PeeSearch

[DiaperFun 14]

The only pee site but this I know is www.peesearch.net, where I am a gold member. That site is good with very friendly and helpful admins and mods but there is also a thing I dont like with that site and that is these anoying flashing adverts everywhere. This site has some too but www.peesearch.net has even more flashing adverts. I really don´t understand why adverts have to be flashing, adverts in a newspaper don´t flash at all. Flashing discolights is also very annoying to my eyes. I am trying not to look at them but they´re still annoying in some way.

I don´t know if www.peesearch.net has been rewieved before but that site has a special diaper section dedicated to DL:s but the mainpart happens about peeing without diapers.

[AnonymousCoward 5]

PeeSearch.net is another site that allows users to upload photos and videos. They have things fairly well organized into different categories (Solo, wetting, outdoor, etc.), and new videos seem to be uploaded around once a week or so. Registration is required, but free, and there's an option to pay for access to archives and unlimited downloads.

[Admin 14,788]

Admittedly at first I was unsure whether this should be reviewed here, since Peesearch and this site are obviously both pee discussion forums, so initially I assumed they would be in competition. The site has been discussed several times already on this forum though, since some members have relocated to this site after having mixed experiences at PS, but also because quite a few members are using both sites. Either way, PeeSearch has been around for 10 years, this site has just finished celebrating it's two month anniversary... it's hard to compare the two. The good news is that even if this forum does continue to grow and become something much larger, I really don't see the sites as ever being rivals, at least I hope that never becomes the case.

Anyway, all that aside, let's have some more reviews of PeeSearch. I'm sure many of you are familiar with it and it'd be interesting to get some additional opinions. Of course, there's actually more to PeeSearch than just the community element, as the name suggests it essentially provides users with a pee search engine. :biggrin:

[steve25805 126,021]

Well, I am still actually a member of that site and first joined it in July 2010. It is possible to award positive or negative reputation points there for particular contributions and I currently have the second highest reputation status on the entire forum and for a while was top. So I am a well known and - until very recently - prolific contributor to that forum. I intend to give an honest review but will first very briefly get the personal shit out of the way.

I broke the rules a couple of times and behaved unconstructively at others, mods would respond to this in very harsh tones and I would make a mountain out of a molehill and drag out a prolonged argument. But there were also occasions when I meant well but was mistinterpreted in a far more negative light and spoken to harshly which seriously upset me, and still other times when I simply offered what I regarded as constructive and well intentioned suggestions which were interpreted unfairly as moans and complaints about the status quo. And if I felt that any mods were behaving unfairly to others I was always quick to speak out, though this was very rare. I thus came to be seen as a one man awkward squad by some of the mods which was partly my own fault, partly not. A particular animosity developed between me and one mod in particular which came to a head recently and almost caused me to leave. But I drew back from that and - very recently - he and I have exchanged private communications and I think now are thouroughly burying the hatchet and moving on at last. I have thus posted there, indicating that this forum has supplanted PS as my first forum of choice now but that slowly, and tentatively, I wil resume posting there from time to time too. In recent months the membership there has become divided insofar as attitudes to me are concerned, between those who retain a lot of respect for me, and those who shared the mods' growing disdain for me. I hope going forward to earn their respect again or else I will give up on the place.

I had to say all that to set the scene insofar as my own declared interests are concerned. Now the review.

PS has always been on the whole an excellent forum, and before WGP came on the scene was pretty unique in terms of it's combination of content, popularity, and quality. It has stricter rules than this site has, and these are fairly rigidly enforced, but the moderation there seems pretty fair and even-handed. I have never noticed any form of favouritism towards favourite members when it comes to mod decisions, which cannot be said of other more mainstream forums I have experienced. But I would criticise the mods as to some extent regarding themselves as being above the members - masters rather than servants of the forum - and I think a degree of subconscious "us and them" type thinking might have developed. To use the police as an analogy, too many of them seem to think of themselves as a "force" rather than a "service", it seeems to me. I think that their default position can be to back each other up come what may, though this may be a false impression if disageement tends to be stated privately rather than publicly. Sometimes the mods can be unnecessarily harsh in the manner in which they criticise, which can really rub members up the wrong way if the criticised person is being totally misunderstood and meant no harm. But such harshness does have the advantage that trolls, troublemakers, and spammers are swiftly dealt with. A little more tact in dealing with longer term members who have proven their value would be better - at least for a first offence.

