GUIDELINES for Inputting to the WIKI

Too bad that this isn't handled like a typical wiki, with users being able to collaboratively create, edit, link, and organize the content. Wikis are generally designed with the philosophy of making it easy to correct mistakes, rather than making it difficult to make them. Thus, while wikis are very open, they provide a means to verify the validity of recent additions to the body of pages. The most prominent, on almost every wiki (including the one here), is the "Recent Changes" page — a specific list numbering recent edits, or a list of edits made within a given time frame. Granted, the open philosophy of most wikis, allowing anyone to edit content, does not ensure that every editor is well-meaning and vandalism does sometimes occur. Wikis tend to take a soft security approach to the problem of vandalism; making damage easy to undo rather than attempting to prevent damage.

Some wikis require an additional waiting period before gaining access to certain tools. For example, on the English Wikipedia, registered users can only rename pages if their account is at least four days old. Other wikis such as the Portuguese Wikipedia use an editing requirement instead of a time requirement, granting extra tools after the user has made a certain number of edits to prove their trustworthiness and usefulness as an editor. Basically, "closed up" wikis are more secure and reliable but grow slowly, whilst more open wikis grow at a steady rate but result in being an easy target for vandalism.

Many wikis requires the users' real name and a biography of themselves in order to edit, affecting the growth of the wiki but creating an almost "vandalism-free" ambiance. It would be nice if the Aneros wiki could be a little more open for users, since frankly the proposed procedure mentioned in your post seems a bit heavy-handed and not at all conducive to active participation from the community.

bonerowner-

thanks much for your interest in improving the content of the wiki.

we had a lot of discussions about how to manage authoring it.

my response to you is this. we'd love to have you contribute content, corrections etc. can you start out working with the framework we have now? give it a try. if it proves unserviceable, then we'll need to consider alternatives.

the comparison of this wiki with others is not exactly apt because of a few reasons:
- the sexual nature opens risk of nasty posts
- the "editors" (me, rumel, bmayfield) don't have a lot of time, so we won't have the time to police the site.
- we are going for a very high level of professionalism appropriate to a users manual. we are concerned that opening it up will degrade that quality.
- basically, it is not obvious that if we open it up, it will converge on quality rather than devolve into garbage.

darwin

bonerowner,

You’ve got some valid points in your post, some of which were discussed early on in the formation of this WIKI. I think this WIKI is special in many ways and as such needs to have some special rules to protect it from would be vandals. If you’ve done much reading of the posts to the forum, you are well aware that there have been some very disgruntled individuals who would very likely sabotage any part of the web site they possibly could. There have been some posters who have personal agendas for behavior that they might wish to foist upon the rest of us. There have been posters who are just completely incorrect about the “facts” as they know them.
It was in the interest of limiting corruption that the present controlled access was initiated. I think it makes a lot of sense considering the very controversial subject matter we are promulgating here. I have no idea how easy it would be to undo the damage a serious vandal could cause, but I do know that it would be very disheartening to try to re-create the information that is there if it were to be lost or otherwise corrupted. I’m sorry that you feel the present restriction of Edit/Write access to the WIKI is available by request only “seems a bit heavy-handed” but it seems to me a fair way to maintain some minimum level of security while still encouraging members to submit information.

bonerowner,

I'm in total agreement with what Darwin and Rumel have said. As they both have stated, these issues were seriously considered at the beginning when we were in the process of putting the Wiki together. As one who has been hanging around this forum since its inception (and a member since 2003), I can tell you that we have had our share of "vandals" here (fortunately nothing recently). When this has occurred it has usually produced a great amount of disruption and distraction. Thankfully, most of it has been short-lived. Typically the members of this forum have been able to take care of this on their own, through their patience and thoughtful responses. In some instances however, it has required the assistance of the webmaster to "lock out" these individuals.

The thing is, in all cases these people have only had the ability to generate comments and have been unable to effect those posted by others. Ultimately it's that "firewall" if you will, that has always kept things from getting totally out of hand.

Without that constraint, the damage would have been far more widespread. Given that this Wiki is a USER maintained feature with the webmaster being largely out of the loop, dealing with vandal inflicted damage would fall upon us.

In a perfect world, unfettered access would be the way to go. But with a majority in our society who are at best dismissive of anal stimulation and many who are downright hostile about it, an endeavor such as this requires a modicum of oversight.

BF Mayfield

Thanks everyone for the input on this matter. The wiki is something you obviously take very seriously, and it shows. I applaud you for your dedication, and for having authored an amazing resource.

