This was a most unusual autumn day in my area of Michigan. The temperature dipped down to 32 degrees Fahrenheit (0 Celsius) in the wee hours of the morning today, October 26. When I began my day at approximately 8am, the temperature was 41. It was not sunny today, in fact all afternoon it looked like it might rain and at about 6pm, it finally rained. What's so odd is that it has continued to rain throughout the evening and the temperature has also continued to creep up. I know that for some, 53 degrees doesn't sound good but at 10:33pm, it is now warmer than it was earlier in the day. At it's not cold enough that it's snowing! Woo hoo!
We had a nice warm 66 degree day today in NJ.It's raining now and 52 degrees.It will rain all day tomorrow. The cold weather will be upon us next week.
Yes, I know about that rain from watching the Michigan-Norte Dame football game. Poured through the game, few if any of that immense crowd departed early. Great win for the Wolverines!
And while I am on the subject of member ratings...... it would appear that admin has taken away the ability for members to see/read (Why?) you were blacklisted by membership. That will kinda take away some of the pleasure that site "whack jobs" have when they change up their reasons from time to time (based on their trolling) OR when they think that they are providing other members with a Public Service Announcement with inflated and often inaccurate (aka, lies) information.
The adjustment is good. Bottom line, you still have the same number of blacklists and if a (Why?) is being used sane people, it gives YOU a glimpse of their reasoning.
Thank you, admin. --------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
Dang! I just posted this and BAM! I can read the (Why?)'s again.
Blacklist is a joke,I can't view pages of people that ban me,they have internet pics,I can't report them....
Also people could use my pics on their pages and I would not be able to do anything about it cuz I can't see the page...
So now the fakes just ban you cuz they know you cannot do anything about them....
It's what I've been saying all along. Banning only helps the obnoxious. Someone like Freddy is all over the site, ragging me and I can't see it. Meanwhile, everyone gets to see bias info about me. I don't know if this is possible but, blocking should be a two part option. Only the person that blocks someone should be the one that can't see the blocked member. The blocked member should be able to see what that member's actions are. Just see and watch only.
Yes, members can block members for some really asinine reasons and you are absolutely correct, those members could be using your image on their page without your knowledge or consent. I know that to be true, it has happened to me.
I will use this platform to segue into something similar, I've noticed a number of quality photos on the SYD Popular page, the pictures I suspect, are commercial pictures and posted by a member who has continually posted internet pictures and also has at least one picture in his gallery that is property of another member. What is interesting is when I clicked on the image to view the image closer, I receive the message that the posting member does NOT permit invisible members to view his pictures. I've noticed that when I am logged out and signing back in, the pictures on the Popular page can be different. I suspect that the person that has made their picture and gallery unavailable to invisible members has also made his picture invisible and unavailable to view to potential new members. It is very possible that the protection that this member was afforded with admin's tweak in the system will permit him to be 100% UNTOUCHABLE. How can a potential new member alert admin if their own picture is made invisible to them? Example, some time ago, CountryCouple54 posted a link to a website where their image was used without their permission. They found their image because it was visible. How would it be possible to find or determine whether your image is being used on this site if admin has added an extra layer of protection for the fakes and internet thieves?
I discovered this new form of blocking approximately 1 week ago and discussed it with another member. I'm sure I wrote about it in the Forum however there was no response from admin.
It was not meant for fakes, it was asked by real members who are afraid of being stalked and want to know who sees their profile. They actually asked to reveal invisible members who visit their profile but since it would defeat the purpose of invisibility I refused and then was asked for the block.
But it's a premium feature, fakes are mostly not paid accounts so they can't use it.
Really, REAL member(s) that are concerned about being stalked? The member that I suspect that I am unable to view their pictures is uploading primarily internet pictures and was already deleted because he had posted picture(s) of other member(s) in his gallery. When he returned, he returned with a new name and went premium paid and full speed ahead using internet pics. I understand that you will be lenient with premium paid members, but to make this person's pictures invisible to nonmembers and only so big and unreportable to non members is real protection.
I believe I recall you on a previous occasion saying publicly or privately this about fakes. There is a place for them here because there is a desire for members to have their needs met (something like that or that was my takeaway from it). The member might be REAL but with all of his needs it might be best for him to reconsider being active at this website with all his concerns of privacy.
Have you really looked at the Popular page? My opinion, it is more like a fantasy page! This might be the opportune time to consider having a category for member's favorite internet pictures and/or Photoshop'd pictures.