The forum itself is divided into subforums along similar lines to this one, with sections for stories, general chat, true sightings, introductions, feedback, etc which work pretty well. Peeing Cupid is also accessible from the home page, though still a paysite. One subforum that it has which this one doesn't is a seperate diapers and adult babies section.

The site also has galleries full of videos and pics submitted by members, some of themselves but many drawn from porn sites. Both pics and vids are divided into categories that make finding what you want easy - outdoor, solo, wetting, Asian, golden showers, etc. Access to these galleries is granted to members who have posted at least 15 worthwhile posts. The forum has a short post rule which is rigidly enforced, and posts such as "Hot" or "Awesome" are relatively quickly deleted. Typically a couple of sentences as a minimum is required. Longer term members of proven worth are allowed more leeway here and can get away with the occasional short post as long as it still has some relevance and is not done too often. Some of the counting threads initiated by Admin here would be totally against the short post rule there and would not be possible. Another rule strictly enforced is the underage rule. None of us can talk about our own first sexual experiences there, even though they invariably involve some kind of fumble behind the bikesheds type scenario in our early teenage years or younger which is pretty normal and natural for all of us. Discussing this would be jumped upon from a great height because we would be discussing experiences from our own under 18 years.

In addition to the galleries, which contain the most recent pics and vids to have been posted, there are far more extensive archives containing every pic and vid that has ever been uploaded to the site throughout it's existence. But these galleries are accesible only to Gold Members - analogous to Premium Membership here - a higher level of membership entitling members to greater access. I believe the mods have free access to the archives which I suppose is a perk of mod status, but necessary in case modding is needed there too.

PS does not have a "like" system as here, in which sense it is decidedly inferior - when I suggested something along those lines a while back - intended constructively - I was criticised for moaning and coplaining about the way things were and accused of being ungrateful for what was a free site (I was not yet a financially contributing gold member at that time). But the forum does have a reputation points system, allowing members to give positive or negative rep to each other, how much exactly being determined by members own reputation points and postcounts. But such rep could be awarded anonymously, so when it came to nasty comments accompanying negative rep, one rarely knew who the "brave" soul was who anonymously gave it.

There are two Admins there - Peemaxx and Slash - but they mostly take a back seat these day and rarely show up, and as far as I can tell the day to day running of the place is almost entirely in the hands of the mods. I have heard that in the early days they were both far more active, like Admin here.

One thing PS has which this site doesn't is a chatroom, somewhere where members could go and chat to each other. This was, though, very much a mixed blessing in my experience. It could be a great place to meet and befriend people but there were downsides. A certain type of sleazebag male who rarely contributed much to the forums was prone to hang out in there lurking in the background saying nothing...until a female appeared. Then two or three of these would suddenly pipe up and want to talk dirty with her straight away without so much as a hello. Needless to say, a fair few females were quickly put off the chatroom by such experiences. Also, on a number of occasions I stumbled across members in there who were bitching about other members behind their backs, on a couple of occasions with mods joining in! On one such occasion, the person being bitched about happened to be a friend of mine - unbeknownst at the time to those doing the bitching - and I was less them impressed I have to say. Several strongly worded private messages from myself to others became necessary as a result. In view of this, with the membership having become divided about me, with some sharing in the negativity of some of the mods, I have naturally wondered how many times the chatroom may have been used as a vehicle for bitching about me behind my back.

PS can still boast many high quality members. A few of them are also members here now too, and this site can boast some who have never been on PS. But PS does retain a number of superb contributors who remain exclusive to that forum. To give but one example, there is Kaeleigh, a white South African girl who posts top quality stories of such a high literary quality than many of us are convinced she has what it takes to write professionally. She also posts pics of herself peeing in the galleries, and comes across, personality-wise, as a genuinely nice and lovely girl. Of course, she is one of the ones I invited here but she has not taken up the offer. For as long as PS can retain the loyalty of members of such quality, there is no danger at all of it's dying.

Well that is my review.

I do believe and hope that both forums will compliment, and bring out the best in, each other. Perhaps the existence of this forum will encourage PS to up it's game somewhat and be an even better place, whilst the existence of PS itself keeps this place on it's toes in terms of being at the top of it's game. I genuinely believe - and certainly hope - that there is room for both forums out there and that each can benefit from the other.

[Paulypeeps 5,287]

Just a quick review from my experience. Peesearch is very popular, and there is quite a lot of activity which makes it slightly more attractive than quieter sites. It does have a few irritating quirks which rather spoils the forum side if you are not particularly interested in the gallery.

