Reputations

[Guest screaminggood]

Reading the "blackballing" thread and a conversation we had this weekend at the club has me wondering:

 

how many of you pay attention to what others tell you about other people?

 

At the club this weekend, someone was pointing out different people, and saying their positives and negatives...."this person is really nice," and "that girl was disappointing." How many of you are influenced by that?

 

And it makes me wonder what they'll be saying about us next weekend?????????

[Chicup 41]

Gossip is human nature, hell some theories on why language developed was to gossip.

 

The problem is figuring out which is just vindictive (they don't play with us so fuck them) which is just perception (we found them to be bad in bed but turns out they weren't comfortable by us at that point and didn't say anything) and which is true.

 

We DO listen to gossip though as it has saved us a few times.

 

One is a bizarre couple in our area who have been active swingers for like over 10 years. The wife is drop dead gorgeous, like 'wow' and the guy is ok in photographs. I was warned very early that the guy was something of a stalker who worked from home and would continue to call/be suggestive with the female half of couples they met, often unwanted. We were new, soft swap only and used that as an excuse to not play with them, to which they were very understanding in the email. Well as we gained experience we kept hearing more and more about this couple, specifically him being an issue. We eventually met them at a function and it turned out the guy looks far better in his pictures than in person, so while the woman is exactly the type I lust for in both general looks and my tastes as well, it just wouldn't happen with them anyways, but thats only with experience. Had they been our first couple we met in person we may have made a noob mistake.

 

Another was when we were seasoned swingers. We started chatting with a couple that seemed pretty relaxed swingers, but due to our schedules it was hard to get together. They kept getting more and more pushy but nothing over the top. We were warned they were a very aggressive couple at a local club and that there were people who just avoided going to that club so they didn't have to deal with them. So we backed out, for mostly legitimatize reasons, we just didn't have the time, and got some very nasty emails from them.

 

The way I look at it is just how many and who is talking about them. One couple says something negative, we will keep it in mind but also keep an open mind. If we hear it from more than one couple or a couple who we really trust, then it will most definitely affect if we play or not.

[LFM2 1,482]

I tend to wait to see what my first impression is. I don't really depend on comments of what others say, but like Chicup said, if more than one person brings up the same subjects and their behavior, it makes a person sit up and take notice.

 

We were obviously too late for our first couple. We've heard a lot about them since then, though. Deep down, I'm sure they are great people, but nobody likes a clingy stalker, much less two. This was our big oops, and maybe we've learned something from that. I'm not sure what, but there has to be a lesson in there somewhere.

[Greg & Sheryl 368]

We are so confident in our own ability to assess the character of others that we don't need to listen to any gossip beforehand.

[WeDive 57]

Reading the "blackballing" thread and a conversation we had this weekend at the club has me wondering:

 

how many of you pay attention to what others tell you about other people?

 

At the club this weekend, someone was pointing out different people, and saying their positives and negatives...."this person is really nice," and "that girl was disappointing." How many of you are influenced by that?

 

And it makes me wonder what they'll be saying about us next weekend?????????

 

We have wondered the same thing about people we meet and they just talk and talk about other swingers they know. It seems that nothing is out of bounds. In fact lately it has become a determining factor of whether we would consider playing with someone that talks out of school like that.

 

On the other side, we have to choose what/how/who we talk about very carefully so that we won't be considered in that same group. We've determined that some general small talk is OK, but anything more specific than that is out of bounds.

 

We actually had an acquaintance contact us this past weekend and ask if we'd heard anything bad about her. We hadn't and we assume we won't hear anything because it's known that we don't give or receive nonsense.

 

If we had an issue with someone there would be no reason to share it. We are well aware that whoever we had an issue with might not be a problem for the next people so we'll let everyone be their own judge. If we had just heard of an issue it would be high school-ish to repeat it.

 

Our .02 worth.

[Playful1 434]

For me, it depends on who the "info" or opinion is coming from.

 

If it is from a long time trusted person, I take it into account, but only to the extent that I keep it mind when dealing with the person. I don't automatically count anyone out because of what someone else says to me.

 

If it is from someone I don't know as well, or seems like sour grapes type situation, I just ignore it.

 

If enough people who have experienced the person have the same reaction though, I take it with more weight. If that many people feel the same way, it's a lot more likely to be true, in my experience.

[Texasfuncouple 69]

From our experience we find the ones who "share" the most are the ones we probably are going to enjoy the least.

 

Not to mention......"What the hell are they going to say about us"

 

~Texasfun

[lustylearning 705]

Honestly, it depends on who is sharing the information with us and what the nature of the information is. We listen to close friends moreso than casual acquaintances, and we take heed of what we deem to be "fair warnings." Our usual course of action when meeting people, however, is simply to take them as they come and see how things go. People respond differently to different people. We try not to share information unless we deem it truly important, and even then, it's only to those we're close to.

