Protocol?

[Ozme52]

Now Oz- you've always come across as someone who listens to the other side of an argument & usually talks sense. Allow me to clarify my previous post.




Now, Amber is meeting someone who identifies as a Dom- someone who has never dommed her from what I can gather from her original post. From what you're saying, all subs should defer to any guy who says 'I'm a Dom?'

So if I come on this forum & say I'm 'Regent Tojo' does that mean that when I met Aussiegirl, she should have addressed me as such?

My point is that until a Dom proves that he deserves respect- in person, they're just a guy who says 'I'm a Dom.'

Well, that's part of the problem with the language. I wrote "formal name" and you apparently thought I meant "entitlement".

But you don't call your boss (my example) "Bob" unless he invited you to do so. You use terms like Mr. Bosses-name, or sir. Likewise, if your name is Regent Tojo, then that may well be the best thing to call you... certainly not "master" or "lord" which are "protocol" forms of address. If you invite her to call you Tojo, or master for that matter, she still has the option to decline and address you formally, I guess in this case, as Regent Tojo.

As far as deserving respect is concerned, everyone deserves a modicum of respect, (dom, sub, or vanilla,) until they prove they don't deserve it. I've always found that to be a better approach to dealing with people. And it appears to me, so does amber, as she was concerned about protocol.

Perhaps my explanation was too brief.