The biggest problem is that new members have to make five posts in the forum, even if they have no interest in the forum, before they can access the gallery. This unfortunately results in a lot of drivel being posted in the forum that need not be there. A by-product of this is that the moderators will remove any post that is not of an arbitrary length regardless of content meaning that many posts are a lot longer than they need to be to prevent the moderators deleting them, which they clearly do without reading. While I can understand the thinking behind the five post rule, it clearly does not work to the benefit of the forum and any suggestion of how it can be improved is immediately considered a personal affront to the rather over paranoid moderators. You do not turn an illiterate into William Shakespeare by telling him to write or else.

The other big problem - which discourages posters to the galleries is that you have no access to material that you upload unless you fulfil the five post rule or buy a premium membership. This also has another by-product in that people are encouraged to upload material already on the site because they have no way of knowing what is already there, and are likely to just copy material from somewhere else if they do not have their own original material.

Peesearch is unfortunately very popular with those who consider themselves morally better than everyone else. Any post that does not meet the very high moral standards of some will immediately be criticised, so think very carefully about posting there if you do not have a thick skin and this especially applies to any mention of peeing anywhere other than on the toilet! You might think that these ridiculous criticisms would be moderated, but unfortunately most of the time they are made by the moderators themselves.

In conclusion Peesearch has the potential to be very good, but currently there are issues that make it less than ideal but the volume of posting may make it worthwhile to trawl through trash to get the nuggets.

PP

[steve25805 126,021]

Paulypeeps, I will just correct a minor error of yours. The five post rule combined with three positive ratings are the criteria for video access here. On PS the rule is that 15 posts must be contributed not five.

And in defence of the place, those posters who turn up posting shite purely to gain rapid access to the galleries soon get their posts deleted so they tend not to clutter the forum for very long. And I have seen the reasons for this rule explained - the more people who access the galleries, the greater the bandwidth required which costs money. The 15 post rule is therefore an atempt to limit access to worthwhile contributors, so I understand the reasons for it.

I do have more agreement with some of your other criticisms. I too noticed that constructive suggestions tended to be attacked as criticisms of the status quo and even attacks on the mods themselves, and signs of ingratitude for what was a forum supplied for free, when we might only have been making suggestions that we thought might make a great place even better precisely because we did appreciate it so much!

Oh, and the serial complainers! That has been a perrenial problem on the site. So often some new member - much desired female ones in some cases - would appear with an allegedly true naughty peeing experience, and others amongst us would welcome and encourage.....but within a few posts all the self-appointed moral guardians would start to pile in, the same minority of people all the time - and start attacking the new member for supposed morally reprehensible behaviour, and generally being judgementalist bastards. Others would challenge them as being damaging to the forum and discouraging new members, and the entire thread - originally some new member's account of naughty peeing which may well just have been a fantasy anyway - would be derailed into yet another tiresome argument with the forum's own resident judgemental narrowminds. So many times I saw people - often girls too - turn up with such tales only to encounter this and fade away after only a few posts. I never felt that the naughty peeing niche was entirely accepted there, and that's where WGP has PS totally beat. Here we have an Admin who himself declares such things to be a primary interest. I hope that if and when hard and fast rules are drawn up here that they will explicitly include a rule against attacking others for their peeing interests, unless they be overtly paedophile or something like that. A general rule about not being judgemental about each other's fetish interests would be something I would approve of.

[Sinna 2pee4you 600]

In defense of peesearch, I never have been attacked or had my post dragged down by negative people. But I find it very crowded at times and difficult to stay in conversations. The thing that annoys me the most, is the 20 message inbox rule and the fact that the messaging does not work comfortably. So if I save my reply to be able to know what the other person is answering to (in case they don't send back my earlier answer with theirs) that costs me 1 storage place. So after messaging with 5 people twice, I have to choose messages to delete.

I am aware that I probably get messages more and faster than others, from girls and guys, but 20 messages storage was full the first day and I have been at 19 or 20 ever since. Currently full at 20 (10sent/10received). So if you want to stay in touch, you have to go elsewhere, which means that PS actually forces you not to use them.

[steve25805 126,021]

There is a difference between being judgmental and having a different opinion of appropriateness of an action. I know that a woman peeing on carpet rings Steve's bell as it were, and he would have no problem with a woman coming to his place and peeing in the middle of the living room carpet. Others, especially those who are not into pee, would find someone doing that to their carpet to be unacceptable or worse. Peeing on your own things, or in places where you will not cause (unacceptable) damage, is different that pee vandalism.