[2inSanDiego4u 181]

Not to mention......"What the hell are they going to say about us"

 

~Texasfun

 

We have a winner! That says it all...

 

Being discreet is one of the best qualities to look for in others, IMHO.

[Hotwallabies 90]

Honestly, it depends on who is sharing the information with us and what the nature of the information is. We listen to close friends moreso than casual acquaintances, and we take heed of what we deem to be "fair warnings." Our usual course of action when meeting people, however, is simply to take them as they come and see how things go. People respond differently to different people. We try not to share information unless we deem it truly important, and even then, it's only to those we're close to.

 

This is exactly how we would deal with this type of situation. You always have to consider the source. If it was people we knew very well and trusted we might give more credence to what they were saying, if it wasn't we might make a mental note but then find out for ourselves. I don't think we would reject someone solely off of what someone else told us though. We might share information if we thought that someone was particularly bad (not in bed but in hygiene, personality, or demeanor, etc.) but we would also put the "this may just be our opinion" caveat even on that. If someone was awesome though we would definitely share that, anyway we can make swinging easier for somebody we will. If your cool we will definitely advertise it so that you get more opportunites. We feel like you've earned it by being cool people. That's my hay penny's worth.

[it'sso 198]

There's a certain amount of risk involved in the lifestyle program, just as there is in any other situation involving others.

One thing is I am sure of is that there will always be people who feel the need to let us all in on what they "know" about others.

For example, if you have any particular oddity about your physical makeup, after you have been with some, you sure as hell don't have to take all your clothes off for people to be made aware of it.

[two4youinswva 3,068]

There are some lifestyle couples that we are close to, and have a very high level of trust in. They aren't the type to talk about others, but if they did tell us we needed to be careful of, or "stay away" from a certain couple, we would heed their advice and thank them for it.

 

Now, as to those who straight up gossip about others, we prefer to make up our own minds.

"No you'll never hear us repeating gossip. So you'd better be sure and listen close the first time!" - The Hee Haw Gossip Girls

[twoforone100 45]

The general rule is to consider the source. Close friends the more we listen. However we have found that good friend A did not like someone and we did. or Good friend B liked someone and we did not.

 

We keep most of our information pretty close. But there are times when "fair warning" is important. Some keep information locked in the "vault" others share.

 

 

 

The important thing is to wonder why people are telling you something. Oh and if they have nothing better to do than talk about us... Well F@%& them.

[lustylearning 705]

"No you'll never hear us repeating gossip. So you'd better be sure and listen close the first time!" - The Hee Haw Gossip Girls

 

:lol:

 

exactly

[Chicup 41]

Once while hiking, my wife and I explored a small cave. We were new to the area, and were rather shocked to find a rattlesnake inside. It rattled a lot, and really scared my wife who isn't the outdoorswoman or should I say outdoorsmen I am. I grabbed her arm tightly to keep her from panicking, and slowly backed away, holding my walking stick in front of me as we did. We got out unharmed and vowed never to go into that cave again. She was still shaking a bit so we sat down on the trail about 100 yards from the cave. Another couple of hikers came down the trail and seemed to be heading to the cave. I just smiled and let them go, I didn't want to color their experience with our bad one. We left after they went in so I do hope it was better for them than it was for us.

[Hotwallabies 90]

Once while hiking, my wife and I explored a small cave. We were new to the area, and were rather shocked to find a rattlesnake inside. It rattled a lot, and really scared my wife who isn't the outdoorswoman or should I say outdoorsmen I am. I grabbed her arm tightly to keep her from panicking, and slowly backed away, holding my walking stick in front of me as we did. We got out unharmed and vowed never to go into that cave again. She was still shaking a bit so we sat down on the trail about 100 yards from the cave. Another couple of hikers came down the trail and seemed to be heading to the cave. I just smiled and let them go, I didn't want to color their experience with our bad one. We left after they went in so I do hope it was better for them than it was for us.

 

Excellent point and very well crafted I might add.

 

But was there a point to your story?

[fun4Ds 1,098]

I just smiled and let them go, I didn't want to color their experience with our bad one. We left after they went in so I do hope it was better for them than it was for us

 

 

 

 

Mental note to self: Man, woman, stick, cave,deviate smile...... DO NOT ENTER !!

[rpu3 630]

I didn't want to color their experience with our bad one. We left after they went in so I do hope it was better for them than it was for us.

 

It is a good point. But back to the rattlesnakes (and possibly back to the thread), what if one of those hikers had been bitten because they didn't know about the snake. What if a simple heads up (as opposed to a more animated "don't go in there! Snakes!) could have prevented that?

 

I guess, having done So. Cal mountains and the deserts, we hikers/campers/shooters just freely shared information regarding rattlers as to keep people alert and avoid a strike. Perhaps there are such creatures who could be so potentially dangerous or toxic that a warning should be provided as a matter of common sense, courtesy or for the public's safety?

