Those who read ONLINE or IN PERSON - Parameters

CosmicBeing

I don't think it is "punitive exclusion" (your words) to decide who and what to read on. Many readers have finely drawn bottom lines, and I don't think that makes them "punitive". I guess it is a difference in opinion, but I don't think it is wrong or prejudiced or punitive for a reader to define their perimeters/preferences. If you don't like what a reader is asking for, then go find a different reader. In the end, it is no judgement on either you, or the reader in question :)

I agree.

If the sitter doesn't want to respect someone's boundaries. Don't deal with them/waste ones money.

preferences/perimeters is just another form of a boundary. We all have them that is why we have the word 'no' in our language.

There are many readers who only specialize in certain topics of readings. I've seen readers who only specialize in love/romances, past lives, finances, counseling, predictive, career, etc.

Just have to find the reader that aligns best with what self is looking for.
  • reads in a certain style customer likes/accept.
  • communicate in the manner acceptable to the sitter/customer.
  • reads the topic sitter/customer is looking to investigate.
That is the reader to invest time/money into.

Took me a long time to find the right professional reader for me.

So no, I do not see it as 'punitive exclusion.' It is respecting the reader's comforts. Reader should be allowed to not get involved in something uncomfortable for him/herself.
 

Barleywine

I like more online reading anyway that face to face. I feel for the sitter they can trust I am not cold-reading them plus I can avoid awkward emotional situations.

"Cold-reading" is an interesting subject; it seems to mean something entirely different now than in the past. It used to mean reading with zero prior knowledge or information, but now it implies trying to leach revealing clues out of the querent's behavior or demeanor independent of what the cards show, to make it look like the reader is prescient. Personally, it has never been a problem for me in face-to-face reading. I focus on the cards and don't pay very much attention to the querent's mannerisms or appearance, and I don't ask leading questions unrelated to what I see in the cards. As far as awkward emotional moments, I trust my style to soothe those before they really get going.

For me, reading in person is what tarot was historically all about, and I still feel that way. There is no "buffer," nothing to hide behind, and no need to over-use intuition when the querent is right there to provide corrective input. I see it as a "win-win" situation, a "mutual voyage of discovery."

Of course, ground rules have more immediacy in a "live" setting where the reader might get caught flat-footed with something unexpected or out-of-bounds, and they can be challenging to enforce when a needy querent is sitting there with a pleading look. Unless the boundaries are stated bluntly right up front (which might take some of the "magic" out of the occasion), one must learn to hedge with delicacy. I limit my introductory caveats to clarifying that I'm not a psychic nor a certified counselor, health-care professional, lawyer or financial analyst, just an interpreter to assist with self-understanding and empowerment via the cards. The "just for fun" disclaimer is legally workable, but to my mind it can make sitters question the reader's capabilities or self-confidence. Unfortunately, the only other way to make that point is even more legalistic: the stuffy "no expressed or implied claims of suitability for any particular purpose" stuff.
 

CosmicBeing

"Cold-reading" is an interesting subject; it seems to mean something entirely different now than in the past. It used to mean reading with zero prior knowledge or information, but now it implies trying to leach revealing clues out of the querent's behavior or demeanor independent of what the cards show, to make it look like the reader is prescient. Personally, it has never been a problem for me in face-to-face reading. I focus on the cards and don't pay very much attention to the querent's mannerisms or appearance, and I don't ask leading questions unrelated to what I see in the cards. As far as awkward emotional moments, I trust my style to soothe those before they really get going.

For me, reading in person is what tarot was historically all about, and I still feel that way. There is no "buffer," nothing to hide behind, and no need to over-use intuition when the querent is right there to provide corrective input. I see it as a "win-win" situation, a "mutual voyage of discovery."

Of course, ground rules have more immediacy in a "live" setting where the reader might get caught flat-footed with something unexpected or out-of-bounds, and they can be challenging to enforce when a needy querent is sitting there with a pleading look. Unless the boundaries are stated bluntly right up front (which might take some of the "magic" out of the occasion), one must learn to hedge with delicacy. I limit my introductory caveats to clarifying that I'm not a psychic nor a certified counselor, health-care professional, lawyer or financial analyst, just an interpreter to assist with self-understanding and empowerment via the cards. The "just for fun" disclaimer is legally workable, but to my mind it can make sitters question the reader's capabilities or self-confidence. Unfortunately, the only other way to make that point is even more legalistic: the stuffy "no expressed or implied claims of suitability for any particular purpose" stuff.

Psychic reading laws are a bit more tough in my state.

I am also not a professional counselor...so i dont feel like i be the best at dealing with someone's strong emotions. I don't even think counseling is an innate skill of mine.

I did a few face to face reading. My main issue with face to face is the energies are a bit too strong for me. Idk if it is just I naturally poop at the whole emotional interaction or if it just overload for my energetic body.

Maybe as I continue to grow as a person...i could become the old lady with a cane and tea leaves. (Which would be AWESOME!)

I never knew cold-reading once meant that.

For me I love online reading people.

I am more into predictive work than any other type of divinational work.

I do this more because I enjoy learning divination...you end up learning a lot about culture in the process. This is still just a hobby.
 

celticnoodle

I refuse to do love readings. The last thing I ever want to do is to tell a client their significant other is cheating! I'd have to be the person they were cheating with to verify that one! :-D

I really dislike love readings myself, for this reason as well as the majority of the "love readings" are from love sick people who are so stuck on their "ex" and I get tired of the "Is he/she thinking of me?" "is he/she in a relationship now?" "will he/she leave their spouse?" :rolleyes: But, pretty much most of the women who are not married (and a few who are) are only interested in that topic. At the store, I couldn't turn them away and quite frankly, I don't turn them away now when they come to me. The worse customes are those who keep every reading they ever got and compare them on this one partiular "lover" they are so hooked on. I tell them, "I read the cards that you pull. I have no control over what was already told to you, and things change as well." But, I do really dislike doing love readings too.

