Message etiquette

[ey****]

1 hour ago, critter13 said:

Does not tell you anything but it starts the conversation and you go from there. Same as if you met in person. You start with hello

there are different medians within communication

if you were in a bar and you wanted to talk to someone you might say "Hello" they are going to then kinda nudge back in a "do I know you" kind of way and then you very quickly after that have to come out with something conversational or your point.  They are also up to that point a slightly trapped audience as they feel compelled to reply - see again the "do I know you" or "does this person work here and is there a problem"

you wouldn't, in person, delve into small talk hell from there.  Like if the person said "Hello" and then you were "How are you?" "How has your day been?" they are very quickly going to "who the f**k are you?" at you

from that side, translating that online is a good reason not to do it

But, similarly - if you were writing someone a letter - say - replying to their personal in magazine - you wouldn't just write a letter which read "Hello" - you might not necessarily want to write a 7 page letter, but you might do a few bits based on their ad and a bit about you.

And online is probably somewhere between the two.  Obviously having a profile most of your intro is on your profile - but there's also no reason not to continue beyond your "hello" with just, something.

 

[ey****]

2 hours ago, DuchessFeuille said:

“I blame women”. Funny, that. TLDR

Haha - you know

last night or the day before I was thinking on just this by how many people (mostly men) find it more reassuring to blame others for their own shortfall

"the ratio", "too high standards", "unrealistic expectations", so on - rather than... well... I think someone can seemingly do everything right and not get the results they want; but blaming others is definitely a way to overcompensate for shortfalls

[BruiseWayne]

6 hours ago, cagedheart said:

I personally will anger, annoy and provoke a response. Much easier to get their unbalanced attention.

So you intentionally antagonize women to manipulate a response out of them?

 

Totally not sociopathic at all. Definitely 1000% awesome. GJ buddy.

[Du****]

21 minutes ago, BruiseWayne said:

So you intentionally antagonize women to manipulate a response out of them?

 

Totally not sociopathic at all. Definitely 1000% awesome. GJ buddy.

I didn’t even notice that bit. Absolutely repulsive.

[Attaboy4u]

I just want to back a sheep up against a keyboard and see what comes out 

[ey****]

58 minutes ago, BruiseWayne said:

So you intentionally antagonize women to manipulate a response out of them?

 

this also ties in with some stuff on another thread about men who deliberately send awful messages because someone replying to say "what is wrong with you?" is still a response and someone who does the "yeah, so that's now how you approach people" is still a response - and the guy has ice broken and can then feign an apology and continue 

[ca****]

4 hours ago, DuchessFeuille said:

I didn’t even notice that bit. Absolutely repulsive.

I assume that was the quote from a response to my self. Such a quick judgemental attitude to have in what is suppose to be a none judgemental community. You do not comprehend my meaning nor do you obviously care too. You just go straight ahead and make your own opinion based on your obvious misunderstanding of the meaning and context the quote was aiming at, holds. It's ppl like you that judge and mark us. Next time educate your self and ask me the meaning. Do not judge me based on your own obviously closed mind. Keep in mind that you can provoke, antagonise and trigger emotions to respond without malice or any intent of it. Arrogance alone is one trait that can cause a woman to feel antagonised or provoke. I can simply be sexist or blunt but no you jump right in their with your judgements

[Du****]

11 minutes ago, cagedheart said:

I assume that was the quote from a response to my self. Such a quick judgemental attitude to have in what is suppose to be a none judgemental community. You do not comprehend my meaning nor do you obviously care too. You just go straight ahead and make your own opinion based on your obvious misunderstanding of the meaning and context the quote was aiming at, holds. It's ppl like you that judge and mark us. Next time educate your self and ask me the meaning. Do not judge me based on your own obviously closed mind. Keep in mind that you can provoke, antagonise and trigger emotions to respond without malice or any intent of it. Arrogance alone is one trait that can cause a woman to feel antagonised or provoke. I can simply be sexist or blunt but no you jump right in their with your judgements

You want to pick on anyone else who found your approach unacceptable, or just me?