I understand the problem with trolls, spammers and vandals, as I do web development for a living. I have been running internet forums for many years, and am currently the admin of over a dozen forums (mostly all vbulletin, and some phpBB) and other sites.

Frankly, the reason that I brought this up in the first place is because I noticed a few places where I felt that I could contribute or clarify things (as I have done many times on other wikis) and was surprised when I went to edit, and couldn't. I know that I could PM or make a post regarding a correction or an addition, but that seemed rather foreign to me, having worked on many other wikis.

For example, I noticed an area of the wiki that discussed the specific type of plastic that was used in manufacturing, and next to one of the models there was a "???." This matter was discussed during the last chat, so I was going to add the proper information in place of the "???," but was unable to do so. I did notice that one reference to the type of plastic had been recently edited, however I found a different one. It is no big deal, and not vital to the overall information in the wiki, and I would be more likely to make an edit like that than make a post or send a pm to an editor. As you mentioned, you are busy people, and such a trivial correction or addition seems not important enough to even bother you with. I have also noticed a few spelling and grammatical errors (again nothing major) while reading the wiki, and those also seem too trivial to make posts regarding corrections.

You all have valid points, and I now understand more fully your reasoning for placing the rules and restrictions on the wiki. I apologize for making waves and for not trusting you to have made the correct decisions. I simply wanted to help.

It is an amazing wiki, and it obviously is a labor of love. Keep up the great work.

I was concerned to see on visiting the wiki 'This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.'

And for the second time as well? Something to do I think with the fact it promotes a particular product and could be seen as advertising?

The instructions that come with the product are vague, so it's been helpful to read firsthand experiences through the blogs, forum and wiki.

Am I right in thinking the makers of the Aneros are in a position where they can't make claims about their products in case people are unable to achieve intense multiple orgasms with it?

I'm not at all familiar with contributing to wikis and don't know how to weigh in with my comments on the debate.

@Crimsonwolf,

Your recent postings and videos have provided a welcome, invigorating and informative resource for the Aneros community and the general public. You recently commented : And honestly, my friends, with all due respect to all that have come before me, the Aneros wiki, in my opinion, needs to either be revised or scrapped. From it's inception the Aneros WIKI has been both praised and condemned. I agree with you that it is in need of some revision but I wouldn't go so far as to say it needs to be scrapped. The Aneros WIKI is an imperfect document to be sure. Prior to its existence the ability of men to obtain any meaningful, coherent information about the use of these devices for prostate massage was woefully lacking so it was created to help fill that deficit.
It has now been seven years since the Aneros WIKI was first introduced and the intent, as stated by 'BF Mayfield', in the thread THIS WIKI IS FOR YOU is unchanged - This is a work in progress, it will continue to evolve, flourish and grow as a direct result of the input of the community that it is intended to serve. It is our belief that this resource will be of tremendous value to new and experienced users alike. It is our hope that this Wiki will help guide you all on this wondrous journey of self-discovery. I think over that seven year period of time the WIKI has served pretty well but there is always room for improvement.
It is very easy for one to criticize nearly anything but it is an entirely different matter to actually create something of value. For the Aneros WIKI to "...continue to evolve, flourish and grow..." it needs the "... input of the community that it is intended to serve." As one of the co-assemblers of the WIKI I am a bit disappointed we have not seen much input from the community during the intervening years to make the Aneros WIKI more useful, helpful or valuable. There are numerous topic areas which have remained virtually untouched and undiscussed in the WIKI such as bio-energy, awakening of kundalini and chakra activation, psychological ramifications of changed sexual/sensual perceptions, spirituality effects, etc. All members have an open invitation to submit information they believe should be included in the WIKI.
The fact you have taken the time and care to post here shows to me you want to help the men in this community, so... Here's a little challenge for you, would you distill your recent posts down for inclusion in the Aneros WIKI? I would also like to see @neros condense his excellent post about arousal awareness for inclusion in the Aneros WIKI.
The Aneros WIKI is not some sacred document with dogma nor is it codified rulebook to be followed, it is a primer to get men started on their own path to pleasure and enlightenment.
Good Vibes to You ! 

The wiki helped me a great deal. It has to be treated like a warehouse of information, you don't necessarily want everything in there but what you do need is there, you've just got to look through all the aisles and be selective. To suggest scrapping it is a slap in the face to the guys that wrote it.