You are not making much sense. It was always possible to upload pics in "for members only" mode or "for friends only" mode. If someone wants to upload obvious internet pics for a very small bunch or morons who think they are real and he pays for it - I don't really see a problem.
Thank you for your response but I believe that the site has more than a "small bunch of morons" as membership. The morons are in epidemic proportion here as seen on the Popular page. Thanks again.
Unless admin changed that aspect of blacklisting, there was no need to unblock a member to change your (Why?). On your page, there is the area that shows you who you have blacklisted and your reason. All you needed to do was update your reason ther.
As far as a 48 hour "cooling off" period, if that's what you found, it must be a new feature based on a request received by admin.
Yes, I could remove my invisibility to visit his page. But I don't because that I suspect I would see an significant amount of inconsistency in appendages which could then be traced back to various internet websites.
My invisibility was a feature that I received when I bought into a premium paid membership many years ago. Now my invisibility can no longer be because member(s) who fear being stalked have an anti invisibility antidote added to insure their privacy is being honored.
Your question was "Is it bad?" I'm sure that if you ask the member(s) who requested this feature, they will say; HECKY NO!
I guess there's more than one way to use it. I use mine to shield me when I want to chat with another member without letting the rest of the site know I'm signed in. I don't want them to think I don't want to chat (and I don't)
I don't have a problem with getting banned, that's up to that person....I just think I should still be able to see what they post cuz they could be using my pics.....I don't need to be able to comment.....but I got banned today by a fake who has pics on an escort site.I can't report them by their pic or the button on their page....
And once a pic goes online,anyone can use it or store it somewhere...I think most people have had their pics used on another site at some point....mine popped up on Craigslist...
I actually found this site through a reverse image search checking an ads pics...
Admin has to listen to the crying sagging wanting him to reinvent the wheel here... just fuck off and leave. You obviously don't like it here!!! And pay your taxes!!!
I'm curious how member #317807, Andreas1958 , could have an unfriendly rating? A member that no one has befriended and no one has blacklisted should be neutral, no?
I think blacklist ratio is ten to one.....so if Andreas has no friends and has been blacklisted,his rating would be unfriendly....it will probably reset after points come in...
😲 A Texas Father has engaged in a battle to stop his 7 YEAR OLD BOY from beginning gender reassignment per his Mother's request to medical professionals. What kind of parent would do such a thing? I think it's outrageous and she should be stripped of her rights as a parent. If perchance you believe I'm being unreasonable, please, explain to me why...
There probably is more to this story but what bearing does it have on a mother investigating and/or pursuing gender reassignment for a 7 year old?
I wonder whether a child is far enough along in their development to know whether their assigned gender is wrong? Isn't this matter comparable to circumcision (only to a higher degree)? Is a boy or girl aware of their sexuality, body, mind, etc at 7 years old OR is the parent, the mother in this case, in the position to make a life long decision for this child?
If there are any transgender members reading this, please respond.
It really should not be legal persay for a person below 18 to change their bodys in such a way.If they are not old enough to be sexual and responsiable in that way,how can they suddenly be old enough to do a sex change? Until it is legal to have sex,the gender could be considered irrelevant anyway if they are treated as childern.
I think the mother just wanted a daughter and is wanting the little boy to suffer for her satisfaction.
At 7 years old, your dreams about what you want and want to be when you grow up, shange from day to day. To modify this boy's body before it even reaches puberty seems so wrong.
Again, if there are any transgender members that can speak on this subject, please speak up.
Here's the story from The Washington Post. It's yet another example of how anyone can say anything on the internet and get people to believe them, in this case the father of the child.
only registered users can see external links
At 7 years old,if the child was born male,it should be treated as male until 18. This should not even be a court battle.Nature decided the childs gender.When it becomes a legal,responsiable adult and can afford all the process's involved on it's own,let it decide.
I read over the story,and I also saw it on tv this evening.The father was granted say in how the boy is raised.
The mother is putting the boy in a dress, the boy acts like a boy with it's father.The poor kid is being used as a revenge tool against the divorced father.I am not in agreement with him using the situation to make any money BUT I am sure he has some legal exspenses.As for what Ted Cruz said,I agree, child abuse
What I saw and heard on the tv was a confused kid,with his mother,he is a girl he says,with his father he is a boy? How in the hell can that be that he is both? Like I said,he is being used and is probably a normal kid if he had both parents raising him at the same time in the same household.