[ca****]

4 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

this also ties in with some stuff on another thread about men who deliberately send awful messages because someone replying to say "what is wrong with you?" is still a response and someone who does the "yeah, so that's now how you approach people" is still a response - and the guy has ice broken and can then feign an apology and continue 

It doesn't tie in with nothing because you clearly have no understanding of the meaning in which your used quote is reffering to. Have you asked me what I meant by the said initial section your used quote is reffering too ? No you have not. Already in a few single posts in which is suppose to be none judgemental enviroment I have been labeled a sociopath, repulsive and this " comparing to others " Yet not one has asked me the meaning of it. I'm sorry but i already feel this place is actually another repulsive clique with absolute instant judgement. Like I wrote previously, provoking, antagonising can be a powerful tool used correctly without toxicity anywhere near it. Ppl are so clueless and just think auto negative. Yet apparently the bdsm community are suppose to be open minded no ? Pfffft I see it's not changed since the days of yahoo and MSN bdsm rooms, it's actually pathetic considering we already get judged for being pervs as it is

[ca****]

21 minutes ago, DuchessFeuille said:

You want to pick on anyone else who found your approach unacceptable, or just me?

You don't even know what my approach is. I said I will anger, annoy, provoke. Arrogance angers people, it provokes but it holds no malice. I could have a blunt personality which unsettles some ppl and so on there. Are many ways which are perfectly exceptable characteristics. I am sexiest to be honest which sure does annoy many but it does not make my approaches unexceptable. No you judged, assumed I meant I would be toxic. You just showed me instantly you are simply judgemental and what you don't clearly understand you just make your own mind up. Online is an enviroment that has no soul, no pressence of a physical being. A smile, a look, sound from your mouth so it is perfectly exceptable to use other ways to create a reason to be responded to. Irritating, annoying in s manner , being cocky or even sharp ( provokes ) but is not in no way shape or form toxic, just ***y clever. You just assumed I meant being rude, mean or nasty. That my friend showed you instantly. I have no more to say on this matter. It's done

[Se****]

11 hours ago, DuchessFeuille said:

“I blame women”. Funny, that. TLDR

Lucky you. 
 

I did read and wish I hadn’t bothered 

[Se****]

1 hour ago, cagedheart said:

I assume that was the quote from a response to my self. Such a quick judgemental attitude to have in what is suppose to be a none judgemental community. You do not comprehend my meaning nor do you obviously care too. You just go straight ahead and make your own opinion based on your obvious misunderstanding of the meaning and context the quote was aiming at, holds. It's ppl like you that judge and mark us. Next time educate your self and ask me the meaning. Do not judge me based on your own obviously closed mind. Keep in mind that you can provoke, antagonise and trigger emotions to respond without malice or any intent of it. Arrogance alone is one trait that can cause a woman to feel antagonised or provoke. I can simply be sexist or blunt but no you jump right in their with your judgements

Bearing in mind that I’m the OP on this post and as such you really ought to have some grasp as to my opinions, let me just play devils advocate for a second and humour me. 
 

Clearly DuchessFeuille and I have completely misunderstood your statement regarding “antagonising/provoking a response” with messages. 
 

So, for clarity and fairness perhaps you’d like to enlighten us as to what you mean by that part of your reply??

 

 

[ey****]

8 hours ago, cagedheart said:

which is suppose to be none judgemental enviroment

but yet your first posts were extremely judgemental.

[ge****]

9 hours ago, cagedheart said:

You don't even know what my approach is. I said I will anger, annoy, provoke. Arrogance angers people, it provokes but it holds no malice. I could have a blunt personality which unsettles some ppl and so on there. Are many ways which are perfectly exceptable characteristics. I am sexiest to be honest which sure does annoy many but it does not make my approaches unexceptable. No you judged, assumed I meant I would be toxic. You just showed me instantly you are simply judgemental and what you don't clearly understand you just make your own mind up. Online is an enviroment that has no soul, no pressence of a physical being. A smile, a look, sound from your mouth so it is perfectly exceptable to use other ways to create a reason to be responded to. Irritating, annoying in s manner , being cocky or even sharp ( provokes ) but is not in no way shape or form toxic, just ***y clever. You just assumed I meant being rude, mean or nasty. That my friend showed you instantly. I have no more to say on this matter. It's done

Thing is though seeking to "anger, annoy and provoke" are, I'm sure you'll agree, all fairly negative traits whichever way you look at it, and I certainly wouldn't suggest they are acceptable.
.
In fact your posts on this thread use lots of words with negative connotations or that are undesirable in any environment whether on-line or off - sure a level of confidence is desirable, and to an extent "cocky" works, but there's a very fine line between that and arrogance, which is not a desired quality for most.
.
Perhaps if you gave some examples of what you mean people may understand better, but so far I can understand the reactions you have been getting - and yes I'm aware that by having been provocative on this thread you've generated responses, but given they've all been negative it kind of undoes your point don't you think?
.
Ultimately if you've found an approach that genuinely works for you then gold luck to you, but am sure you'll agree that going by the responses on this thread alone it's not going to work for all.

