hiddenmarlin14 said:And Snowflake is exactly the same way—I saw that from Yellow. 😍 We'll go for a walk, find a bench to chill on, and then he’ll hop right up next to me and start licking my face. 🤣
🤣He was just happy-go-lucky and living his best life.🤣 😍
Larry Perez69 said:you gotta watch out so your instructor doesn't screw you over like they did me... I was taking my test on an overpass... there were two solid lines right there... and the instructor goes... "hey... just pull a U-turn here on the bridge and we'll head back"... so I turned 🕺😁
Kimberly Rodriguez51 said:Rachel Palmer56, you've probably got more chances than not if they're in your family at all.😁 I don't recall seeing any specific inheritance rules, though.
But if there really are that many, there’s probably some truth to it.😁
Rebecca Roberts8 said:My cousins are pregnant, so I can't really speak from experience. But they say it usually follows the maternal line every other generation.
I’m not a mom myself, and I don't have twins, but I've gotta ask something. Basically, there are five sets of twins in my extended family. Does anyone else have twins in their family? And is it actually possible for me to end up having them too, or is that just a total coincidence?😁
The penalty for that is a permanent ban on one account and an extra seven-day suspension on the other.
What Richard Sanders7 is talking about is a different story (he’s talking about farming points using multiple accounts to dodge bans), which could be an issue. But like rustydrifter10 said, just give us a heads-up if you see stuff like that happening. In our experience, those cases are super rare, and if we catch someone doing it on purpose, they're getting busted.
They specifically made certain profiles just to trash another user in the worst way possible, got banned, and then they're still hanging out here on their main accounts. Are you actually going to step up and hand out the proper punishment? If so, I'll send you the profiles so you can see exactly who we're dealing with.??? Just graying out offensive profiles isn't enough.
That's just one example of what people get away with... I'd really like to see them get punished properly.
They tried to wiggle out of the contribution side of things, but you can't dodge ownership requirements since every company needs an owner.😉
Under these new rules, the base salary for a board member, CEO, or manager used to calculate full-time contributions can't drop below $1677.
Basically, directors can still pay themselves the minimum wage, which sits at $1.00 gross, but they’ll have to shell out at least $624 monthly for Social Security and Medicare.
This levels the playing field between corporate directors and small business owners who pay taxes on the same base amount.
Even directors who aren't technically employees (like in companies without staff) have to pay up if they aren't working somewhere else. Their contribution base is actually even higher. It's set at the average salary level, which for 2017 was $2.50 gross.
The bottom line is that it actually makes more sense for a business owner to hire a director now, because it lowers their overall tax burden to the government.
Still, these legal tweaks left enough loopholes for entrepreneurs to sidestep the higher contribution rates. They can just register the director as part-time, which means they only pay half the contributions.
Also, if the person in charge holds the status of an authorized representative, they aren't stuck paying that mandated monthly base rate.
Don't assume everyone operates the same way you do. Not everybody has good intentions. And honestly? Don't go putting your trust in just anyone's word... even if they seem solid.
Look, it’s not just about whether they have the right to do it—it’s actually illegal. It’s a criminal offense. Even if you're only leaking info that only you personally know. But we're talking about linking usernames here, not someone's actual legal name. I only know one Forum User on this site who uses their real name, and they're already pretty well-known in certain circles.
So, if we're really going to obsess over justice and playing fair, we need to decide if this is actually okay. It's not like I'm worried about anything. Yesterday's drama didn't even phase me, and honestly, I don't care where anyone goes or what they do—I'll just skip over the irrelevant stuff. But these two are right, and I have every right to say so.
I’m totally with this thread. I’m backing everything Richard Sanders7 and Forum User Thomas Davis98 said.
By the way, I have no clue why I got banned yesterday. I was just supporting the topic with my own experience. It wasn't trolling. Just because I'm always in a good mood doesn't mean I'm messing around.
Basically, one person using ten different handles—doesn't matter how many—can cause issues across multiple threads without getting properly penalized.
Feel free to check my profile. Look at my points, my bans, and how often I've been muted. No hard feelings, I know I'm a model user. But it also seems like a "model user" is just anyone who manages to juggle a dozen accounts while staying right on the edge of the forum rules.
So, what I was saying yesterday is that I messed up by siding with Rachel Palmer56. She wasn't even trying to hide her connection to me, and she's basically retired anyway.
Something isn't adding up here. You can decide for yourselves who's actually being suppressed and who's running wild through the corners of this forum.
I only see the logic in having two accounts in very specific situations.
Anyway, no emojis here, so hopefully you won't take this as trolling.