# CWI



## Unsure in Seattle

I propose that CWI be split into two sections; one for betrayed spouses and the support thereof and one for the support of wandering spouses and the support thereof with strict moderation of each to ensure that the posts end up at the proper places. My feeling is that there has been too much trolling in that regard (wayward spouses expecting justifaction or "help" in a place where they aren't going to get it) of late.


----------



## Amplexor

Thanks, there is an ongoing thread in the mod section discussing that exact concept. We have not hashed it out yet.


----------



## Almostrecovered

can I have access to this mod section?


----------



## Unsure in Seattle

Amplexor said:


> Thanks, there is an ongoing thread in the mod section discussing that exact concept. We have not hashed it out yet.


Yeah; I realize it's perhaps not as easy as I laid out. It sort of went bad at the relationship forum I used to be a member of before I came here. My hope is that with better moderation and a better caliber of user here, that the same problems wouldn't take hold.


----------



## costa200

I think dividing it would create a sub-forum of targets. It would be a place where everyone would be expecting to go and dish out punishment on cheaters. I can only see the trolling on that section increase dramatically and it will be a mod's nightmare. Unless there was a way to severely limit access to that particular sub-forum it would just the a pain to run.


----------



## larry.gray

And then you expect BS to stay away? Refuse to let them in? I guess one option would be to ban certain posters from only that forum.

The fact is that well behaved BS are invaluable to a WS.


----------



## Coffee Amore

A popular infidelity forum has the option for the WS to post a big red stop sign on the thread title. This tells the other posters that only other WS or BS who are healed can post on the thread.


----------



## Shaggy

Coffee Amore said:


> A popular infidelity forum has the option for the WS to post a big red stop sign on the thread title. This tells the other posters that only other WS or BS who are healed can post on the thread.


I always interpret the stop sign to say "I am happy cheater, please don't waste my time telling me I'm in the wrong, because I know I'm not...I'm in love."


----------



## Hope1964

This would be fine as long as we don't start getting WS's on there asking for advice of how to keep cheating. There should be a disclaimer that the only WS's we want to hear from are those who want to reconcile and stop cheating.

And a disclaimer in the BS section that any BS's who don't believe anyone should reconcile keep it to themselves too.

AR you don't want to have access to the mod section. You'd see what they really think about you then


----------



## Almostrecovered

I demand complete transparency even if it means hearing the harsh truth


----------



## Amplexor

Hope1964 said:


> This would be fine as long as we don't start getting WS's on there asking for advice of how to keep cheating.


We've had those here before. They don't survive for very long.


----------



## Hope1964

Amplexor said:


> We've had those here before. They don't survive for very long.


True, but they take some of us with them sometimes.

If there was a disclaimer we could just report them and not have to beat them up.


----------



## Gaia

I think its just fine as it is. After all bs's are NOT the only ones who are coping with infidelity, the ws is as well and as we have seen as of late... so are the ap's who seem to want to better themselves. I believe the bs's need to realize this and some need to drop the sense of entitlement. That's just my opinion though... since I do think that seeing it from all sides is very beneficial.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## the guy

I think that it sould stay as is. I have seen a few waywards turn a corner by hearing from the betrayed.

I haven't been here that long but there is a good thing go on here so why change it.

Plus who am going to beat up if you take all the cheaters and but them in there own subforum. LOL


----------



## larry.gray

Amplexor said:


> We've had those here before. They don't survive for very long.


Yes, but that is because CWI is loaded with BS who won't let it. If the forum doesn't allow many of the BS in, they just might last longer.


----------



## Ikaika

larry.gray said:


> And then you expect BS to stay away? Refuse to let them in? I guess one option would be to ban certain posters from only that forum.
> 
> The fact is that well behaved BS are invaluable to a WS.


The reverse is also the case.


----------



## larry.gray

drerio said:


> The reverse is also the case.


I fully agree. But we don't often have WS beating people up. 

The problem is BS who come here and pile on remorseful WS poster because they will at least listen and understand in a way that the BS poster didn't get out of their own WS.


----------



## Ikaika

I understand the need to keep out trolling (not sure that is possible regardless of how one parses it out)... So would the division make it less or more threatening to would be posters? It may very well be that the majority of WS post seeking to find justification (none will find it from me, as I was a WS), but the chance stands that 1 out of the 100 finds possible redemption. My input would be to make it the least threatening environment. Let the gladiator enter the lions den, through shiny gates... it will be his/her to decide how to venture forward. It will also be ours to throw out the imposters.


----------



## Ikaika

larry.gray said:


> I fully agree. But we don't often have WS beating people up.
> 
> The problem is BS who come here and pile on remorseful WS poster because they will at least listen and understand in a way that the BS poster didn't get out of their own WS.


I do...


----------



## Ikaika

So, just a simple suggestion about CWI:

From the time of post to say about the 5th page, things can become fluid, however it appears that about the 6th page of most of these (if the OP is still engaged) you begin to see an emergence where a core group of posters have some vested interest in the both the topic and the OP. 

Normally when a new poster comes in and especially if it is about the 10th page and the OP is still engaged, most new posters have not taken the time to really engage in conversation and often can have less than helpful comments. 

So not sure if there is a programmable way to alert a Moderator at the point of say the 6th or 7th page so as to ask the OP if they would like to take the conversation private with those who have the most vested interest.


----------



## Coffee Amore

drerio said:


> .
> 
> So not sure if there is a programmable way to alert a Moderator at the point of say the 6th or 7th page so as to ask the OP if they would like to take the conversation private with those who have the most vested interest.


But if the conversation is taken private wouldn't that defeat the whole point of a message board like this? Others who are in the same situation won't benefit if the discussion is hidden. For every OP who comes out of lurkdom to post, I'm sure there are several more reading and learning.


----------



## Ikaika

Coffee Amore said:


> But if the conversation is taken private wouldn't that defeat the whole point of a message board like this? Others who are in the same situation won't benefit if the discussion is hidden. For every OP who comes out of lurkdom to post, I'm sure there are several more reading and learning.


Point understood


----------



## cledus_snow

i say the board should stay as is, then you don't have two separate camps. 

i think larry brought up a good point. who do you let in? who would you ban? i think members/posters/contributers- whatever you wish to call us- should have "free flow" of movement throughout the boards. 


to say this board is "intolerant" of a WS's plight is not accurate. there have been plenty of WS who have stuck around and become outstanding forum contributers. 

i mean seriously, look how may were duped with *allybabe*'s Academy Award performance. she was able to do this because people believed in her.....they _accepted_ her- a WS!

intolerant.....i think not.


----------