[ca****]

10 hours ago, Freetobare said:

Bearing in mind that I’m the OP on this post and as such you really ought to have some grasp as to my opinions, let me just play devils advocate for a second and humour me. 
 

Clearly DuchessFeuille and I have completely misunderstood your statement regarding “antagonising/provoking a response” with messages. 
 

So, for clarity and fairness perhaps you’d like to enlighten us as to what you mean by that part of your reply??

 

 

I did grasp your opinion in which I respectfully gave an open, lengthy and honest answer reply to. The said topic in question here is about one little section that compromise of one sentence out of all that i said. I already noted prior to that part that in general , quote " I still however will try atleast some compliment " the now debated section is related to if I really like somebody or really wanted to get their attention I will use anger, annoyance and provoking tactics. Which if ppl would simply ask and not assume will see is not a negative mind set. Clarification - I will use my exact initial first approach to my previous submissive which ended in a wonderful 2 years real life relationship/dynamic but spawned from online. Ok so I first approached her disagreeing with a statement she seemed truly passionate about. I cared not for her statement and in truth I agreed with most of it however I needed to steal a few hours or moment of her time so I could be on her mind for a short while. So approaching her by disagreeing with her and rather blunty " angered " her. The arrogant manner in which i spoke " annoyed " her that I seemed so condecending about her strong feelings regarding it which in turn " provoked " a lengthy strong heated debate allowing me to steal her time and be in her mind for just a few hours. Which over the course of such I showed glimpses of my self which in turn made her intrigued about me and allowed her to see past the wall of men in her inbox. However my method was intentionally to anger her, to annoy and provoke her. My initial intentions was to minipulate the situation because I cared not for her statement I simply wanted her and those gave me an option to steal the time needed to be seen by her. Real life dating has a physical being behind it. A smile, a look a tone of voice or even how someone walks or holds them selfs. Online in this enviroment in a box on a screen. The words have to tickle emotions, irritate senses. I can sweet talk or charm my way into anyones inbox but that is generic silver tongue nonsense that actually does not really please anyone nor does it really trigger any true response. Anger a woman and you can see the fire burn in her eyes. An angry women is an honest woman. An annoyed woman is an erotic woman and a unsettled unbalanced provoked woman is easy to steal from and invade/conquer. If I had not spent the time initially angering , annoying, provoking my previous submissive I would not have been able to make her submit and share each other for 2 wonderful years. She would never have tasted who i am especially in this enviroment. It is called skill, effort and the foundations in how a skillfull dominant steals their submissives choice or begins to. Mark my words from the first moment of contact my dominance is working. You don't actually believe your self that you actually want to be butter coated in silver gloss. You know your self that you want a person to be able to annoy you, anger you and know how to provoke you, to make you feel. Just like I took the time to read a few posts and pattern to attain a small amount of knowledge about my previous sub before making my move on her passionate statement. This is nothing more than skill, nothing more than my dominance taking what it's going to take eventually. These judgmental opinions always believe of toxic manners , always scream or cry at words like minipulation yet that is the exact actions that transpire on a date. A woman perhaps dresses seductively or arousing and alluring ( form of minipulation ) a guy will be more gentleman like, well mannered ( form minipulation ) any woman online is guarded by her rituals and greedy needs for why she is here. Anger, annoyance and provoking unbalances that and they don't need to hold a negative tone. In many ways I would be classed or called sexist. That is a trait or characteristic I can't change and I wouldn't if I wanted to as its the backbone to my dominance. That alone can cause anger and provoke. For example a woman asked a question once about paying half on dates and I messaged saying no I would not except this. That angered her and she demanded an explanation in which again gave my an opportunity to provoke . Yes I took her submission too. It's called skillfull dominance nothing more , nothing else

[ca****]

4 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

but yet your first posts were extremely judgemental.

No they weren't just except you simply concluded your own opinion about one section in which I previously noted I would generally give compliments. It's fine I am not actually offended and don't actually mind being judged to be actually truthful because I'm a guy who cares not for the opinions of others of me. I never have nor will I ever need to. Its ok no harm done

[Du****]

Wow.

