| |
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/13/2007 4:27:25 PM |
I find it odd that the administrator of this site has not posted anything in this thread but instead he is opting to have his moderators defend his actions with regard to this issue. I do not think it is fair too the moderators at all.
We have never been asked to do Admin's talking for him...nor do we represent him in that capacity. Moderator responses in this thread are voluntarily given, and when and as we choose to do so (as is our moderating work here). The site owner is a very busy man, and answers threads as he gets the time/inclination to do so. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/13/2007 6:13:25 PM | We are bad bad boys. We are guilty as charged regardless of what we say or do or how many times we have or have not violated the IE rule. It is obvious we DO NOT or will we ever qualify for a GET OUT OF JAIL card on this one. I think we are all doomed to spend the rest of our eternity on this site in IE purgatory.
Your Wholesomeness, Purity, Morality and Sense of Righteousness are never under Question.
Its really what you click on ...
I find it odd that the administrator of this site has not posted anything in this thread but instead he is opting to have his moderators defend his actions with regard to this issue. I do not think it is fair too the moderators at all.
You are implying that all Moderators state 1 Thing on the Forums, but disagree with the Admin's Actions.
Defend who? IE Seekers? No Defence required.
Its nothing other than only 1 single Feature which permits Users to restrict Contact from a certain Public ... just 1 from over a Dozen in your Mail Settings. Feel free to whine about any of the other Ones too.
Maybe its also totally unfair, ridiculous, assinine that anyone is even allowed to restrict Age, Sex, Instant Messenger, People without Pics on their Profile, etc.
Are you gonna grab the Picket Sign over these other Items too?
Now that you have probably exhausted the existing IE Contacts, you need new feeding Ground ... the Type of "Ground" that doesn't want any Contact from you.
So lets just cry foul.
In any Event, most of the Infos posted here come directly from the Admin, but not always via the Forums.
 |
| |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/13/2007 11:23:54 PM |
Your Wholesomeness, Purity, Morality and Sense of Righteousness are never under Question.
Bulls#$t, it is under question and not only that, these people are also being penalized by not being allowed to message anyone they like. Granted, there are a few that ruin it for the many. But why should everyone else that hasn’t messaged the I E profiles being penalized for the rest of time as far as this site is concerned
It’s really what you click on...
So are you saying that one merely has to click on an I E profile to get flagged?
You are implying that all Moderators state 1 Thing on the Forums, but disagree with the Admin's Actions.
You do, all of you are saying that it takes more than once or twice for a member to message an I E profile to get flagged and to that I say bull. If you refer to post # 45 you will read that he says he hasn’t been on this site for quite along time and when he comes back he finds he has been flagged and now post # 75 you will read that this person has not messaged any I E profiles but he flagged. I have also read a few other posts that these people are saying the same thing about either not messaging or messaging an I E profile once or twice and have got flagged. I do hope that sooner or later admin will take a deeper look at the code he used to flag people for messaging I E profiles and find that there is indeed something wrong with that code.
And also Ticketoride I do not appreciate being treated with disrespect. I treat you as well as anyone else on this site with respect and I would appreciate the same in return. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/13/2007 11:38:31 PM | | Just for the record, it is not that I am against the I E filter at all, in fact I do think it is a good feature to have on this site. I just think that people are getting flagged unfairly and I am not the only one that thinks this. I am in hopes that admin will take a closer look at the code that was used for the filter and find that there is something wrong with it and fix it. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/13/2007 11:59:40 PM | But why should everyone else that hasn’t messaged the IE profiles being penalized for the rest of time as far as this site is concerned
Nonsense. You are the first to flat-out state the filters are mis-functioning.
So are you saying that one merely has to click on an I E profile to get flagged?
Nowhere was that said in my Post.
... an I construe you to imply 1 (... since many definitions of that little word exist) ... nowhere, in no post, nor from any Moderator stated that it takes only once to trigger the Filter. But as has been stated again and again (if you could be bothered to read the entire Thread), it takes far more than that. The actual quantity, algorithym is proprietary Information the Admin has not released so as not to assist anyone to circumvent these Filters.
You do, all of you are saying that it takes more than once or twice for a member to message an I E profile to get flagged and to that I say bull.
Say what you like. Your Take of it is plain-flat wrong.
If you refer to post # 45 you will read that he says he hasn’t been on this site for quite along time and when he comes back he finds he has been flagged and now post # 75 you will read that this person has not messaged any I E profiles but he flagged.
