Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

In this Discussion

glossary discussion
  • darwindarwin
    Posts: 1,196
    folks-

    i'd like to keep the GLOSSARY thread focused on particular terms and definitions.

    but we also need a place to discuss the best way to make the glossary.

    B Mayfield has started that discussion in the GLOSSARY thread, and to keep it going, while not having it reside in the GLOSSARY itself, i'm going to copy it here so people can respond. i hope this works for everybody --darwin

    ------------------------------------------------

    To All Forum Users

    It has occurred to me that to create a glossary that will become a purposeful resource for others, it is important that great care and consideration is given to what is included. If not, such a document would inevitably confuse and distract those that it seeks to help.


    As this proposed glossary will be open source , it would seem to me that there should be some criteria established for including terms in it. Although there may be many more, there are two criteria that immediately come to mind for me.

    The first is RELEVANCE. One person generating a term does not make the term useful in and of itself. It should really count for something...either as a short hand, or a way of adding clarity or depth to an idea or concept. The test for this criteria is.. does this term really say something....and ...is this term useful ?

    Second is the USAGE. Has the term had any history of being adopted or otherwise accepted by others. The test here is... has this term appeared repeatedly and is it being used by various members throughout the forum?

    If a term does not pass these tests it would likely mean one of two things; that it is not yet ready for inclusion in the glossary or that it does not serve a value to others.

    If one filters proposed entries using both of these criteria prior to posting,..it will help separate the wheat from the chaff and prevent the Forum Glossary from become mired with all sorts extraneous material. As it is true that the inclusion in this list would ultimately serve to perpetuate the usage of these terms, it is important that they have some real meaning and value for forum users to start with.

    BF Mayfield
  • Edit
    Posts: 0


    Great idea Darwin to start this separate thread... so, we have all these words, abbreviations, etc. in the glossary... can we get some definitions? HSMO? HFMO? I wish I were better able to contribute to the discussion; I'd love to get the lingo down! Again, great idea... thanks!
  • darwindarwin
    Posts: 1,196
    (this post was edited 2007-03-27 15:13:06)

    BF and others-

    a couple of points to follow up on what B has suggested.

    first, as it is currently implemented, the glossary is "semi-open source."

    it is semi-open because as constructed i'll be editing the lead entry in the thread to incorporate the terms suggested in the various cumulative replies.

    this means that i'll be attempting to add a degree of consistency and quality that might not be there if it was open the way a wiki page is open.

    second, i largely agree with the guidelines B has put forth.

    i looked through the list that is currently there, and tried to apply B's wheat/chafe criteria.

    here is the chafe i came up with (and quick definitions):
    * silencer (something to stifle the loud vocalizations produced in aneros use)
    * O-zone (a state of ongoing continual orgasms, with the A or w/o)
    * ass-crack (slang for the addictiveness of the aneros)
    * aneros fuck (slang for the experience of having the aneros's spontaneous motion inducing a distinct and excellent feeling of being fucked)
    * internal jerk off (slang for an aneros induced dry orgasm that feels remarkably like you are ejaculating, but without actually ejaculating)
    * butt flutters (synonym for quick anal sphincter involuntaries)

    all but the last of those, i must admit, are my own "coinages," the last being from Tripper.

    the place where i'd like to think about being a little lenient on B's filters is the second filter: wide usage.

    as B notes, by being in the glossary, a term might become widely used where were it not there, it wouldn't.

    to me, that would be a sign of a good term: one that has captured in a simple phrase a concept that we know exists but don't have a concise way to refer to.

    indeed, it is part of what is so amazing about the aneros is that we find ourselves groping for new words to refer to things.

    looking over the "chafe" above, i personally am inclined to keep most, as i think they introduce new users to important concepts and experiences that they might not know about or have a word for.

    to me, if we have a "might-be-chafe" rate of not more than 10-15% i think the glossary will be fine, and might be enhanced.

    B or anybody else want to give commentary or provide critiques of the terms that are there now?

    at your service,
    darwin
  • TripperTripper
    Posts: 250
    Darwin,

    Personally, I am glad and others I am sure feel the same way...that a Glossary effort is underway.

    Many thanks for initiating this important effort.

    Tripper