Posts by Jacob Wood9

Dennis Jackson38 said:If the admin mentioned a few pages back that people shouldn't be overtly seeking sex in their Advertisements and should just mind their phrasing, I have to wonder: why should any of us care what kind of companionship others are looking for? Truly, why does it matter?

We are talking about Lonely Hearts here, and everyone has their own unique way of being lonely and their own specific voids to fill. It is perfectly legal, and frankly, it falls outside our jurisdiction—or anyone else's for that matter. It seems quite absurd to suggest that one person has the right to edit someone else's personal criteria, unless those criteria explicitly state something like "I want to hook up" or "I'm looking for sex"—assuming, of course, that such directness isn't already deemed inappropriate for some reason (even though being upfront about needs is a healthy, normal part of most successful dates, but let's stay on track).

Following that line of logic, you would essentially be banning eighty-five percent of the articles and features found in any major print or digital media outlet today.
Do you realize how much that would tank viewership and readership? The impact would be massive.

I fail to see why a site like US Forum would radically diminish its own engagement by enforcing the personal preferences of moderators and stripping away the right to diversity in what people seek.

Personally, I suspect the traffic has actually spiked because everyone stumbling upon this thread is heading over to the US site just to see what kind of Advertisements they’re running over there.😁😁😁

As for personal preferences, I suppose she survived the shock, but I wouldn't call this a violation of the right to diversity; rather, it feels more like an attempt to question whether certain sub-forums even have a right to their own distinct identity. Since they have Advertisements on the US site, I guess they're trying to light everything up over there... the other day, there was even an Ad where a user was looking for a roommate to share an apartment, mentioning she had a washing machine and that the utilities weren't too expensive, and so on and so forth.

Nicholas King said:How yes no.

I suppose Plan B is surely about to kick in—you know, the whole routine about how moderators can't be online 24/7, how they’re just volunteers, and all that nonsense. It’s a complete distraction from the actual issue—which is that the Advertisement has been up for four days straight, yet today's duplicate was wiped out despite the author explicitly stating it was a repost—so, frankly, trying to argue that we're being selective with deletions is a losing battle. A day where someone finally just writes a simple sentence like, "Yeah, we messed up, it happens, let's move on"—after which absolutely nothing else would occur—is clearly still a long way off (not to mention that promised apology from that brave female moderator who vanished without a trace right after deleting the Advertisement she had previously declared perfectly fine, to say nothing of anything else).

It's much easier to spend days typing out how 2+2=5.

My bad, clicked the wrong thing

It's deleted now

Thanks for helping out; if you spot another one, let me know

Nicole Ruiz said:But that isn't even what this thread is about!!
What we are actually discussing here is the double standards, the hypocrisy, the total inconsistency, and that blatant intolerance fueled by the subjective worldviews of moderators who don't even seem to know how to consistently apply the very rules they wrote themselves... 🙂

Well, I suppose your Advertisement was what actually prompted us to go ahead and redefine the rules.

Nicholas King said:Honestly, if you just follow this one thread regarding the Advertisements, the conclusion is pretty obvious: before you can even attempt to agree with me, you first have to reach an agreement with yourself.

That argument might actually hold water—at least regarding the subsequent deletion of physical contact—if the moderator, who so bravely stepped up to explain the criteria for publishing (or not), hadn't explicitly declared an Advertisement non-problematic only for it to be quietly pulled later, all while boldly promising an apology if she were mistaken—if only she had actually fulfilled that public promise.

But that’s only one part of the story: we still have our married gentleman who continues to unashamedly and messily look for a woman "on the side" without prejudice 🙄; and it remains entirely unclear what specific rule, criterion, or whatever it is, makes his post acceptable while Nicole Ruiz's is not.

No matter how much "oh, I really messed up, oh man, look what I did, oh wow, did you see that..." humor you try to throw at this banal fact, it’s still going to stick out like a sore thumb and remain glaringly obvious.

this one was deleted too

Nicole Ruiz said:I suppose if a girl—say, a college student—posts an ad saying she’s just looking for physical contact, that kind of thing is generally viewed as perfectly acceptable. However, if a male student were to post that exact same ad, I have a strong feeling it would be flagged or sanctioned almost instantly.
Furthermore, if a married man is out there looking for a woman, society tends to shrug its shoulders because having affairs is somehow socially tolerated, yet if a couple looks for a third, it’s suddenly treated as completely unacceptable, immoral, and just plain wrong...

Look, it’s possible that a specific ad might have slipped through the cracks due to a mistake or some sort of misjudgment, but if you're truly intent on posting these kinds of things, it might be more productive to reach out to the moderators for the romance and adult sections. Perhaps they could open up dedicated spaces where people can openly look for threesomes, group activities, physical intimacy, or whatever else is on their mind.

Nicholas King said:Rather than resorting to arrogance or these weak attempts at being witty, it would be far more productive—and frankly, more interesting—to hear actual answers to specific questions:

- The moderator explicitly stated right here that there was absolutely nothing objectionable about an Advertisement where a woman is quite literally seeking physical contact. Yet, following this entire ordeal, even that post was removed. Did the moderator change her mind after the fact, or did she simply lose track of her own logic, or perhaps something else entirely?

- What is the tangible difference between that "problematic" post and the one where a married man is looking for "a woman who understands him"—an ad that has been sitting on the Classifieds for days now? Does the moderation team honestly believe a married man doesn't have options—or, more importantly, do they think a married man isn't looking for sex?