"HERE'S HOW TO GET A FREE BAG OF SNICKERS
CNN, (WILX) - Snickers is giving away one million bags of candy!
Visit onemillionsnickers.com to sign up for a Walmart gift card that's good for one bag of fun size Snickers bars.
A candy giveaway was initially tied to an online petition to get Halloween moved from October 31 to the last Saturday of October.
Snickers said if the federal government changed the date of Halloween, it would give away a million free Snickers bars.
The date of Halloween hasn't changed but Snickers is giving away candy anyway.
More than 55,500 gift cards will be given out at one time.
The website will read "we need to refill our bowl" when supplies run out for the day."
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes
Forget about it, they're already gone.
I win... Again!
The saggy granny and all her tough talk are smashed. Again. A weak rat.
The adjustment is good. Bottom line, you still have the same number of blacklists and if a (Why?) is being used sane people, it gives YOU a glimpse of their reasoning.
Thank you, admin.
--------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
Dang! I just posted this and BAM! I can read the (Why?)'s again.
Also people could use my pics on their pages and I would not be able to do anything about it cuz I can't see the page...
So now the fakes just ban you cuz they know you cannot do anything about them....
I will use this platform to segue into something similar, I've noticed a number of quality photos on the SYD Popular page, the pictures I suspect, are commercial pictures and posted by a member who has continually posted internet pictures and also has at least one picture in his gallery that is property of another member. What is interesting is when I clicked on the image to view the image closer, I receive the message that the posting member does NOT permit invisible members to view his pictures. I've noticed that when I am logged out and signing back in, the pictures on the Popular page can be different. I suspect that the person that has made their picture and gallery unavailable to invisible members has also made his picture invisible and unavailable to view to potential new members. It is very possible that the protection that this member was afforded with admin's tweak in the system will permit him to be 100% UNTOUCHABLE. How can a potential new member alert admin if their own picture is made invisible to them? Example, some time ago, CountryCouple54 posted a link to a website where their image was used without their permission. They found their image because it was visible. How would it be possible to find or determine whether your image is being used on this site if admin has added an extra layer of protection for the fakes and internet thieves?
I discovered this new form of blocking approximately 1 week ago and discussed it with another member. I'm sure I wrote about it in the Forum however there was no response from admin.
But it's a premium feature, fakes are mostly not paid accounts so they can't use it.
I believe I recall you on a previous occasion saying publicly or privately this about fakes. There is a place for them here because there is a desire for members to have their needs met (something like that or that was my takeaway from it). The member might be REAL but with all of his needs it might be best for him to reconsider being active at this website with all his concerns of privacy.
Have you really looked at the Popular page? My opinion, it is more like a fantasy page! This might be the opportune time to consider having a category for member's favorite internet pictures and/or Photoshop'd pictures.
As far as a 48 hour "cooling off" period, if that's what you found, it must be a new feature based on a request received by admin.
Your question was "Is it bad?" I'm sure that if you ask the member(s) who requested this feature, they will say; HECKY NO!
And once a pic goes online,anyone can use it or store it somewhere...I think most people have had their pics used on another site at some point....mine popped up on Craigslist...
I actually found this site through a reverse image search checking an ads pics...
--------------------------------------- added after 27 seconds
Sorry, that was supposed to be on Admins post
Now here is my question, just how good are your ball handling skills?
I wonder whether a child is far enough along in their development to know whether their assigned gender is wrong? Isn't this matter comparable to circumcision (only to a higher degree)? Is a boy or girl aware of their sexuality, body, mind, etc at 7 years old OR is the parent, the mother in this case, in the position to make a life long decision for this child?
If there are any transgender members reading this, please respond.
My question is does a 7 year old child have the capacity to know and understand that their gender assignment at birth, was totally wrong?
I think the mother just wanted a daughter and is wanting the little boy to suffer for her satisfaction.
Again, if there are any transgender members that can speak on this subject, please speak up.
only registered users can see external links
The mother is putting the boy in a dress, the boy acts like a boy with it's father.The poor kid is being used as a revenge tool against the divorced father.I am not in agreement with him using the situation to make any money BUT I am sure he has some legal exspenses.As for what Ted Cruz said,I agree, child abuse
What I saw and heard on the tv was a confused kid,with his mother,he is a girl he says,with his father he is a boy? How in the hell can that be that he is both? Like I said,he is being used and is probably a normal kid if he had both parents raising him at the same time in the same household.
New Comment Go to top