theres only one thing i want to be doing at dawn with a lady and it aint stalking................
Oh I don't know. You can't beat having a lady on your early morning stalk....
theres only one thing i want to be doing at dawn with a lady and it aint stalking................
I don't wish to be a miserable killjoy but if SD is serious about attracting lady members to the site and developing their interest in stalking then perhaps some of the more lewd and crude comments need to be toned down a bit. The naked lady with the bow in jokes and funnies was notably bad in this respect and soon removed by admin. atb Tim
+1 on that. I have just taken a slagging on another thread for earning my living. Theres too much of it. There is another problem too. From what I see a house hold only seems to be able to have one member per internet address which means that a husband and wife can not both join from the same household email address? is that so?
Mark
Tim I worked in a print finishing room full of women and I can assure you, the conversations they had were far worse than anything that's ever been discussed on here.
From the basis I outlined above - and that is admittedly a relatively small and narrow niche sample - the feedback is slightly at odds with sikamalc's position ( I say slightly, because in a number of respects he is spot on ).
Feedback now as opposed to say 12 months ago is much more positive overall. That is very much attributable to much more 'robust' moderation. I ve covered before what a difficult line Admin try to walk I do appreciate both sides of the equation. But I for one welcome a harder and more proactive Moderator line and would like to see it raised just a notch more. You admin guys still have too much of a social life!
I appreciate its an inclusive forum and should reflect the members as a group with common interest. I welcome that threads stray outwith strict deer stalking - I believe that makes for a stronger forum and espirit de corp. Last thing we want is for clone like agreement on all topics, but I still argue that polite debate is effective debate.
There are increasing numbers joining - great - but the real question is how many members take active part, how many watch only and how many rarely return. And why?
On same basis - female feedback remains unaltered. Out of something like 22 ladies recommended to view SD in the last 12 months I dont think a single one went on to join. I've spoken further with about 16/18 of those and in each case the responses were similar -
1. Atmosphere - pub/rugby club impression left. - Its a forum for all, not a monastary. A number of people have related to me that they talk here as they do at the pub. Thats their call and I do understand their general outlook. But read the posts above - how many in honesty would be completely comfortable talking that way in front of wives, daughters etc? Please be clear, that's not meant to judge anyone else, but try to look at the issue of 'why'. My good lady is ex TA infantry, shown this thread her view is that the majority of females will form an impression - and not a particularly positive one of the SD membership. She appreciated that people were having a laugh, but the effect was perhaps not thought through.
So what? 'They' either accept us as 'we' are or go elsewhere! '?' Not exactly inclusive is it? And do we as a forum want to effectively run on the basis of having a good chance of alienating 50% of the population - stalkers or not - who may look in on SD? I'll rephrase that - 50% of the voting population.
2. Those that looked deeper all went to the intro/ members lists and found one or two posts by ladies. Try it with open eyes guys - it doesnt make happy reading.
3. Because of 1 & 2 those ladies didnt give SD the chance to show how things have improved - and they have in general terms of silliness and aggression - perfect - no, but much better. Effective they have been excluded from this inclusive forum.
So what - 'we' stalk to get away from home/ women etc? Who is 'we' paleface? There are two sides to be acknowledged and given fair accommodation. But as it stands 'we' are keeping a good number of people interested in stalking away from active involvement in SD - I dont believe that is a good thing. Seems to me that broad pews work well and tend to last. Narrow pews just seem to fall over sooner or later.
Fully appreciate its a bloke pontificating on behalf of ladies and really down to them to speak on their own behalf in terms of answering the original posters question. Aside from welcome post from Linda, that none have done so should be actually speaking quite loudly!
From the basis I outlined above - and that is admittedly a relatively small and narrow niche sample - the feedback is slightly at odds with sikamalc's position ( I say slightly, because in a number of respects he is spot on ).
Feedback now as opposed to say 12 months ago is much more positive overall. That is very much attributable to much more 'robust' moderation. I ve covered before what a difficult line Admin try to walk I do appreciate both sides of the equation. But I for one welcome a harder and more proactive Moderator line and would like to see it raised just a notch more. You admin guys still have too much of a social life!