The Aneros WIKI is not some sacred document with dogma nor is it codified rulebook to be followedBut it has achieved that de-facto status. I've seen posts on the forum over the years where people actually get pretty angry about things that get posted because it's not in line with the Wiki (or their interpretation of it). I've seen the Wiki cited as a source in arguments to prove people wrong. People quoting it like scripture has a tendency to elevate it to that. And so there's a sense that, unless you're in complete agreement with every aspect of the Wiki, then you don't "get" it.
The lack of Wiki updates/changes actually cements its status as a solved
problem and a closed case, at least from my perspective.
As one of the co-assemblers of the WIKI I am a bit disappointed we have not seen much input from the community during the intervening years to make the Aneros WIKI more useful, helpful or valuable.
It's a bit like the Pope coming out and saying he's disappointed people haven't contributed to the Bible.
The fact that Crimsonwolf had to include pre-emptive disclaimers and apologies in his thread, should tell you all you need to know about how tense the environment is around here when it comes to opening your mouth. And it isn't just about the Wiki, there are the personal dogmas on top of that.
So if posting a thread on the forum comes with such tension, imagine how much of a risk it is to stand up and proclaim something worthy of the Wiki. "I think this story about Jesus should be added to the bible". I think it took guts to post that thread, and I found the egg-shell walking he had to do pretty sad.
Fortunately things have settled down in this regard lately, and things are a little more positive and chill, which I think is why we've been able to have great posts from neros and Crimsonwolf.

You guys are the Aneros apostles, you were around in the "before-times" along with the other legendary posters... and there's an air of "We already figured everything out, look at the Wiki. The rest of you can go home". And I'm not saying that's coming from you guys, but the Wiki is held in such high esteem that it's treated as a solved problem by other people. In the end, I think it's up to you guys to pop this bubble and engage people from above. At least until there's momentum, and the Wiki becomes seen as the community document it was intended to be.

But maybe it's just me, I don't know how other people view it, and I feel like I'm breaking the 4th wall by even going here.

@Clenchy,It's great that you have felt free to vent your spleen against the perceived sacredness of the Aneros Wiki but I do feel compelled to spring to the defence of its authors and editors.

I believe it is to their credit that the prime contributors to the Wiki, namely @BFMayfield and @rumel do so often make use of the acronym "IMHO"!

I'm sure it has been mentioned several times in this Forum that the Wiki is NOT intended to be a set of rules but is rather to be thought of as a guide to newbies on where to start. From my own perspective, having bought my first Aneros device, I wouldn't have had a clue where to start or what to expect, had it not been for @rumel's introductory PM to me and the fact that he pointed me specifically to the Wiki.

Having said that, and having read most of it more than once, I found that I was able to put it aside and have, at least for the past three or four years, been instructed more by the contributions made by threads contributed by members of the Aneros General Discussion Forum.

Apologies to @rumel, but I haven't personally attempted to contribute to the Wiki because I simply feel I don't have the wisdom or depth of experience to make a worthwhile contribution.

However, I would love to see versions of the essays written by members such as @Cockadoodle, @neros, @Crimsonwolf and @JMay, to name just a few, be incorporated into the Wiki, but I guess, in the final analysis, it is in the hands of those individuals to decide whether they should or not make such a contribution. How about it fellas?

@Clenchy,It's great that you have felt free to vent your spleen against the perceived sacredness of the Aneros Wiki but I do feel compelled to spring to the defence of its authors and editors.

First of all I'm not attacking the Wiki authors, so you don't have to come to their defence in response to my post. I appreciate the work they've put into the Wiki, and I'm not trying to attack it or anyone involved. Secondly, there's no "spleen venting" happening on my part, I didn't write any of that in anger. It was offered only as a constructive observation and a theory as to why people aren't engaging. But I could be wrong, I'm just throwing it out there. If it is a problem, then maybe it can be fixed.
Apologies to @rumel, but I haven't personally attempted to contribute to the Wiki because I simply feel I don't have the wisdom or depth of experience to make a worthwhile contribution.This was part of my point though, the Wiki is such an intimidatingly important document, and the bar is set so high, that mere mortals consider themselves unworthy of contributing to it. I haven't lifted a finger to contribute to the Wiki for the same reason as you - I'm not a high level guru master. Now what if the rest of the community feels that way too? Is it a problem then?

Maybe part of the solution is to set out more encouraging parameters for how non-gurus can get involved. The first few posts in this thread are very much about what they don't want, and very little about what they do. It's understandable, but it's not that welcoming.

And again, please don't take this as an attack, this is just my way of trying to figure out how we can make things better.