Those who express that idea are not being judgmental or narrow minded. They disagree with the appropriateness of the actions and their opinions are just as valid as those who enjoy those actions. If I got a sexual thrill out of fire (and was an arsonist) would it be judgmental for others to say that I should not burn down someone else's home?

Maybe, but it does a pee forum no favours at all to make a big deal out of it there all the time. It is primarily a place for getting off on pee, not for making moral judgements about how others do so. If that has to be done, best to open a thread specifically for that debate, as Admin did here a while back, rather than attacking the actual posts of often new members and making them feel unwelcome in consequence. It would do nothing for this forum or anyone's ability to enjoy pee here, to have holier than thou moralistic attacks on new members, with the forum being used as a vehicle for expressing moral indignation against each others' peeing interests. If we must flaunt our moral superiority, let's at least start a specific thread to do so and keep it there, not go around attacking new members in packs for posting stuff we disapprove of.

It is worth bearing in mind that your own favourite activity of driving around specifically looking for sightings of girls peeing and watching them without their knowledge - the sort of thing that in Britain would likely sooner or later get you beaten up by an angry boyfriend, or arrested by the police - is potentially not entirely immune from such moralising either. But again, if anyone really feels a need to do it, they should open a specific thread to do so and not attack you or anyone else, old member or new, directly for specific posts.

I am sure that most members do not come here for moralistic arguments, and such displays are likely to put off far more people than they attract. And what positive purpose does it serve? I don't want to see that here, or see new members attacked for their contributions. This forum can be better than that.

[steve25805 126,021]

Steve, if you recall a certain moderator at Peesearch actually accused me of being the same as a rapist because I dare to look at women peeing in public places. As to the threat of a boyfriend or the police, I have been hunting long enough that I do not have to take unnecessary risks. I have my ways to have to police look at me as a "friendly", I will not go into them but they work really well.

I do not want to get into a "pissing" match with you. We agree on some things, and we have, and will continue, to disagree on others. I have not seen many, if any posts attacking someone for vandalistic peeing. I have seen posts disapproving of it. Apparently in this case, we will have to agree to disagree

Yes, ok. I never meant my last post here to look as combattive as it reads. Part of my problem on the other site I think. I am very forthright, blunt, and direct in arguing for what I believe, but with only the typed word to go on it does come across as overly aggressive and perhaps even rude and was not meant to. In real life I can argue with someone like that with a smile on my face and pausing in the middle to offer to buy them a drink. The underlying friendliness within me often doesn't come across online unless I specifically state it.

I myself, for what it's worth, have no massive moral issues with how you go about enjoying girls peeing. If you were setting up secret cams in the ladies' toilets that would be more questionable, but as you have said yourself, if anyone pees in a place that is open to public view, the possibility of being seen goes with the territory. I was not attacking you for it at all, just demonstrating that some aspects of naughty peeing are potentially not the only aspects of our fetish that could be criticised in this way. As you yourself experienced on another forum from a mod, no less.

The posts I have seen on Peesearch in the past attacking someone have occurred when someone has shown up with a tale about pissing on, for example, some changing room carpet or something like that, obviously with neither the consent nor knowledge and certainly not the approval, of the owner, and which other members of the public want to use. Yes I can fully appreciate the moral questionability of doing that in those circumstances for real. Of course I can. And I wouldn't do it for real, though I might concievably write a fantasy story about it. But I have seen new members who show up with supposedly true personal accounts of such behaviour, and in such cases attacks upon the behaviour occur which are also intrinsically attacks on the individual indulging in it. The one blurs into the other. Invariably the person ends up being personally attacked for her behaviour in a sense, or is made to feel that way.

I do understand the moralistic objections. But I don't think it serves any useful purpose to direct them against specific confessions made by members - especially new ones whom we ought to be welcoming. As with our own fantasies, unless it is something really bad which could also potentially get the site closed down - eg paedophile material - we should leave our consciences at the door and not attack the personal confessions of others. We can all start threads specifically for a moralistic debate which mentions no member or post specifically. There is no need for us to make anyone feel unwelcome or unwanted because of the nature of their confession. And in my case, I enjoy reading them despite any moral questionability. Like I say, I mostly leave my conscience at the door when enjoying what others are into concerning pee.

I know we disagree sometimes, and our politics are entirely different - if we showed up on the same politics forum we'd be at each other something chronic :laugh:. But I am certain that we both respect each other, and like I said, pee forums are primarily about pee and not about arguing with each other. Which is my whole point really. So yeah, let's just agree to differ.