I appreciate its an inclusive forum and should reflect the members as a group with common interest. I welcome that threads stray outwith strict deer stalking - I believe that makes for a stronger forum and espirit de corp. Last thing we want is for clone like agreement on all topics, but I still argue that polite debate is effective debate.
There are increasing numbers joining - great - but the real question is how many members take active part, how many watch only and how many rarely return. And why?
On same basis - female feedback remains unaltered. Out of something like 22 ladies recommended to view SD in the last 12 months I dont think a single one went on to join. I've spoken further with about 16/18 of those and in each case the responses were similar -
1. Atmosphere - pub/rugby club impression left. - Its a forum for all, not a monastary. A number of people have related to me that they talk here as they do at the pub. Thats their call and I do understand their general outlook. But read the posts above - how many in honesty would be completely comfortable talking that way in front of wives, daughters etc? Please be clear, that's not meant to judge anyone else, but try to look at the issue of 'why'. My good lady is ex TA infantry, shown this thread her view is that the majority of females will form an impression - and not a particularly positive one of the SD membership. She appreciated that people were having a laugh, but the effect was perhaps not thought through.
So what? 'They' either accept us as 'we' are or go elsewhere! '?' Not exactly inclusive is it? And do we as a forum want to effectively run on the basis of having a good chance of alienating 50% of the population - stalkers or not - who may look in on SD? I'll rephrase that - 50% of the voting population.
2. Those that looked deeper all went to the intro/ members lists and found one or two posts by ladies. Try it with open eyes guys - it doesnt make happy reading.
3. Because of 1 & 2 those ladies didnt give SD the chance to show how things have improved - and they have in general terms of silliness and aggression - perfect - no, but much better. Effectively they have been excluded from this inclusive forum.
So what - 'we' stalk to get away from home/ women etc? Who is 'we' paleface? There are two sides to be acknowledged and given fair accommodation. But as it stands 'we' are keeping a good number of people interested in stalking away from active involvement in SD - I dont believe that is a good thing. Seems to me that broad pews work well and tend to last. Narrow pews just seem to fall over sooner or later.
Fully appreciate its a bloke pontificating on behalf of ladies and really down to them to speak on their own behalf in terms of answering the original posters question. Aside from welcome post from Linda, that none have done so should be actually speaking quite loudly!
From the basis I outlined above - and that is admittedly a relatively small and narrow niche sample - the feedback is slightly at odds with sikamalc's position ( I say slightly, because in a number of respects he is spot on ).
Feedback now as opposed to say 12 months ago is much more positive overall. That is very much attributable to much more 'robust' moderation. I ve covered before what a difficult line Admin try to walk I do appreciate both sides of the equation. But I for one welcome a harder and more proactive Moderator line and would like to see it raised just a notch more. You admin guys still have too much of a social life!
I appreciate its an inclusive forum and should reflect the members as a group with common interest. I welcome that threads stray outwith strict deer stalking - I believe that makes for a stronger forum and espirit de corp. Last thing we want is for clone like agreement on all topics, but I still argue that polite debate is effective debate.
There are increasing numbers joining - great - but the real question is how many members take active part, how many watch only and how many rarely return. And why?
On same basis - female feedback remains unaltered. Out of something like 22 ladies recommended to view SD in the last 12 months I dont think a single one went on to join. I've spoken further with about 16/18 of those and in each case the responses were similar -
1. Atmosphere - pub/rugby club impression left. - Its a forum for all, not a monastary. A number of people have related to me that they talk here as they do at the pub. Thats their call and I do understand their general outlook. But read the posts above - how many in honesty would be completely comfortable talking that way in front of wives, daughters etc? Please be clear, that's not meant to judge anyone else, but try to look at the issue of 'why'. My good lady is ex TA infantry, shown this thread her view is that the majority of females will form an impression - and not a particularly positive one of the SD membership. She appreciated that people were having a laugh, but the effect was perhaps not thought through.
