</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Diamonzzz,


WHO????????!!

What are you an owl??? No, that is up to them to disclose that information--- </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Alright!! I want WHOever it is to come forward this instant!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

It's Dan-O and Slappy! I knew it!!!!!
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
DZZZ

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by star*fish:
[QB] greengrass,

aeri was struck by the comments on WF's thread and asks this question:

[QUOTE] I guess my question is---how many of you have made such a pact and does it extend to ALL board members or just members of the opposite sex?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think it's a legitimate question and not an attack....so I'm not sure where you are coming from?

Greengrass: You don't have to replay too many of Aeri's posts slewn WFLOWER's way recently to see where it's coming from. She has a certain "charm" about her style of disagreeing, or all too often, taking things personally.

Starfish:
Yes, of course it is WF's choice to make this decision for HER marriage. But I see no reason why it shouldn't raise questions for others as it has aeri. And what's with the question about being a "man"???

Greengrass reply: The whole point here is who is truly behind a screen name here on the Web? If someone chooses not to go "off-line" with a stranger, it's their perogative. So Aeri has a great little thread started here, and I agree it's a good topic.

One question though: What if this thread's title was:
"Socializing with MB Members....(insert your name here everyone on MB reading this) Isn't the title just a bit disrespectful, or is it just me?


Edited to add: It's nice to see WFLOWER is classy enough to not stoop to "victim status" by engaging back.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: greengrass ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:


I totally respect WFLOWER in her decision. She POJA'd the issue and she's sticking with it. That's great. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I know you do, although using WFLOWER as an example is what I think set some people off, thinking it was a personal attack. I know it was not.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think you misunderstood Diamonzz...I can see her side of the story as well. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I don't think I did. One can't say that they respect my boundies in one sentence and then assume to be an exception in the next.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You may have missed the point--I was only curious to know who has this same arrangement. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Your point is very clear.

ba109

Personally, I would trust my spouse contacting ANYONE on the board if he HADN'T had an EA and wasn't prone to one.
There is that word again, "prone".

what would be the point in trying to establish an EA with someone?
So he previously set out to intentionally have an Emotional Affair?

Most affairs start don't start out with, "I'm going to have an affair" or "my spouse doesn't love me, who can I turn to for comfort?".
Harley says don't get into situations where affairs start and you won't get into affairs.

WFLOWER should stick to her POJA, unless she or her H are no longer enthusiastic about it. Then, they need to come to a new POJA. There is nothing wrong with this.

Now, I do know that I made suggestions to WFLOWER to see if that is something she was willing to do, or if they could POJA. If not, fine. No big deal.

Her marriage and POJA are the most important thing here. Period. More important than emails, aquaintances, participation in the boards, etc.

We are all prone to affairs, particularly so when our needs are not being met. There are more things than affairs that can adversely affect your relationships. That includes participating on the boards or talking on email if your spouse is not enthusiastic.

It is WFLOWER (in this example) and her H's opinions and boundaries that matter in this.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: *Takola* ]</small>

Wrong thread.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 06:57 PM: Message edited by: Imi_na'auao ]</small>

Uh---I think you're posting to the wrong thread.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by nelly:
<strong> Dan-O,
"If she wants to pursue my in-box, she can" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

did you set me up, for that one?

i was never a big roll, pinch twist and inhaler....( infact, i was more of a just hand it to me or blow it into my mouth kinda gal infact, i was more of a just hand it to me or blow it into my mouth kinda gal )......but,the image sure brings back some memmories.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">such appropriate banter for a marriage building board nelly.

a man never would have gotten away with this.

--moon

Well, I sure don't have a problem with people emailing me. My address is in my signature line. I do have respect for anyone that sets a personal limit and sticks with it.

well, i'll tell you what moon.....you delete it and i'll delete mine.

i agree, it was inappropriate and i posted w/o thinking.
i apologize.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by nelly:
<strong> Dan-O,
"If she wants to pursue my in-box, she can" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

did you set me up, for that one?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I believe the word I used was peruse.
per-ooz: vt - to read attentively; to examine in detail.

To pursue an in-box, between husband & wife, is something else altogether. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by moonstruck:
<strong>such appropriate banter for a marriage building board </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Appropriate? Maybe, maybe not. If such talk offends, then I apologize. Obviously, we grew up in different neighborhoods.

Heck, a lot of the kids I grew up with, who are now 40-ish, are probably still twisting 'em up. I gave it up under a fair amount of pressure from Mrs. O and from the corporate random testing that became a fact of life in the late 80s & early 90s.

Some days, I still kinda miss it.

Moon,
i deleted it.

sometimes, i get a little too 'comfortable' on the board.
but, i don't understand the comment that a man would never have gotten away w/ it......can you explain what you meant by that?

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: nelly ]</small>

dan-o--

nah, same age, same neighborhood, different lifestyle choices.

--moon

Permit me to play "let's all get along n the sandbox" Nelly, Dan-O and Moon but I "think"
I see a real misunderstanding.

I "think" moon took your comment about smoking the dubie as "sexual" and I think Dan-O missed that and was commenting that speaking about smoking pot was not something socially unacceptable in his neck of the woods.

And Moon... I think you missed the fact that BOTH missed that one.....

Ok ..... so did that explain things a little better or did I totally miss it too???????????


<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

DZZZ

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

I have mixed emotions on this one. I have worked on charity projects involving people over the net. There were some quality people and there were some in need of a sleeveless jacket and a padded apartment if you get my drift.

I am guarded when it comes to the net.

That being said the work place is far and away the number one breeding ground for affairs.

Nearly 2 out of 3 wayward spouses either worked with or met their affair partner in the work place according to Shirley Glass.

The internet is getting alot of press because of dating websites, porn sites and various adult chatrooms.

But the workplace still is the largest concern for couples wanting to affair proof their marriages.

So while I would urge caution on the net I would not place it higher up on my concerns than work related activities.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">BA .. I totally agree with you .. I saw the irony of it myself... </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">D,

I'm glad that you recognized the contradiction. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> I do like your "absolutes".

ba109

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm glad that you recognized the contradiction </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Thanks for acknowledging it Ba. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

In my lifetime I have had to eat crow so many times it almost tastes good now!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

DZZZ