[steve25805 126,021]

Groan. After making my peace with a mod I have tentatively resumed posting on PS again. And within days exactly the kind of thing that puts me off the place rears it's ugly head. As an example of the kind of moral judgementalism that certain individuals are prone to on PS, this next thread is most instructive. Basically, some fairly new member posts a vid in the spam section featuring a woman urinating in public with some old guy deciding to express his disapproval by kicking her very hard. The Op condemns the violence. Suddenly, P155wet decides to make a big moral issue out of it, going on about how the woman's behaviour was so reprehensible that the guy's violence towards her was maybe justified. And the entire thread degenerates into a public attack and defence - trial by pee forum - of yet another aspect of the pee fetish, with the use of violence against those who transgress being excused as justifiable.

Not sure if non-PS members will have access to this thread or not - the PS spam section might not be open to non-members - but here it is for anyone who can access it to see for themselves - http://www.peesearch.net/community/forums/showthread.php?t=56485&page=1&pp=10

Please, Admin, don't allow this kind of anti-pee moral grandstanding to become the norm on this forum. It is sure to put off more people than it attracts. After all, isnt't an interest in, eg, public peeing likely to attract more people to a pee forum than open attacks upon the morality of it?

[Admin 14,788]

Obviously on a forum - this one included - everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's easy for me to understand both perspectives but I do sometimes find it tedious when people with a pee fetish are actually so against some aspects of it. My hope here is that members who are against public peeing comment on it in appropriate threads about morals, rather than turning video/story threads into some kind of argument. There's plenty of different kinds of peeing on this site for everyone to enjoy, but it's important to remember that this site is here for enjoyment, and certainly not to condemn people. Everyone has different views on different matters, and I would never encourage illegal activity, but I also wouldn't ever tolerate abuse for members because they're into a specific part of this fetish.

Anyway, let's please try to keep this thread to feedback and reviews of PeeSearch. Who else here is a member? What has your experience been like? I'm curious if anyone else here uses the site for aspects other than the forum and gallery?

[glad1 2,832]

I thought I'd stir this pot again. It's been so long since I last used one! :wink:

Much as I enjoy Steve's delightful posts on carpet peeing, in real life I'm probably more judging. In fact, I'm what I call a PERP, Person Enjoying Responsible Pissing, you know a good will ambassador for our sport! :)

So, let's save our fun for Steve's universe, where all the girls are naughty and the carpets yellow. But, when we're in its parallel one, perhaps if we're a little more careful where we pee, don't damage property and stay out of sight of those who might be offended, we might become, er, mainstream! :wink:

As a member of both PeeSearch and here, I find each place has its merits. At least for now, this one is a little more up close and personal! :) And, besides the forum and gallery, I've enjoyed the private conversations! :thumbsup:

[MissPiss 1,027]

PeeSearch doesn't allow conversations about farting : ( They think it's scat related.

[steve25805 126,021]

PeeSearch doesn't allow conversations about farting : ( They think it's scat related.

Yes, they are very strict with their rules. I can totally understand the reasoning behind it - especially considering that every country has it's self-appointed prude squad moral guardians, who seek at every turn to use the full force of the law against free sexual expression. All PS is doing is playing safe in order to safeguard the one thing that matters most to it - free discussion about most aspects of peeing - whilst trying to stay off the radar screens of the prude squad moral guardians as much as possible. At times this can seem a bit too restrictive, but I suppose it is easier to follow the rules rigidly than to allow too much moderator discretion. Because that would just open the door to inconsistency and percieved unfairness.

None of this really matters anymore now, though, begause WGP offers us the best of both worlds. I have been able to post here pics that are screenshots taken from pee sites that are banned on PS - probably a third of my pics here and a number of my vids too would be disallowed there. We have also been able to have frank and open discussions here about our first ever sexual experiences or desires, which for all of us occurred well below 18, yet is perfectly normal and natural. On PS such discussions would be banned. This site is therefore a quite a lot looser and less restrictive, but whether this in the future makes it more vulnerable to attack from the self-appointed moral guardians remains to be seen. In the meantime it's great to be able to have somewhere where we can speak openly about stuff that might be against Peesearch's more rigid rules criteria.

[Have A Drink 34]

I haven't been to peesearch in over a year, but here's my review. The place suffers from four major problems: Moderation, lack of content, in-fighting, and the worst page design you've ever seen.

Although Steve dramatically understates his own involvement with the mess at peesearch, participating in down vote wars and making caustic remarks to those who were in disagreement with him, his remarks on moderation are spot on.