@Clenchy,I take your points entirely.

@Crimsonwolf,

Your recent postings and videos have provided a welcome, invigorating and informative resource for the Aneros community and the general public....The fact you have taken the time and care to post here shows to me you want to help the men in this community, so... Here's a little challenge for you, would you distill your recent posts down for inclusion in the Aneros WIKI? I would also like to see @neros condense his excellent post about arousal awareness for inclusion in the Aneros WIKI.
The Aneros WIKI is not some sacred document with dogma nor is it codified rulebook to be followed, it is a primer to get men started on their own path to pleasure and enlightenment.
Good Vibes to You !

Rumel, it would be my pleasure, and honor, to do so.

I offer my humble alologies to you, and to BMayfield - if I was actually as smart as I'd like to believe I am, I would have taken the time to find out how to submit to the Wiki, or request its revision. I fired from the hip, and I was wrong to do that.

You and the men of this community honor me by reading what I write, and for the praise you have offered - I give you my pledge, I will endeavor to be a voice of reason, to be as classy and honest with everyone as you've been with me.

I thank you, again, sir.

Edited to add: Just wanted to mention, I have removed the remark about the Aneros Wiki from the post. Believe it it or not, I'm grateful for you helping me get my ideas on track - I'm prone to pontification, as you might have noticed. 😉

@Clenchy -

Your point is well taken - part of the reason why I didn't even bother trying to submit to the wiki is the fact that I've only been a part of this community for a very short time. The only reason I made my videos, the only reason I started posting here, and what will keep me doing it, is knowing about the men who have had Aneros toys for YEARS without experiencing what I have.

I'm not a mutant; I know I am not special, and because I know that, I know other men can do what I did. My ability to report on the evaluation of my experience is an advantage, but it does not equal time spent experiencing.

My experience as a coach or teacher gives me the perspective I need to communicate with you the way I do, and I am grateful that @rumel sees value in what I've put out there. He was right to say what he did. I'm well aware, we don't always cover all out bases. 🙂

I agree that the wiki needs refreshing - and I want to be a part of how it evolves. If I can assist in how men first see the Aneros experience, that's exciting...and humbling!

Cheers, Clenchy - and thank you for reading my words!

Be careful not to create a Frankenstein Aneros Dogma.

Everyone is different. Every body is different. Every journey is different. Every orgasm is different.

People should have their own wiki. Everyone. It is difficult enough to make it consistent that way. Imposing a mix of mismatched experiences and ideas on others is doomed to turn bad.

The forum or blogs are perfectly fine to do it.

While I understand what @Clenchy is getting at, I think there has to be someone at the top that has been at it the longest. They need to vet any additions to the Wiki so no contradiction enter it. If the wiki comes from everyone's point of view then it i going to be a shambles for anyone especially a newbie to read and comprehend. I realise it is only maybe two or three peoples point of view but that is enough for a beginner.Anything else could be added in maybe a members additions area so it is easy to find.
The problem is that every tom dick and harry comes in to the forum, uses the aneros and then thinks there a expert. Credibility has to be earned with good postings.
Its either there is a "King of the hill that is open to suggestions" which we already have or a we start voting for a king of the hill now and then.
This is just my opinion as I am no where near as smart or good at writing as others on this forum.
If there is a article written by someone that most people think is fantastic then yes lets add it to the wiki in info form or as a link as long as it is vetted so the wiki stays true.
Of course people are going to use it as scripture to prove someone wrong, thats our only defence against people just typing dribble and expecting everyone to believe it.

Maybe you guys that feel confident enough to wright top notch posts that most people agree with should get together with the first authors and incorporate new improved instructions into the wiki sort of like a committee. It can evolve but with some order to it.

I realise maybe the posts above are not trying to be disrespectful to the the original authors but in reading some of the posts, that is the way it comes across. We are going to jump down your throat as we respect the original authors for getting us to where we are today. They are like family, we will have their back.
Its always hard to type conversations as there is no emotions attached to it. People can get the wrong idea real easy.

@Clenchy, @Pommie, @braveneworld, @Crimsonwolf,

Thank you for responding, I think it is wonderful you guys care and are thinking about this. You all are every bit as smart as I, the only difference is (perhaps) our time of experience with these devices and I don't think that the time lapse is important. What is important is what you have already learned.