[slevin 1,374]

Well, one difference is that anyones interaction with a rattle snake is going to turn out the same (unless you're Steve Irwin). Peoples interaction with a couple we had a bad experience with might be vastly different than our own personal experience. I'd hesitate to warn anyone, might respond with a polite warning if asked specifically. People we were close with we'd share our experience unprompted, but just as an FYI.

 

We'll listen to the gossip generally and will consider the source. If its someone we respect the opinion of it will hold more weight than if it comes from someone we don't know.

[it'sso 198]

Excellent point and very well crafted I might add.

 

But was there a point to your story?

 

I too am intrigued about the reasoning in not warning the other couple.

Stupid old me. I would have been concerned for their safety.

[The Fuse 1,012]

Am I missing something here? Was Chicup not being sarcastic? I thought his point was that to *not* warn someone about clear, impending danger was a *bad* thing. Obviously a rattlesnake encounter and a swinging encounter are very different, but I still think that was his point. I think the key is when, and for what reasons, we or others are "sharing information" that could affect another's reputation. Do we think they are potentially dangerous? Then yes, of course. Maybe the guy couldn't get it up? Leave that one alone. Maybe his wife was a dead fish or didn't want to do certain things? Leave it alone.

 

As an unrelated anecdote, in life and in swinging, some of the worst gossips seem to be those who complain about gossip itself. I have witnessed recently someone complaining about it. But that same person, after I did nothing but get on a webcam to say hello in a G-rated, five minute encounter, implied to a trusted mutual friend that it was only a matter of time before he and his wife would be playing with me and Mr. Fuse. I was completely turned off by this behaviour and would now not go near them with a ten foot pole. Sometimes I wonder who else this person told that we were "in the bag", and what that did to our reputation.

 

A former colleague used to say that women were such terrible gossips... but he suggested pretty plainly to me that two of our other colleagues were sleeping together, and also tried to get me to admit to a crush on a third. I was pretty uncomfortable at all of it. I won't say I never talk about other people, though most of the time I do try to take the high road except if I have information that could save people some real trouble. I am still trying to find my way. My current signature line definitely applies here.

 

I'm reminded of the quote attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt (paraphrasing):

 

People with small minds talk about other people.

People with average minds talk about events.

People with great minds talk about ideas.

[Guest screaminggood]

Well, heck, Chicup forgot that I'm from Texas....there's rattlesnakes in all our caves....and remember they taste like fried chicken!!!!

 

The funny thing about this couple: the guy was doing the gossipy compare notes, when I mentioned something positive to the woman about someone else, she made a snippy remark about not caring.

 

We tend to make our own decisions as well. The only one I've ever avoided after a rep comment was for a warning about STDs.

 

We did play with the "talking" couple. Ironically, she was very, very good, and he was hm, different, from anyone else I've ever experienced. It just makes me wonder what they'll be saying about us next weekend, but then it won't really matter!

[siren52 15]

I think there is a difference between gossip and warnings. And I certainly would listen to what a close friend has to say about another couple good or bad.

[Hotwallabies 90]

Accidentally hit enter when my 22 month old grabbed the laptop. Sorry.

[Hotwallabies 90]

Am I missing something here? Was Chicup not being sarcastic? I thought his point was that to *not* warn someone about clear, impending danger was a *bad* thing.

 

He was definitely being sarcastic. He meant it to point out how absurd it would be to actually let such a thing take place whether it be with a rattlesnake in a cave or a rattlesnake in swinging. If someone is a problem you should let people know. If I heard my friends were going to a terrible restaurant that I had just been to would I not tell them that the restaurant was crap? I know we're not dealing with rattlesnakes or restaurants here but there is still much validity to Chicups excellent parable.

 

By the way you made some excellent points as well Fuse. Why we're sharing the information is very important to consider. If Chicup and his wife had simply not liked the cave and then sat outside it warning people away that would have been a problem.

[rpu3 630]

Am I missing something here? Was Chicup not being sarcastic? I thought his point was that to *not* warn someone about clear, impending danger was a *bad* thing. Obviously a rattlesnake encounter and a swinging encounter are very different, but I still think that was his point.

 

Some of us early morning posters didn't quite see the sarcasm, myself included. What is plain to some was not as clear to others, obviously. I, upon several cups of coffee and a re-read, can see it a bit more now and I'm actually happy, because I spent a bit of my morning thinking, "what kind of asshole doesn't warn others about a rattlesnake while hiking?!?"

 

Well, one difference is that anyones interaction with a rattle snake is going to turn out the same (unless you're Steve Irwin).

