem it not the best definition for me, I will use my own. Understand?

 

[Mimi]

Let me be honest. I don't honestly care whether you invented the definition. You cnt tell us what definiton to use. But, and as much as I hate to say this, this forum appears more like you want us to accept you definitons and drop ours. If that's truely the case, dvnc, then I'm going to leave because it's very apparent that I will always do the illegal thing: Have and use my ouwn definitions to terms. And that's just something you do not want me to do is it?

All in all my opinion of TMF has gone from being a paradise to now TMF being a place where you own thoughts and definitions of things DO NOT APPLY.

dvnc, to be blunt, I don't care if you know the best definition of "gathering" because I do not agree with it and therefore to me it is NOT the best. And since I personally deem it not the best definition for me, I will use my own. Understand?

Heh. Congratulations on blowing your own cover, Super. Not that anyone hadn't figured it out on their own, but it's much more convenient when a user does it to himself. Thank you. 🙂

AFA your dispute here, you can call your little one on one anything you want. But just realize 99% of the members of the forum who read this will not agree with your idea of what constitutes a gathering, as a true gathering remains the exact style of event DVNC coined a decade ago.

Good luck with what you're trying to do, though. Lord knows you're gonna need it now.

 

[ShaggyMan]

Blown Cover?

Heh. Congratulations on blowing your own cover, Super. Not that anyone hadn't figured it out on their own, but it's much more convenient when a user does it to himself. Thank you. 🙂

AFA your dispute here, you can call your little one on one anything you want. But just realize 99% of the members of the forum who read this will not agree with your idea of what constitutes a gathering, as a true gathering remains the exact style of event DVNC coined a decade ago.

Good luck with what you're trying to do, though. Lord knows you're gonna need it now.

What cover did I blow? And who the fuck are you to say I'm Super? I was just stating that I do not think dvnc's definition of a gathering was the "best" definition and that I'd prefer to use my own. i have different opinions about things Mimi, understand? And maybe it's illegal to do that here on TMF, because it sure as hell appears so. If I don't like your guys' terminology, then I will not use it, and instead use my own term(s), got it? And one other thing, I don't agree, nor do I disagree with what Super was saying, I was mad with the fact that people are this apparently "honest and just" forum were saying that THEY knew his intentions, which in all 100% honesty was total bullshit.

 

[dvnc]

ROFL! Whomever you may be is of little difference. Your thread is now visible, long term, and if you've not followed Mimi's message, you'll likely be one of the only ones. Anyone reading this thread, from start to finish, is likely to be a bit leary of your concept.

Personally, I don't actually sweat that there are people who vary from the concept that we, the originators of this TMF, put forth. I was brought in to manage these area due solely to my familiarity with the topic.

If you don't like the way we do it here, the way we define gatherings, etc., you are encouraged, by me and others, to do your own way elsewhere. It's a large internet. Whatever persona you chose, ShaggyMan or Super777 at jt***@sbcglobal.net, you're now known for the behavior you just showed.

If you post a pen pal, personal, or gatherings call to a discussion group, you get moved. Yours, as ANOTHER mod found, was not a discussion, and he chose to put it in Pen Pals. You're not a gathering by "our" definition, and it IS "our" forum to moderate, so yes, you're stuck with that. Thousands of people "suffer" our organization of things.

Rebel. Start your own. It can only improve the community.

 

[ShaggyMan]

Ok, wtf dvnc......

ROFL! Whomever you may be is of little difference. Your thread is now visible, long term, and if you've not followed Mimi's message, you'll likely be one of the only ones. Anyone reading this thread, from start to finish, is likely to be a bit leary of your concept.

Personally, I don't actually sweat that there are people who vary from the concept that we, the originators of this TMF, put forth. I was brought in to manage these area due solely to my familiarity with the topic.

If you don't like the way we do it here, the way we define gatherings, etc., you are encouraged, by me and others, to do your own way elsewhere. It's a large internet. Whatever persona you chose, ShaggyMan or Super777 at jt***@sbcglobal.net, you're now known for the behavior you just showed.

If you post a pen pal, personal, or gatherings call to a discussion group, you get moved. Yours, as ANOTHER mod found, was not a discussion, and he chose to put it in Pen Pals. You're not a gathering by "our" definition, and it IS "our" forum to moderate, so yes, you're stuck with that. Thousands of people "suffer" our organization of things.

Rebel. Start your own. It can only improve the community.

Excuse me, but this thread has been ordered to be shut down, by me, ShaggyMan, or at least the real one because I personally feel like I've been invaded. Yeah, my lil 16 year brother got my password from me, but I changed it. He's the one who's been arguing with you this whole time. Now not to be offensive or anything, but don't you guys feel stupid for fightig with a 16 year old? And yes, he did lie to create the whole Super777 account. He's been using my e-mail address this whole time. And dvnc, I'd prefer it if you didn't publicly type my e-mail. It's one thing if my little bro did it because I can stop him from doing it again, but when you do it I view it as an attack on me because I can't stop you. To be honest dvnc, my e-mail isn't anything I want anyone, including my little bro posting, so I'd like an apology for that dvnc(my bro already said sorry to me). Why? Because though my e-mail was already posted, it still feels like invasion of privacy when some complete stranger re-posts it. As for my little bro, he has been punished and you won't hear from him again. I had created this account, and then just signed off. But since I'm currently home from college, my parents computer doesn't have any passwording system so he easily logged in, found this new account(since he had demolished himself as Super777) and used to continue his ongoing fight against you. The only thing I will say is that my bro did put the word "meet" implying a gathering. Regardless I do understand that this is your forum to moderate, but the word "meet" does not imply a Pen Pal situation, it implys a gathering, but I guess that's up for interpertation here. Thank you for listening to me, and I hope my lil bro didn't hurt my relationship with TMF or any of it's members.

P.S.- I did contact my local court system ealier today and from what they told me, yes this is your forum to moderate, BUT as the judge told me, ".....the full definition and intentions of the post are to be defined ONLY by the original poster(my bro, Super) and NOT by the staff of the forum." Basically, he may not have stated a gathering by your terms, BUT if he said it was a gathering then you guys are unable to alter that fact and must therefore respect what he said the intentions were, whether or not they agree with your terms/definitions.

 

[dvnc]

Oh, I respect the right to state disagreeing perspectives on what constitutes a "gathering", hence it hasn't been removed. I *disagree* with the definition, based on standards set by me, by the tickling community in the last decade, and by this forum. Do approach this legally. You'll find that there's not a court that will defend your position that you can enforce a separate definition without disagreement. It also becomes a matter of public record. Good luck with that.

I'm unclear how, with a forum requiring a name and password, how your brother, with his own original name and password, was logged in as himself, then your name AND password were employed, without your knowledge or consent.

How your email address was posted with the original account name.

How Super777, with 33 posts to date, figured this out. Especially when your *current* account has 29.

As for apologies, I am truly sorry you have allowed your account to be managed thusly. To log on and fight, first with one login, then with another. It matters little WHO was doing the fighting. These two accounts are now visible as behaving thusly.

As you want this "shut down" I will lock it. I do HIGHLY suggest that, in future, when you wish to launch such posts, you consider PMs, ESPECIALLY when both account have the exact same posting style.