Any attempt at a similarly witty response—like the quote above, or some timely sarcasm aimed at the same two tired jokes—will serve as nothing more than a sign of total confusion and utter helplessness.

it is entirely possible that

- what exactly is the tangible difference between the problematic post and an Advertisement where a married man is looking for "a woman who understands him"—an ad that has been sitting on the Classifieds for days now? Does the moderation team honestly believe a married man doesn't have options, or more specifically, do they think a married man isn't looking for sex?

well, no... I find myself in complete agreement with you on that point.

Nicole Ruiz said:Completely irrelevant. 🤷

Well, I suppose how "irrelevant" it is depends entirely on your perspective, doesn't it?

For instance, if I were to head down to the pet section—you know, where people post Advertisements offering free cats or dogs—and decided to post an Ad for livestock meant for slaughter, I imagine they'd probably tell me I'm in the wrong sub-forum.

Nicole Ruiz said:It met the criteria! It was deleted because of discrimination, period.

I wasn't whining! 🙂
If there is no discrimination, then the rules should apply equally to everyone.

No.

Get in line.☕

I definitely respect where you're coming from, though.
Personally? I just don't see it that way at all.

It wasn't deleted for being discriminatory; honestly, based on the Advertisement, you aren't exactly a Lonely Heart—you seem to have quite a line forming.

I suppose there are plenty of websites out there for those kinds of things, so maybe just try looking there instead.

🙂

I’m casting my vote for granitefalcon10

I have to say, the way she handled that assignment... well, let's just say it left me feeling a certain kind of warmth that even the most massive multinational pharmaceutical giants—I won't name names here unless I'm looking for a lawsuit from Pfizer or Merck—couldn't quite manage to replicate.

granitefalcon10!!!!!!

slynomad14 said:I’ve only been hanging around this Forum for a few months now, but I feel like I’m constantly running into this vague, undefined concept of "trolling"... Most people here seem terrified to actually give examples, but I’ve never been one to just follow the crowd, so I’m going to lay it out...

Take two users, Herbicidna and Jacob Wood9. A whole bunch of people have called Herbi a troll, but then again, half the threads Jacob Wood9 starts could easily be labeled as trolling too. It looks like the mob successfully chased Herbi off the site, because I haven't seen them post here in a while...

If you look closely at certain sub-sections, it's obvious there are little cliques connected to the mods, which obviously leads to double standards for everyone else on the site—you've got the "untouchables" and then there's the rest of us...

The fix is pretty straightforward... don't ignore the trolling and don't try to rename it either. I'm sure the moderators have plenty of tools to handle people who take arguments too far; just issue a warning, and if they don't listen, hit them with a ban...

The subjects I choose to bring to the table tend to spark quite a bit of interest, mainly because they're designed for an audience with a somewhat higher intellectual threshold... if people are more accustomed to threads titled "I've never even had sex, please help me," well, I guess that isn't really my concern.🙂

Hey everyone, I’m a huge enthusiast when it comes to accounting, bookkeeping, and tax law, so I’m genuinely thrilled to find such an incredible group here. If you'll have me, I’d love to officially join the ranks. 😳

Sending kisses and good vibes to all of you ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I mean, wouldn't it just be easier to call 1-800-FED-RESERVE instead of wasting all this time going back and forth with these self-proclaimed geniuses who are probably already drafting their formal grievances

I suppose once about half of you get laid off, things will finally quiet down enough that you won't have any spare time left to sit around debating who said what to whom anyway.

I suppose I'll just drive everyone deep into the red until they're more than happy to perform oral sex on me
zato ja ućeram sve u minuščicu do daske i mogu mi vršit felatio 🙂

James Cox6 said:I've reached my limit 😢

My husband snores incessantly... we've tried him sleeping on his back, his side—it doesn't matter—he just won't stop..

I’m waking up multiple times a night, practically shaking him awake.. begging him to just stop, but it's the same thing over and over...

Is there any way to fix this? What actually triggers that snoring reflex? 🤷

If I may offer a small consolation, snoring during sleep is relatively common; personally, I think it would be far more concerning if he were snoring while wide awake... you might start thinking he was actually growling at you.😢

I find myself waking up in the middle of the night, nudging him... begging him to stop, only for it to begin all over again...

Do you honestly believe he’s choosing to snore just to spite you? It isn't as if he woke up one morning and decided, "That's it, from this day forward, I shall snore in my sleep!"

If you have the option, perhaps you should consider sleeping in separate beds... it really shouldn't matter much, I suppose.

melloweagle26 said:What even is this? 🙂
Should I just shut it down? 😬

But seriously... I’m dying to know if your inspiration for this title and opening post was that one episode of Pretty Woman featuring mac and cheese and the EU 🤣

Go ahead and close it then😳
I haven't actually seen that episode😳

crimsonranger38 said:😂 I didn't even notice which thread I dropped that news into. 😂

I hope Jacob Wood9 doesn't mind. 😁

Why on earth would he have an objection? If you’ve decided this is your space, then please, feel free to post whatever you like... I'd actually quite enjoy the conversation.🙂

Look, I’d appreciate it if my esteemed colleagues would just move along if they don't have anything substantial to contribute to this discussion

This thread is intended for serious commentary regarding the recent volatility in the capital markets, so perhaps you could save those little jokes for trying to charm some naive newcomers on a different forum

What on earth is going on with Jane today... does anyone happen to have some kind of inside scoop? 😕

Since the other chat room has become somewhat cluttered with constant nonsense and rather unreliable commentary, I thought it might be prudent to open this parallel thread. My intention here is to provide a space where shareholders can unwind—specifically those who appreciate the usual youthful energy but still wish to maintain a certain level of intellectual clarity. I’m hoping we can discuss equities without being distracted by all the typical earthly temptations and distractions found elsewhere.🙂