Talk:Relationship Styles - Revision history

Sabryna: /* Caregiver/little */ new section

2014-03-18T06:35:20Z

‎Caregiver/little: new section

Sabryna at 06:16, 18 March 2014

2014-03-18T06:16:51Z

Sabryna at 06:16, 18 March 2014

2014-03-18T06:16:40Z

67.248.213.169: thoughts on opinions in a wiki that doesn't want to allow any verifiable, referenced facts. aka lololol

2014-03-18T05:54:57Z

thoughts on opinions in a wiki that doesn't want to allow any verifiable, referenced facts. aka lololol

Sabryna at 05:42, 18 March 2014

2014-03-18T05:42:01Z

Sabryna: Created page with "'m changing DD/lg / MD/lb to Caregiver/little, as it is a better umbrella term. Also: is there any way we can include Master(Mistress)/slave or is that too wordy? ~~~"

2014-03-18T05:38:30Z

Created page with "'m changing DD/lg / MD/lb to Caregiver/little, as it is a better umbrella term. Also: is there any way we can include Master(Mistress)/slave or is that too wordy? ~~~"

New page

'm changing DD/lg / MD/lb to Caregiver/little, as it is a better umbrella term.

Also: is there any way we can include Master(Mistress)/slave or is that too wordy? [[User:Sabryna|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna|talk]])

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:35, 18 March 2014
Line 15:		Line 15:

	::I'm only on here right now to fix wording that was WANTED fixed at the moment. Maybe you should be on here to be productive, too. [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])		::I'm only on here right now to fix wording that was WANTED fixed at the moment. Maybe you should be on here to be productive, too. [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])
		+
		+	== Caregiver/little ==
		+
		+	http://domimatrix.tumblr.com/post/63794799886
		+	^ Someone's made a beautiful layout as to how DD/lg and Caregiver/little fit in to the BDSM umbrella.
		+
		+	--- Citations ---
		+
		+	On Caregiver/little: http://a-littles-black-book.tumblr.com/post/63503352822
		+
		+	Types of Littles: http://www.fearlesspress.com/2013/10/10/types-of-littles-exploring-age-play-archetypes/
		+
		+	Types of Daddies/what is a Daddy Dom: http://www.fearlesspress.com/2013/11/10/types-of-daddies-exploring-age-play-archetypes-part-two-by-daddy-vinnie/
		+
		+
		+
		+	In need of: Types of Mommies; other examples of Caregiver/little such as Mommy Dom/children and Daddy Dom/little boy; articles by educators; print sources; non-Tumblr sources*
		+
		+
		+
		+	*because I haaaaate using tumblr as a source, it changes too damn often

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:16, 18 March 2014
Line 14:		Line 14:
	:: Here's an idea: why don't YOU go find the (non-Fetlife, non-tumblr, well-reputed) citations and start listing them in a talk chat so pages on these things can be better fleshed out? I think all of us are sick and tired of people who would rather wag tongues than be helpful, especially those who wipe pages instead of fixing the offending content. Or, GASP, start writing pages yourself? Gee, what an absolutely mind-blowing idea, this being helpful shit.		:: Here's an idea: why don't YOU go find the (non-Fetlife, non-tumblr, well-reputed) citations and start listing them in a talk chat so pages on these things can be better fleshed out? I think all of us are sick and tired of people who would rather wag tongues than be helpful, especially those who wipe pages instead of fixing the offending content. Or, GASP, start writing pages yourself? Gee, what an absolutely mind-blowing idea, this being helpful shit.

−	I'm only on here right now to fix wording that was WANTED fixed at the moment. Maybe you should be on here to be productive, too. [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])	+	::I'm only on here right now to fix wording that was WANTED fixed at the moment. Maybe you should be on here to be productive, too. [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:16, 18 March 2014
Line 11:		Line 11:

	: But you would rather do this project without any citations at all. That is a conscious move on your part (you, Admin, everyone else) to de-anchor the wiki from anything objective or verifiable. The purpose of that, naturally, is to make it simpler to put up any random lie or bigoted remark that Admin wants. It's hard not to see that as a deliberate choice to facilitate lying. On the other hand, maybe Admin is just very, very bad at understanding how documents and facts work. 05:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)		: But you would rather do this project without any citations at all. That is a conscious move on your part (you, Admin, everyone else) to de-anchor the wiki from anything objective or verifiable. The purpose of that, naturally, is to make it simpler to put up any random lie or bigoted remark that Admin wants. It's hard not to see that as a deliberate choice to facilitate lying. On the other hand, maybe Admin is just very, very bad at understanding how documents and facts work. 05:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:: Here's an idea: why don't YOU go find the (non-Fetlife, non-tumblr, well-reputed) citations and start listing them in a talk chat so pages on these things can be better fleshed out? I think all of us are sick and tired of people who would rather wag tongues than be helpful, especially those who wipe pages instead of fixing the offending content. Or, GASP, start writing pages yourself? Gee, what an absolutely mind-blowing idea, this being helpful shit.
		+
		+	I'm only on here right now to fix wording that was WANTED fixed at the moment. Maybe you should be on here to be productive, too. [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:54, 18 March 2014
Line 7:		Line 7:

	[[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])		[[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])
		+
		+	: I know you mean well, but at some point you're going to have to realize that there are 20 different opinions on any one of these items; and the whole reason wikipedia works is because it's supported by citations to external sources. You say "person A says this [1] however person B says this [2]". And that's how you can get anything done at all amongst people with biases and opinions.
		+
		+	: But you would rather do this project without any citations at all. That is a conscious move on your part (you, Admin, everyone else) to de-anchor the wiki from anything objective or verifiable. The purpose of that, naturally, is to make it simpler to put up any random lie or bigoted remark that Admin wants. It's hard not to see that as a deliberate choice to facilitate lying. On the other hand, maybe Admin is just very, very bad at understanding how documents and facts work. 05:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:42, 18 March 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'm changing DD/lg / MD/lb to Caregiver/little, as it is a better umbrella term.		'm changing DD/lg / MD/lb to Caregiver/little, as it is a better umbrella term.

−	Also: is there any way we can include Master(Mistress)/slave or is that too wordy? [[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])	+	Also: is there any way we can include Master(Mistress)/slave or is that too wordy?
		+
		+	Wouldn't Deity/priest(ess) and God(dess)/worshiper fall under the same category?
		+	Is Pack really Power Exchange? I know Packs that are more like families, so I'm wondering if Pack is usually a PE thing, or if it should be listed as non-PE.
		+
		+	[[User:Sabryna\|Sabryna]] ([[User talk:Sabryna\|talk]])