 

Really? All who accidently come upon a rattlesnake will have the same outcome? I don't see the same outcome experienced by all, given the 7,000+ strikes reported a year* from snakes, versus those who encountered a snake and were not bitten (with the possible reaction being the difference), and then versus those who never stumbled upon one in the first place.

 

Perhaps there is a more finite set of potential interactions, but not all interactions with snakes are the same any more than swinging interactions are the same. Regardless, as with the snake information, the failure to pass along relevant information in swinging could do nothing or cause illness or death, and all the options in between. Which, upon a re-read and coffee, and some helpful "sarcasm" interpreters, was likely his point in the first place.

 

 

*Depending on whose stats you'd like to use (state reports, the FDA, health care self-reporting, etc.)

[MrkLin 393]

We consider the source and the info being passed along. If someone is a drunk, hardcore druggie, or has an STD, I think you'd want to know about it before you got into a situation with them. I also think that if I know something like that and I don't tell you about it, I'm culpable.

 

As has been said before, fair warning is one thing - gossip is quite another. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between the two, but you usually know the difference.

 

As far as what people are saying about us is concerned, who cares? People who know us know us, and that's good enough for us. We figure that people who don't want to get to know us based entirely on something somebody told them about us are probably people we don't want to get to know in the first place. I know that sounded rather egotistical, but it's reality. If you're the kind of person who believes every little tidbit of hot gossip you hear, and engages in such things, well, have fun with it. We're too busy having fun to bother with such drivel.

[The Fuse 1,012]

upon a re-read and coffee, and some helpful "sarcasm" interpreters,

 

Sarcasm is in my genes. I can't help it.:D

[exploringRM 305]

We've had couples we know give us positive information on other couples, couples that we are either interested in or actively hanging out with. Being a bit new to going back to people's houses it's a nice warm fuzzy. We've not gotten too much negative information.

[WesternSwing 504]

We say nothing but nice, albeit if we did hit it off it will be "nicer" than if we didn't, but as I said in another thread, just because we didn't hit it off with them doesn't mean someone else won't. And if they do we'll be the ones with egg on our face for saying negative things about them. It's better to avoid those situations and be the couple everyone loves. Basic Dale Carnegie isn't it? "Don't criticize, condemn or complain."

 

Mr. WS

[slevin 1,374]

Really? All who accidently come upon a rattlesnake will have the same outcome? I don't see the same outcome experienced by all, given the 7,000+ strikes reported a year* from snakes, versus those who encountered a snake and were not bitten (with the possible reaction being the difference), and then versus those who never stumbled upon one in the first place.

 

Perhaps there is a more finite set of potential interactions, but not all interactions with snakes are the same any more than swinging interactions are the same. Regardless, as with the snake information, the failure to pass along relevant information in swinging could do nothing or cause illness or death, and all the options in between. Which, upon a re-read and coffee, and some helpful "sarcasm" interpreters, was likely his point in the first place.

 

Oh I got the sarcasm and I actually appreciate the point of the story. I think it was a great way to point out the pitfalls of deciding not to warn someone else about the potential 'dangers' of playing with a particular couple. My point, in the general sense, is that almost no one is going to WANT to run into a snake. Almost no one is going to be happy that they ran into a snake. Most encounters with a snake are going to end up exactly like it did in the story: fearfully getting the heck out of there. Some might get bitten, most will get the heck out of there. There can be serious consequences, almost no good outcomes for most (except those who go looking for snakes. In swinging the consequences are less dire, assuming its not an STD you'd warn about, or a serial killer on the loose. Also the negative interactions in swinging for us can often be positive interactions for others. I think there are very few couples that are "bad couples" who do nothing but wreak havoc everywhere they go.

 

That's all I was trying to point out. I caught the original intent and appreciate it's purpose.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

From our experience we find the ones who "share" the most are the ones we probably are going to enjoy the least.

 

Not to mention......"What the hell are they going to say about us"

 

~Texasfun

 

This is my thought as well. We had one couple we were very interested in and finally chose to pass on for this very reason.

 

But you do have to make a judgement call and determine is it gossip? Therefore you can't base your judgement on someone simply because you heard something... now granted if you keep hearing the same thing from multiple sources... either the rumor has really made the circuit or it's truth (but which is it?).

 

There's a couple we met recently that was supposed to come to our last group dinner. We mentioned we'd previously met at a social them to another couple who was at the dinner and their response was "were they drunk?". Um not that we noticed. "well I'm sure they were before the night was over.". Funny we met them again at the last social we went to and they weren't drunk there either.

 

Sometimes one bad night results in a year of bad rumors....

 

I get Chicup's point about the cave. Although as someone else pointed out, the snake might not still be there. So there is a difference between "watch out we encountered a snake in that cave" and "hey THERE IS a snake in that cave". You just have to be careful how you phrase things.

[2plus2fun 143]

Another thing we found... the people who talk the most about particular people (pointing them out, etc) are usually the people that kiss and tell.