I do not do yes or no questions. I help a client figure out how to ask a question that I feel I can answer with the cards.
ditto.

I do health readings on occasion as I am an intuitive healer trained in multiple energy healing techniques. I make sure my clients know that I am not a doctor nor do I have any medical training.
this is a delicate issue. I will do a health reading a wee bit--but not to try and diagnose anything as I am not a trained medical person. However, as an empath and psychic, I often pick up their health issues and I am one who thinks it is important to give all information I give to my customer. Its what they are paying for.

I generally follow the Code of Ethics set by the ATA, which is pretty good set of rules. It protects you and your clients.

I also refuse to read for anyone that's been drinking. I find few things as annoying as a drunk person. I won't read regarding anything that could possibly be illegal. And I won't read for anyone under 18, unless their parent or guardian gives me permission in person.
I agree with you too, RT. It is important to not read for anyone under 18, I think. I do so IF the parent is there and agrees. After all, my mother began taking us kids for readings from the time we were 13 or 14 yoa, I think and I took my daughter too, from the time she was about 15 or 16, I think. (now I do all her readings for the most part). One time, I read for my 17 yr old niece and my sister told me to go ahead and read & she refused to sit there w/her. Naturally, it was about her bf, and I saw a breakup there. I had to be honest and I told her as gently as I could--but the Niagra Falls occurred and I told my sister I would NEVER read for her again w/o the sis sitting RIGHT there. (all happened exactly as I read, but I have never read for her again).

I One thing I don't do is predict death or even its remote possibility (although discussing the potential for accidents or physical trauma is certainly within reason).
I have seen death in card readings. This is another very delicate situation. I only tell what I see (& delicately) if I know the customer or its family/very close friend) that there "may" be a death in their circle. After all, no one really knows if a death is definite. This is another one that I dread seeing and need to give the information about it....
 

celticnoodle

My rules are pretty simple...
yes, I think all these are very wise rules, CB. Good for you! :thumbsup:
I like more online reading anyway that face to face. I feel for the sitter they can trust I am not cold-reading them plus I can avoid awkward emotional situations.
very true and I agree. I much prefer online reading.

I don't think it is "punitive exclusion" (your words) to decide who and what to read on. Many readers have finely drawn bottom lines, and I don't think that makes them "punitive". I guess it is a difference in opinion, but I don't think it is wrong or prejudiced or punitive for a reader to define their perimeters/preferences. If you don't like what a reader is asking for, then go find a different reader. In the end, it is no judgement on either you, or the reader in question :)
:thumbsup: I agree, Padma.
 

greatdane

It's nice to see how other readers may draw a line

or if and when they do. I do what I am comfortable with and I know by law some things one must be careful with anyway.

But I think it's always good to let someone know your thoughts about reading or if there is something you just don't read on. I think it's only fair. I wouldn't want to go to a reader I didn't know anything about, what they did or didn't want to read on.

It saves time and I think it's important for someone seeking a reader to be able to choose and how do you unless you know something about them? If you don't know someone who has been to them, it's by the reader telling you about themselves and how they read or the sitter asking.
 

celticnoodle

or if and when they do. I do what I am comfortable with and I know by law some things one must be careful with anyway.

well, GD, first of all you should always do what YOU are comfortable with doing. You are offering a service, and so you need to be comfortable with how you carry it out. Its up to the customer to determine if they are also comfortable with it or not. If not--they are free to go elsewhere. simple as that.

But I think it's always good to let someone know your thoughts about reading or if there is something you just don't read on. I think it's only fair. I wouldn't want to go to a reader I didn't know anything about, what they did or didn't want to read on.

It saves time and I think it's important for someone seeking a reader to be able to choose and how do you unless you know something about them? If you don't know someone who has been to them, it's by the reader telling you about themselves and how they read or the sitter asking.

I agree with you, 100%! :)

good thread too, btw.
 

Village Witch

I also refuse to read for anyone that's been drinking. I find few things as annoying as a drunk person. .... And I won't read for anyone under 18, unless their parent or guardian gives me permission in person.

I once read at a Halloween party as I dressed as gypsy. I had a blast. I know folks had been drinking but no one seemed intoxicated. I did not drink at the party knowing I was going to read. I have had a few folks in a bar the hubby and I like haunt ask for readings. One person was very drunk and wouldn't stop begging me to read for her. I ended up having to leave. No drunks!

I never thought of the under 18 issue. Thanks for bringing that up. I have done readings for the hubby's grandchildren with their mother's permission. It wasn't because of their age but because of their religious upbringing.

Most of my readings are GT's as I use them to break the ice with a client when doing a psychic/medium reading.
 

greatdane

It's really interesting reading about all your experiences

No matter how we read, what we wish to read on, may all respect our right to read how we read. And for those who don't respect our rules, how we read, well, there are a lot of readers out there they are free to go to.
 

CosmicBeing

No matter how we read, what we wish to read on, may all respect our right to read how we read. And for those who don't respect our rules, how we read, well, there are a lot of readers out there they are free to go to.

I am actually coming to the point of not really wanting to do readings anymore.