So what? 'They' either accept us as 'we' are or go elsewhere! '?' Not exactly inclusive is it? And do we as a forum want to effectively run on the basis of having a good chance of alienating 50% of the population - stalkers or not - who may look in on SD? I'll rephrase that - 50% of the voting population.
2. Those that looked deeper all went to the intro/ members lists and found one or two posts by ladies. Try it with open eyes guys - it doesnt make happy reading.
3. Because of 1 & 2 those ladies didnt give SD the chance to show how things have improved - and they have in general terms of silliness and aggression - perfect - no, but much better. Effectively they have been excluded from this inclusive forum.
So what - 'we' stalk to get away from home/ women etc? Who is 'we' paleface? There are two sides to be acknowledged and given fair accommodation. But as it stands 'we' are keeping a good number of people interested in stalking away from active involvement in SD - I dont believe that is a good thing. Seems to me that broad pews work well and tend to last. Narrow pews just seem to fall over sooner or later.
Fully appreciate its a bloke pontificating on behalf of ladies and really down to them to speak on their own behalf in terms of answering the original posters question. Aside from welcome post from Linda, that none have done so should be actually speaking quite loudly!
I agree. atb TimFrom the basis I outlined above - and that is admittedly a relatively small and narrow niche sample - the feedback is slightly at odds with sikamalc's position ( I say slightly, because in a number of respects he is spot on ).
Feedback now as opposed to say 12 months ago is much more positive overall. That is very much attributable to much more 'robust' moderation. I ve covered before what a difficult line Admin try to walk I do appreciate both sides of the equation. But I for one welcome a harder and more proactive Moderator line and would like to see it raised just a notch more. You admin guys still have too much of a social life!
I appreciate its an inclusive forum and should reflect the members as a group with common interest. I welcome that threads stray outwith strict deer stalking - I believe that makes for a stronger forum and espirit de corp. Last thing we want is for clone like agreement on all topics, but I still argue that polite debate is effective debate.
There are increasing numbers joining - great - but the real question is how many members take active part, how many watch only and how many rarely return. And why?
On same basis - female feedback remains unaltered. Out of something like 22 ladies recommended to view SD in the last 12 months I dont think a single one went on to join. I've spoken further with about 16/18 of those and in each case the responses were similar -
1. Atmosphere - pub/rugby club impression left. - Its a forum for all, not a monastary. A number of people have related to me that they talk here as they do at the pub. Thats their call and I do understand their general outlook. But read the posts above - how many in honesty would be completely comfortable talking that way in front of wives, daughters etc? Please be clear, that's not meant to judge anyone else, but try to look at the issue of 'why'. My good lady is ex TA infantry, shown this thread her view is that the majority of females will form an impression - and not a particularly positive one of the SD membership. She appreciated that people were having a laugh, but the effect was perhaps not thought through.
So what? 'They' either accept us as 'we' are or go elsewhere! '?' Not exactly inclusive is it? And do we as a forum want to effectively run on the basis of having a good chance of alienating 50% of the population - stalkers or not - who may look in on SD? I'll rephrase that - 50% of the voting population.
2. Those that looked deeper all went to the intro/ members lists and found one or two posts by ladies. Try it with open eyes guys - it doesnt make happy reading.
3. Because of 1 & 2 those ladies didnt give SD the chance to show how things have improved - and they have in general terms of silliness and aggression - perfect - no, but much better. Effectively they have been excluded from this inclusive forum.
So what - 'we' stalk to get away from home/ women etc? Who is 'we' paleface? There are two sides to be acknowledged and given fair accommodation. But as it stands 'we' are keeping a good number of people interested in stalking away from active involvement in SD - I dont believe that is a good thing. Seems to me that broad pews work well and tend to last. Narrow pews just seem to fall over sooner or later.
Fully appreciate its a bloke pontificating on behalf of ladies and really down to them to speak on their own behalf in terms of answering the original posters question. Aside from welcome post from Linda, that none have done so should be actually speaking quite loudly!