Look at the BS this Dude in this Link is trying to peddle off on us:
Mail Settings: Exclusion Feature that needs to go
I have also read a few other posts that these people are saying the same thing about either not messaging or messaging an I E profile once or twice and have got flagged.
Its false. Its nothing other than an Attempt to invalidate/nullify the Filter by means of "Hearsay" to free them to contact anyone for IEs.
To create an Atmosphere of Uncertainty and Doubt about these Filters in an Effort to have them removed.
I do hope that sooner or later admin will take a deeper look at the code he used to flag people for messaging I E profiles and find that there is indeed something wrong with that code.
Everything is always under Review at all Times.
How many Times do you need reach into your Pocket before you are sure no Money is there?
And also Ticketoride I do not appreciate being treated with disrespect.
This is disrespectful: Your Post
I just think that people are getting flagged unfairly and I am not the only one that thinks this.
You are mistaken. Its not about "Think" ... its about "Facts", Facts the Admin can Review via Logs.
|
| |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/14/2007 12:01:38 AM | I just think that people are getting flagged unfairly How would they get flagged "unfairly"?????
The message restriction is meant to filter out people who've conted users who were seeking "intimate encouners".
The only way you get flagged is by contacting people who were seeking intimate encounters.
That's not "unfair"., and there's nothing wrong with the filter. The filter's doing exactly what it was intended to do. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/14/2007 2:46:56 AM | I have this filter set on my account, for very good reason.
I know people on this site who are only looking for intimate encounters. They get a certain type of person messaging them.
I DO NOT want those people or those kind of people also messaging me. I am after something entirely different and to be honest, I don't want to waste my time shifting through the crap trying to decide who is serious about dating and who is just after a quick 'leg over'.
Yes, some men on here mask their true intentions, they also mask the fact that they are married, however, by getting rid of those that are openly looking for sex means that I have fewer idiots to plough through in my quest to meet a decent man!
As the Mods have said, you have to actively message looking for IE a few times before the block is set and thats your personal choice. It doesn't fit in with what I want.
If you have changed your dating outlook then the simplest thing to do is to close your account, open a new one and start again, keeping away from the IE people. Those that are only after a quick 'bonk' will soon slide back into their old ways.
However, do expect women on here to actively question you regarding your intentions as, unfortunately, the idiot few make it hard work for the decent chaps on here. | |
|
TeJay
|
Joined: 1/16/2007
Msg: 84 | |
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/14/2007 7:06:35 AM | Let's just face it. These guys do not want the women on POF to be able to have a voice. They refuse to acknowledge that the women "choose" to utilize this feature. Instead, they blame the mods and admin for allowing the creation of such a tool.
Have you noticed that they do not address the women who have posted here? Not even Pandy, who is a mod. Instead they continue to ignore the women who are posting but keep insisting that the admin fix this. The only ones getting response is the male mods.
Reminds me of a joke that someone once told me.
Why did God give women boobies and P*ssy? SO men would Have to talk to them.
You are ignoring the women’s responses here maybe because you are still only interested in one thing.
And also Ticketoride I do not appreciate being treated with disrespect.
This is disrespectful | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/14/2007 7:34:44 AM | Let's just face it. These guys do not want the women on POF to be able to have a voice. Some guys are very stubbornly unwilling to accept the fact that not every woman wants to be contacted by them.
The only reason these guys who are bi tching about the message restriction is: they can't get around it.
The other message restrictions are based on what's in your profile, and aren't effective against dishonesty. The married man can pretend to be single; The pot-head can claim to be a non-drug-user; the person living 200 mils away can claim to be a resident of your city; the guy looking for intimate encounters one day can be looking for long-term the next day; These guys can change their profile as often as they want, just to contact people who don't want to hear from them.
Because this restriction's based only on their message history, rather than relying on honesty, people can't lie their way around it. Therefore they think it's soooo unfair to them.
I think that the fact that so many people are bi tching about the filter, is proof that it's working. The more posts that get made by guys thinking it's unfair, the less likely the admin is to remove the restriction.
The opening post stated:
There are a number of people that I am unable to even send an innocent message to. What that poster is ignorantly refusing to understand is: those people do not want to recieve a message from you. That is their right.
| |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 5:50:25 AM | Interesting thread -
This morning I went to message someone who had the IE flag set and found that I was blocked. I have not had this occur ever in the past so thought I must have inadvertently emailed someone who was seeking IE. I went back through all sent emails checking the ladies profiles and not one were seeking IE.
Is it just possible that something in the POF code is incorrectly setting the flag or is there some other user action that can also trigger this?