[ca****]

3 hours ago, gemini_man said:

Thing is though seeking to "anger, annoy and provoke" are, I'm sure you'll agree, all fairly negative traits whichever way you look at it, and I certainly wouldn't suggest they are acceptable.
.
In fact your posts on this thread use lots of words with negative connotations or that are undesirable in any environment whether on-line or off - sure a level of confidence is desirable, and to an extent "cocky" works, but there's a very fine line between that and arrogance, which is not a desired quality for most.
.
Perhaps if you gave some examples of what you mean people may understand better, but so far I can understand the reactions you have been getting - and yes I'm aware that by having been provocative on this thread you've generated responses, but given they've all been negative it kind of undoes your point don't you think?
.
Ultimately if you've found an approach that genuinely works for you then gold luck to you, but am sure you'll agree that going by the responses on this thread alone it's not going to work for all.

Perhaps read the response I just wrote to the op here. First understand the meaning of anger, annoying and provoking. Like my long reply to freetobare they aren't used with a negative tone so no its not negative

No you are right but the responses are all judgmental and wrong. The op was the first to ask for clarification instead of judging. Yes they are all wrong. My many submissives and people who I know me online and off will tell you that I am a very skillfull kind decent man but yes with a controlled devil inside. The reactions here are based on one little sentence which was part of a massively lengthy reply. I think it was 7 words long the quote Being debated that is but I wrote an essay. I even quote prior that I would general compliment if I was just randomly saying hi. No they simply did not understand and decided to take their own course of judgment. If I wasn't right do you think I would continue replying to these responses you say that are piling up. No I am not wrong simply because nobody asked my meaning.

Quick example, you can provoke anger simply by not agreeing with certain passionate topics, it's pretty easily done. It's all you , that have taken my one sentence and concluded it means storming into inboxes Being insulting and rude or just toxic. I can create anger and provoke by being wonderfully arrogant or condecending. My bluntness can cause this alone and my arrogance which I often emphasises just to tease and trigger. It's all the responses that have concluded it's meant or done in a toxic manner. Which is very judgmental and rich coming from our community yet it's always been the same. Ppl join the bdsm community thinking they are different but become what they claim they are not, cliques bound by rules made by cliques and gangs. I personally think that's a rediculous fact about the whole bdsm community. I do not need to give examples of what I meant to apease and settle ppls minds. I took my time to write out a lengthy response to the Initial orginal post which in general one line has been taken by all of you and assumed what it meant. You have no right to assume or make your own judgement have you. Therefore my replies have been with the same premise. I wrote a massive essay and you say I should also add examples. I'm sorry that you and others think negative and closed minded.

It's no problem though buddy I don't actually care for confirmation from others. I don't join cliques nor gangs so its irrelevant to my self who agrees with me or not. I do as I please I follow my rules and I judge my self. 👍

Good talk😉

[ey****]

51 minutes ago, cagedheart said:

I'm a guy who cares not for the opinions of others of me.

yet you responded to my opinions twice now.

if you didn't care you wouldn't have seen fit to respond

[ca****]

27 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

yet you responded to my opinions twice now.

if you didn't care you wouldn't have seen fit to respond

Ok you aren't responding to nothing , you aren't being helpful and just acting immature so I'm going to say this once. This conversation with you is done

[Du****]

Again… just… wow.

[BruiseWayne]

@cagedheartIf anybody is misinterpreting anything you say ( which I sincerely doubt we are ) then that's YOUR fault for not being able to get your point across clearly enough without coming off looking like a creep. It's not anyone else's fault for being 'judgemental' when they react appropriately to something they've read that's appalling.

 

I can be pretty audacious and blunt as well yet somehow I manage to do both of those things without anyone ever accusing me of being a manipulative sociopathic POS, so either we're just built different and/or you're going about your business in an exceedingly toxic way, which going by what your views are and what your rationales and motivations behind them seem to be I don't really think that's an unfair assessment.

 

The problem isn't that you don't feel you're intentionally being awful or malicious or the delusional way you've convinced yourself that you've somehow found some secret truth the rest of us can't graps or won't admit, the problem is you don't seem to understand WHY what you're doing and how you're treating women is awful and malicious in the first place. OF COURSE some people are going to respond favorably to it because they were probably traumatized by one or both parents in a similar way but that doesn't make anything you're up to or your views or how you carry yourself okay. I really feel sorry for any woman that gets tangled up with you, lol.