@Canacan,Everyone is different. Every body is different. Every journey is different. Every orgasm is different.TRUE, and ultimately every man does, in essence, create his own WIKI, as he experiments and learns but everyone needs a starting point. The Aneros WIKI is meant to be that starting point of introductory information, the reassuring hand to provide support for the individual journey each of us has embarked upon. Mismatched experiences and ideas are bound to occur and making note of the paradoxes within each man's journey is part of the message as well. I don't think one's journey "... is doomed to turn bad." as long as one accepts and understands that his journey is unique.

hi guys,

i, like rumel and bf mayfield, was one of the three authors of the wiki. i haven't paid attention to it for years. rumel is fantastic in everything he does, and his continued interest in the wiki is just one example.

i agree it would great for guys to write articles for inclusion in the wiki. nero and crimsonwolf and others have done some really great work in the last year or so.

rumel, i wonder if we should state clearly on the wiki, if it is not already there, that this wiki is not authoritative, just the accumulated wisdom of some aneros users.

like canacan says: there is a huge diversity in approaches and responses to the aneros.

darwin

Maybe the wiki should provide more than one absolute explanation since we don't have a proven theory of how the aneros works and what happens during the journey. I think that's the main problem here. Just my two (very limited) two cents.

I maintain the women to page should be deleted until it undergoes a major revision as i now that I've seen the guidelines it is a major contradiction if not violation of them.

It is very easy for one to criticize nearly anything but it is an entirely different matter to actually create something of value. For the Aneros WIKI to "...continue to evolve, flourish and grow..." it needs the "... input of the community that it is intended to serve."

@darwin,

I added the following two paragraphs to the Main page of the WIKI :

Much of the information contained herein is anecdotal in nature having been obtained from the distillation of hundreds of posts by numerous users over the years. Advice and procedures suggested herein are not intended to be rules or absolutely definitive but are a consensus of generally accepted practices and knowledge which have been verified to be effective for many men. It is important to note these are not uniformly effective as the diversity of each man's life makes it impossible to establish a particular formula for orgasmic success utilizing Aneros prostate massagers. Each persons experience with these devices is unique in respect to their physical, emotional and spiritual approach and responses.

This wiki is intended to provide a very basic understanding and learning about the usage of Aneros devices, a primer of sorts. It is not purporting to be a final, authoritative source of information regarding prostate massage or orgasmic processes and teachings. Each user is encouraged to use this information as a starting point for their own experimentation, this wiki is more like a compass than a map, it is a tool to help you navigate your own path to any one of multiple destinations in your sensual environment.
Good Vibes to You !

Maybe it would also help to mention what we consider the best parts of the WIKI as it stands now?

I appreciate it's simplicity. It will be a challenge to add more without reaching information overload.

I read everything that is written here, but do not convey my thoughts as well as some others. So...I will not be submitting anything to the WIKI. I am merely stating my concern.

As we grow and evolve, we seek more information. Could more links be added to some of the brilliant posts that have been made lately instead of a complete overhaul?

As I try to put myself in a newbies shoes, the WIKI is something easy to read and not intimidating. It is something that is quick to check back to and find helpful information.

I am all in favour of an update, I would just like it to remain a simplified version of all knowlegeable sources available.

I agree with @Canacan and @G-Force on this one.

The Aneros Wiki should offer simple, straightforward information on the Aneros as the Wiki presently does.

But I move that treatises @nero's Myth of Super Orgasm and @Crimsonwolf's The Truth Behind How to Re-wire, and also other notable treatises be posted as pinned closed Announcement posts similar to Brian Mayfield's treatises above in the Forum.

Thom./BigGlansDC

@imp if your comment was to say i am simply criticizing the wiki with out contributing...that is not the case. i have written so much on the female aspect of this that it is uncanny. when asked what i would like to contribute by one of the members here i told him....he did nothing because of how he feels about me. so that is not the case at all. now if your message was not to convey that...disregard this one.

Hello, all.

Rumel's recent addition of two introductory paragraphs was appropriate. Now it is totally clear that the Wiki is "...more like a compass than a map."

The Wiki authors have always been open to making modifications to it as needed. I was pleased to see my description of the "Do Nothing" method included a few years ago. Any Forum member who has an idea of something that should be added or modified should not hesitate to contact Rumel.

Cheers,

Dave

@ten_s_nut I hate to say this...but I have not experienced what you describe. i only wish was you describe was universal. maybe one day it will be.

Hello, devajones.

Perhaps you could post your proposed mod or addition to the Wiki in this thread and get feedback? I'd like to read what you have in mind and I bet other Forum members would as well.

Cheers,

Dave