9/17/2014 3:59:06 PM: I am going to harp on the profile topic a bit. Recently a few people have approached me whose profiles are well written, clear, and very different from what I am looking for - I don't mind that, I consider myself lucky to have a reasonable amount of interest shown and realise this is not because I am a super-goddess-of-perfect-pulchritude (alright, IF you insist). What I do find a wee bit odd though, is that when I decline on the grounds of quite irreconcilable differences they then reply along the lines of “Oh I didn’t mean that”, or “That is just one aspect of me”.Except of course it isn’t, and trying to use thin end of the wedge tactics will just end up a miserable mistake and waste of everyone’s time. One person frustrated and thwarted and the other grumpy at having to say no all the time.

9/5/2014 3:36:17 PM: You don't need to write war and peace, but FFS stick something in your profile that narrows where in the broad church of BDSM you are located. It will save a great deal of time.

6/7/2010 8:58:08 PM: Pique! Not peek, peak or even piek.I may be a little piqued.

9/7/2009 7:58:12 AM: Time-wasting and human fishingI haven't been on collarme for very long but, in the short time I have been, I have been struck by how many very grumpy profiles there are on here.It isn't very encouraging or inviting to have a furious typeface as a first introduction to a stranger.I am aware that there is some difficulty if you are male and looking for a female play partner. There are probably 15 men for every real, non-pro female, and that is possibly a conservative estimate. So, women get to be choosy. Call it mother nature's little joke or some other unfairness, but it is just the way it is, no more point in railing at it than in railing at rain.The inequality of numbers though, is only part of the problem. I believe that there are at least two other probably more significant issues: how women are attracted to men and the extreme demands and risks of submission.CAVEAT: I am aware that I am generalising hugely, so forgive the broad strokes - I know that not all men or all women are like my archetypes.For the most part, men know pretty instantly if they are sexually attracted to a woman, it is less immediately clear to women that they are attracted to a man. We just aren't wired visually in the same way as you are, chaps. (HK theory number two: this is the same reason why male prostitution to females is not a lucrative business - one of the few places window-shopping lets us down.) Which leads me to what I term 'human-fishing'. I have to have a sense of who I am meeting and the only way I know to do that is to have a lot of conversation and correspondence beforehand. I have, on occasion, met people off the internet without spending much time chatting to them. It has never led to anything beyond that initial meet. In particular, because of how intensely affecting submission is, because of how vulnerable it makes me, the need to know the other person is more important than if I was embarking on a vanilla relationship.I don't consider this process 'time-wasting' because the search is usually interesting and instructive whether it results in flesh-to-flesh or not. Like fishing. Most of the people I talk to will not lead to flesh: I have only had six collaborators in 16 years, though I have talked to hundreds of people. I hope the conversations I had with them were amusing and arousing; entertaining and satisfying for their own sake, rather than a waste of time.If that seems too trying or too unreasonable, then please pass but raging at me doesn't change my mind or make me more more inclined to open anything else to you.