Great site and I admire the tremendous effort behind it. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 6:29:43 AM |
This morning I went to message someone who had the IE flag set and found that I was blocked.
Did the message specificially say 'so-and-so is not accepting messages from people who have contacted IE', so some such?
You may have been blocked because of your age, etc. may not fit this person's contact requirements.
Is it just possible that something in the POF code is incorrectly setting the flag or is there some other user action that can also trigger this?
Negative. The Only user action that triggers the filter is a history of contacting Multiple women seeking Intimate Encounter.
If you been blocked because of the IE filter, you can swear 'til you're blue in the face that you never contacted an IE.
No-One, but NO-ONE is buying it. | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 88 | |
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 7:47:46 AM | I have checked this several times with test profiles, both for blocking and getting blocked. Viewing IE profiles won't do it, replying to an IE profile won't do it, first contact to one, even two doesn't do it, .....
late™
moderator | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 2:14:21 PM | The members I was attempting to reach had no other conditions that would cause a block for me - at least none that were visible on their profile. I found a profile that I should fit the filters for and the message returned states.
You are not allowed to message pof_user_name. Return to your inbox
Since this blocking only started yesterday and none of my sent mails show the addressee was seeking IE, something else must have triggered same but I will let the moderator check my contact history.
I assume that if someone else makes first contact and that person is seeking IE and I respond to that initial contact - that this black flag is not set?
As I understand it - and I'm sure this has been asked upteen times - this "black" flag is set ONLY when I originate an INITIAL email contact to a POF member who lists they are seeking IM?
Is it possible that if I message someone seeking "Friends" and they later change their profile to seeking IE, users who are in that persons contact history are then black flagged?
A SUGGESTION to Marcus
When someone attempts to message a party who is seeking IE - intercept the POF mail form with a warning page - beneath the warning, this page would have two buttons CANCEL or PROCEED ANYWAY. Everyone must admit it is very easy for someone to not always check the seeking field.
It should be very easy to implement this suggestion and would probably return several GIGS of storage space not to mention the server bandwidth and Moderator response time regarding this issue.... which by the way I fully support.
thanks everyone
Hoss | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 2:58:50 PM | I agree with the policy and applaud POF for it. It's hard enough to sort out the players from those looking for serious relationships. I have spoken before about the fact that some who say "long term" are really looking for intimate encouters. No point wasting one's times with someone whose goals are from the get go out of alignment with yours. I would not want to hear from someone who had contacted others for intimate encouters or sex and I am glad that this site has a way of sourting that out.
 | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 3:27:20 PM | Since this blocking only started yesterday and none of my sent mails show the addressee was seeking IE, something else must have triggered same but I will let the moderator check my contact history .
we can't check emails - sorry.
As an FYI, the intended recipient of your email does not have to be an IE seeking individual - as long as you have made contact repeatedly on a first time basis with IE individuals, and you then contact someone who has the flag set - you're blocked from emailing them.
I assume that if someone else makes first contact and that person is seeking IE and I respond to that initial contact - that this black flag is not set?
correct - as mentioned in most of these threads and in the FAQ
As I understand it - and I'm sure this has been asked upteen times - this "black" flag is set ONLY when I originate an INITIAL email contact to a POF member who lists they are seeking IM?
IE, correct - see above
Is it possible that if I message someone seeking "Friends" and they later change their profile to seeking IE, users who are in that persons contact history are then black flagged?
the flag is set on contact, otherwise the system would have to keep track of what a user was originally, what they are now, go back and check and that user when you contact them again - a lot of coding and system resource horspepower needed, and besides totally unfair.
The system is checking for "intent" on initial contact. You were contacting someone who had friends as their status on intial contact.
A SUGGESTION to Marcus
When someone attempts to message a party who is seeking IE - intercept the POF mail form with a warning page - beneath the warning, this page would have two buttons CANCEL or PROCEED ANYWAY. Everyone must admit it is very easy for someone to not always check the seeking field.
There will always be ways of circumventing some system block, however, in this case there is no need to tip someone off about the "why" so that they can try a work around. Much like the other filters, when you're blocked for say, smoking or married or drugs etc ... some people will go change their profile to suit their needs, - intent for "sexual contact fly by night one nighters" is an "intent" that women want to know about.
Something could be implemented, sure - but Admin is pretty locked on this one. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 4:00:43 PM |
There will always be ways of circumventing some system block, however, in this case there is no need to tip someone off about the "why" so that they can try a work around. Much like the other filters, when you're blocked for say, smoking or married or drugs etc ... some people will go change their profile to suit their needs, - intent for "sexual contact fly by night one nighters" is an "intent" that women want to know about.