Although the stiffness of enforcing the rules reduces spam for sure, it's not really the rules that are the problem. It's their attitude towards members.

The moderators have an arrogant, holier than thou, attitude towards us peasants that are (were) members. Not only that, but they are an extremely cliquish group that makes it such that it does no good to speak to another moderator about the actions of one of their own. This is off-putting to both established members and new members. Who knows how many lurk for a while, see this, and leave. That's probably the reason for the 15 post rule. Even with it, most churn out 15 posts, get access to the gallery, and never post again. Moderation complains about this, but their actions are what makes it happen.

Speaking of the galleries... There's really nothing there worth signing up for. Most of the pictures are the same pictures that have floated around the 'net for years. Same with the videos. Either samples from various websites or useless teaser clips from users to promote their own websites.

Other than the in-fighting and and wank-bait requests from newbies that post once and never come back, there really didn't seem to be much activity in the community part. As I left when there seemed to be a mass exodus of members, I'd guess there's even less now.

The site also has a garish look to it. Tons of flashing banners. Not one, but several. Terrible choice of colors and layout. It truly is an abomination to look at.

That said, there are a couple of outstanding members. Kaleigh writes outstandingly and her personal video clips are wonderful too. Oh, and you can't forget Puddyls (who seems to be here too) either. Tons of pictures and a total cutie to boot.

For the most part, I wouldn't bother. Yes it is free, but you truly are getting what you pay for. My guess is that when it was one of the only places around people used it because it was the only choice. Now there's so many places that are more pleasant. As for the files section... My guess is that most everybody already has seen all the clips there anyways. It's really not worth the hassle of trying to make 15 posts that meet the arbitrary rules that change depending on whose manning the controls that day.

TLDR:

Don't bother.

[steve25805 126,021]

Although Steve dramatically understates his own involvement with the mess at peesearch, participating in down vote wars and making caustic remarks to those who were in disagreement with him.....

LOL, perhaps. Though half the time I was provoked by the caustic remarks of others. I just do it so much better. :biggrin: And oftentimes early on, suggestions intended to be helpful were mistaken for attacks by mods, and I also stumbled upon mods, no less, dissing my forum friends behind their backs. And their criticisms towards my desire for certain things to be explained to me sometimes could be rather unreasonable, like the time when one attacked me for expecting consistency in regards to moderation decisions, like this was a wholly unreasonable expectation. So I got into the habit of going into total combat mode over the slightest little thing, partly because I realised that some mods there had an attitude problem with me and they all seemed to stick together as far as I could see. There was a definite clique there that I realised I wasn't part of and - seeing it done to others - suspected that I myself was possibly being dissed behind my back. So there were underlying thought processes behind the way I reacted.

And yes, I have always debated issues in highly combattive ways - away from the fetish I frequent politics forums where such behaviour is standard and I guess sometimes it carried over.

But yes, I acknowledge that I in consequence went over the top way too easily, making mountains out of molehills, and so on. And I myself became highly provocative in the way I reacted all too often.

That was a long time ago now though, and I have turned over a new leaf and learned from that to have better ways of dealing with things, and the mod with whom I had most difficulties and I have long since patched things up and moved on.

And Peesearch IS still a great forum with many good members. One of it's moderators is actually a friend of mine. And there has been much less of a holier-than-thou, bow-down-in gratitude-for-all-we-do-for-the-forum attitude from the mods there now.

[Have A Drink 34]

I realised that some mods there had an attitude problem with me and they all seemed to stick together as far as I could see.

It wasn't just you. It was any member. They have an attitude towards anyone and all of them stick together. Even if one appeared to be in their clique, they might not be. Lots of behind the back trash-talking, as you've said.

That was a long time ago now though, and I have turned over a new leaf and learned from that to have better ways of dealing with things, and the mod with whom I had most difficulties and I have long since patched things up and moved on.

That does appear to be the case. Hopefully all that happened there stays there. I'd give you a like for this, but don't know how.

[Admin 14,788]

I'd give you a like for this, but don't know how.

Just to clarify, now that you've received 2 post ratings yourself, you can rate other people's posts by putting your cursor over it and clicking the appropriate icon in the bottom right hand corner. Welcome to the site! :)

[steve25805 126,021]

I'd give you a like for this, but don't know how.

The rating system often confuses new members, because until they themselves have recieved at least three positive ratings, they do not have access to the "like" and other ratings icons. When you have recieved sufficient ratings you will notice a number of icons towards the bottom right of each post. You can use these to award positive or negative ratings for that post.

I see Admin beat me to it....lol