 

You really are the textbook example of someone who uses the guise of being dominant as a smoke screen to excuse away all their gross behavior.

 

[Ar****]

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

Ok so I first approached her disagreeing with a statement she seemed truly passionate about. I cared not for her statement and in truth I agreed with most of it however I needed to steal a few hours or moment of her time so I could be on her mind for a short while.

That's not domination, that's being an a**hole. You talk about the dishonesty of compliments, of "generic silver-tongued nonsense" and such, yet there is no honesty in disagreeing with something you do in truth agree with to serve your own agenda.

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

My initial intentions was to minipulate the situation because I cared not for her statement I simply wanted her and those gave me an option to steal the time needed to be seen by her.

Just, wow. This is an open admission of putting your wants and needs above those of your target (victim?) and willingness to sidestep ethical considerations in an effort to attain your goals.

"Simply wanted her" in this context and with the framework of the replies and arrogance you present, sounds positively r*pey - a reason for not letting decent manners and good, positive honest communication get in the way of you having what you desired.

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

I can sweet talk or charm my way into anyones inbox

😂 No you really can't, but that's kinda cute. As an aside, have you ever tried just being honest? No manipulative "sweet talking" OR provocation? Y'know, in case somebody might like you (and your domination) for you are?

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

a unsettled unbalanced provoked woman is easy to steal from and invade/conquer.

Aaaaaaaand we're back to r*pey.

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

If I had not spent the time initially angering , annoying, provoking my previous submissive I would not have been able to make her submit and share each other for 2 wonderful years.

*  *  *  *  *

It is called skill, effort and the foundations in how a skillfull dominant steals their submissives choice or begins to.

MAKE her submit?? STEAL their choice??? Do you even hear yourself or how you sound? This is the behaviour you want to advocate as acceptable in the community, or anywhere at all? If that's what it means to be a skilful dominant then count me out, because it's f***ing sick.

I find myself wondering whether you are going to double-down or backpeddle... 🤔

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

This is nothing more than skill, nothing more than my dominance taking what it's going to take eventually.

However much you try to frame these sorts of words as arrogance, they will always be nothing more than boundary-ignoring, entitled, and R*PEY.

3 hours ago, cagedheart said:

These judgmental opinions always believe of toxic manners , always scream or cry at words like minipulation yet that is the exact actions that transpire on a date. A woman perhaps dresses seductively or arousing and alluring ( form of minipulation ) a guy will be more gentleman like, well mannered ( form minipulation )

And yet, after all that has been said already by all, I find myself reflecting now on how pitiable and sad it is that you view dates in such a way. Is that your experience of them? You've never gone out with somebody who didn't have an agenda, or without an agenda yourself? Has that contributed to the mindset you display today?

[Du****]

18 minutes ago, Aranhis said:

And yet, after all that has been said already by all, I find myself reflecting now on how pitiable and sad it is that you view dates in such a way. Is that your experience of them? You've never gone out with somebody who didn't have an agenda, or without an agenda yourself? Has that contributed to the mindset you display today?

“I can sweet talk my way into anyone’s inbox”
.
Gosh. Also, lol 😂
.
I’m appreciating the highlights, by the way. Saves me the drudgery.

[ca****]

1 hour ago, Aranhis said:

And yet, after all that has been said already by all, I find myself reflecting now on how pitiable and sad it is that you view dates in such a way. Is that your experience of them? You've never gone out with somebody who didn't have an agenda, or without an agenda yourself? Has that contributed to the mindset you display today?

Of course but the orgin of these quotes stem from a response I wrote to the op post on this thread which was predominately about messaging woman to connect in that manner. It was also an essay and the debated part is only a sentence of around 6 words 😂 in which prior to said sentence which everyone seems to be triggered by I pointed out that I don't actually message online much and I will compliment them in general. I don't date off line much I don't need to but I do use it for mainly expression to be totally truthful. Keep in mind my explanation was asked for and it was based on Internet messaging. It was one line out of hundreds that's been targeted and trying to reply to all has split and confused some of its original meaning.

I don't actually understand your sadness. There is a reason I would be messaging a woman online. Do you just go around messaging random ppl to go out with ? Of course there's an agenda. Everyone has a readon for using online and at the time I was looking I wanted to date out of my circle and away but work was time consuming which then brought me online.