Something could be implemented, sure - but Admin is pretty locked on this one.
Good point - and I now see why this thread will continue to develop a life of its own.  | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 4:55:19 PM | I do not want to flood the forum and appear I am beating this thread to death with another post, however I provide the following results.
I logged into mail as the_hoss
- Selected Search My City
- Selected age 22-99 (catch all) and then People that I have Contacted, and applied.
- 2 pages of matches were returned
- went through each profile and not one was seeking IM.
Thoughts anyone?
Paul
AKA: The Hoss | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 7:27:16 PM | The Hoss
I'm in England so I could be way off...............
But .............
Could it be that you are Married????
The main reason (apart from the IE thingy) that people block a certain user in England is because they are set as being MARRIED. Its another filter I have in place. I have no wish (and I am sure a huge percentage of the women on here have the same wish) to be contacted by anyone who is, in anyway shape or form, ATTACHED.
I think that could be your answer! | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/15/2007 7:33:56 PM | Thanks MadChick - I always check the email filters for that or any other restrictions such as age etc. You are correct though - most woman are not interested in seeing a married man and I fully respect that.
/Hoss | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/16/2007 12:43:19 AM | This morning I went to message someone who had the IE flag set and found that I was blocked. I have not had this occur ever in the past so thought I must have inadvertently emailed someone who was seeking IE.
Let's have a little Profile Review, should the rather obvious be overseen.
Your Profile states you are Married, but the First Date Form Field: "Meet for a nice quiet lunch and see what what chemistry develops".
Is it just possible that something in the POF code is incorrectly setting the flag or is there some other user action that can also trigger this?
User Action: You making first contact of those seeking Intimate Encounters.
Is it possible that if I message someone seeking "Friends" and they later change their profile to seeking IE, users who are in that persons contact history are then black flagged?
No.
The IE Filter executes in "Real Time" not in any "Retrospective" Aspect.
When someone attempts to message a party who is seeking IE - intercept the POF mail form with a warning page - beneath the warning, this page would have two buttons CANCEL or PROCEED ANYWAY. Everyone must admit it is very easy for someone to not always check the seeking field.
The IE Filter is based on "Contact" Habits, not Threat of Consequence.
Not based on "Yeah" or "Nay", but who you have been contacting, and those who restrict such Contact.
It should be very easy to implement this suggestion and would probably return several GIGS of storage space not to mention the server bandwidth and Moderator response time regarding this issue.... which by the way I fully support.
Not about Gigabytes, Server Space or Moderator gophering about.
Its about those who do not wish to be contacted by those who have habitually sought Intimate Encounters.
|
| |
|
TeJay
|
Joined: 1/16/2007
Msg: 97 | |
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/16/2007 4:16:42 AM | It seems like every time I read a new post with a guy who states that he has never/ or only once or by accident, contacted someone with I/E on their profile, and swears by it, then I have this shadow of a doubt that this block could be malfunctioning.
.....but then, I read on to all the replies by others and the mods only to get to the facts of the poster.
I just want to thank the mods and other posters who probe or dig a little deeper where the truth gets revealed. I feel like the mods try hard to state the facts without the need to say more then they have to, but then to poster keeps on...insisting that something is wrong. We finally get to the real truth.
I am more and more appreciative of this filter each and every time I read a new post. | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/16/2007 4:30:18 AM | I fully support the filter system - it is needed to make this site work smoothly and meet the needs of all users and to that end it works well.
Now no one here knows me or my contact habits so for me to say that I have not been seeking IE will carry little weight with the majority of readers. However, is it just remotely possible that some other glitch may cause this flag being set? Now yes it is possible I read a profile that appeared promising and neglected to check the "Seeking" field but doubt that "multiple and repeated first contacts" were made.
Please read my Msg number 94 for results of a test I ran that showed zero IE hits.
I am not asking or seeking my account flag be removed but rather try to improve even further a well designed and run dating site.
/Hoss | |
|
| Messaged for intimate encounters or sex
Posted: 7/17/2007 7:31:55 PM | | ok ok im sure this topic has been discussed but with the 2000 differnt topics it is hard to find the one i am loooking for... so i accidently message someone who was looking for an Intimate Encounter. how long does that stay on my file till i am able to message a user who has that blocked. | |
|
TeJay
|
Joined: 1/16/2007
Msg: 100 | |
| |
Home
login 
start at the top of the thread, here --> 
