Posts by Sophia Thomas7

Ashley Bishop4 said:Setting criteria isn't the same thing as discrimination.

Look, if there are specific requirements for something and someone tries to jump in without meeting them, that’s just not discrimination.

In this situation, the rule for an ad on the US Forum is that it has to be for the US, not for LJES or ŽuD or whatever else. That decision falls under the moderator's jurisdiction, not some imaginary authority.

Obviously, couples or married people can post on the US Forum and run ads, but that's impossible to police. What we *can* actually do is stick to the logic and the intended purpose of the PDF.

It’s honestly mind-blowing how you can so rudely ignore a fact that's been repeated over and over—a fact that's basically the entire foundation of the US Forum concept.

I don't think there's anything else left to say here.

Actually, there is. If we're going to ban every single Advertisement that explicitly asks for sex, then we have to go through and delete every single post and thread where sex is even mentioned.

Starting from the bottom of the barrel.

Dennis Jackson38 said:Well, that sounds wonderful; let the readership increase. 😉

On a separate note (and this goes to Phibsu as well), my primary contention is that individuals should surely have the right to express their specific romantic or emotional preferences through Advertisements. If one person's ideal partner involves a very specific dynamic, another requires a third party, and a third seeks nothing more than casual flirting—provided they articulate these desires without being indecent—it remains entirely unclear why or for what purpose such freedom of pursuit would be restricted in the Advertisements section when that same freedom is, of course, perfectly permissible within the discussion topics.

That is all. 😁

I actually agree with what was written here. I've felt the same way even before on the 'reviewing the ads' thread.

Dennis Jackson38 said:I don't need to hold an official moderator title to spot irregularities, Sophia Thomas7. 😉

Furthermore, what leads you to believe that most of the users on this US Forum are merely clones of the authors behind various Advertisements? Are you attempting to cross-reference IP addresses across every single Advertisement, or something along those lines?

I wasn't even talking about whether there were irregularities or not. My point was just to highlight how incredibly skeptical I am about that whole "if we discriminate based on sex in our advertisements, views will drop" correlation.

Dennis Jackson38 said:I don't need to hold an official moderator title to spot irregularities, Sophia Thomas7. 😉

Furthermore, what leads you to believe that most of the users on this US Forum are merely clones of the authors behind various Advertisements? Are you attempting to cross-reference IP addresses across every single Advertisement, or something along those lines?

Regarding this last point, the fact that we're dealing with all sorts of different people— You weren't a moderator for the US Forum, but I was. And honestly, your claim is pretty far from the truth if you’re actually convinced that most people there are "diverse" while only a few are clones.

I think I made myself pretty clear. 😉 Honestly, back when I was acting as a moderator, I made it a point to check the IPeve logs for pretty much every single advertisement we had to delete. I did it because they were constantly breaking the rules.

Oh, come on. Things have probably changed quite a bit since then. It’s likely just a bunch of lurkers who finally decided to log in just to drop an Advertisement. 😬 Just like those people on that one thread where they go, "I’ve been lurking this whole time, but I finally decided to jump in just so I could actually say something to this thread." 😬

Dennis Jackson38 said:

Sophia Thomas7 As stated by:
That wasn't quite what I was asking.

With all due respect, your question lacks any clear structure or coherent logic, which is precisely why my response turned out the way it did.
You simply cannot claim to know for certain that readership won't decline, but you really ought to consider the sheer volume of grievances being aired by entire factions of the community regarding advertisements over these last few months. It serves as a glaring indicator that there is widespread dissatisfaction within the collective, suggesting that a shift in strategy is absolutely necessary. This should be viewed as a clear signal for the US moderators—and keep in mind, you aren't one of them.
It is also worth noting that the individuals behind these Advertisements aren't limited to just a small circle of clones from the States; they represent a diverse spectrum of people. We aren't merely a tiny group of regulars who post every day; there is actually a much larger community observing and participating here on the US Forum.

The crux of the matter is this: there is absolutely no need for the moderator to offer any kind of personal justification or claim that they hold a negative bias against open relationships when making these types of decisions.

You serve as an excellent case in point here. You frequently emphasize on the Forum just how much importance you place on the "trio" dynamic, and how you believe one can certainly maintain such a connection within a relationship. Whether we are talking about discussions on LJES, the US Forum, or anywhere else, I fail to see the issue. Why should we withhold the ability to express such desires to others, provided that they adhere to the rules regarding polite advertising by keeping their intentions discreet?

This is precisely the point I am making.

If certain topics are strictly prohibited in an Advertisement, yet people continue to seek them out regardless, then we have a responsibility to provide a response that actually carries weight—one that doesn't simply rely on:

"My colleague and I both hold a rather skeptical view regarding the concept of open relationships," noted the moderator.
It seems to me that people in committed relationships simply lack anything substantial to offer those of us currently navigating the single life, so they resort to these little displays just to satisfy their own whims.

Furthermore, any decision of this magnitude ought to be accompanied by a coherent, well-reasoned justification—ideally one issued directly by the forum administrator or the owner themselves.

The question was perfectly coherent. I don't see nearly enough people complaining about the fact that sex isn't allowed in US advertisements to suggest that readership would take a massive hit.

Regarding your point about it being "different people"—you haven't been a moderator for the US, but I have—and honestly, your statement is pretty far from the truth if you actually believe that most of those advertisers are unique individuals and the clones are just a minority. 😁

Dennis Jackson38 said:

Sophia Thomas7 As stated by:
That wasn't quite what I was asking.

With all due respect, your question lacks any clear structure or coherent logic, which is precisely why my response turned out the way it did.
You simply cannot claim to know for certain that readership won't decline, but you really ought to consider the sheer volume of grievances being aired by entire factions of the community regarding advertisements over these last few months. It serves as a glaring indicator that there is widespread dissatisfaction within the collective, suggesting that a shift in strategy is absolutely necessary. This should be viewed as a clear signal for the US moderators—and keep in mind, you aren't one of them.
It is also worth noting that the individuals behind these Advertisements aren't limited to just a small circle of clones from the States; they represent a diverse spectrum of people. We aren't merely a tiny group of regulars who post every day; there is actually a much larger community observing and participating here on the US Forum.

The crux of the matter is this: there is absolutely no need for the moderator to offer any kind of personal justification or claim that they hold a negative bias against open relationships when making these types of decisions.

You serve as an excellent case in point here. You frequently emphasize on the Forum just how much importance you place on the "trio" dynamic, and how you believe one can certainly maintain such a connection within a relationship. Whether we are talking about discussions on LJES, the US Forum, or anywhere else, I fail to see the issue. Why should we withhold the ability to express such desires to others, provided that they adhere to the rules regarding polite advertising by keeping their intentions discreet?

This is precisely the point I am making.

If certain topics are strictly prohibited in an Advertisement, yet people continue to seek them out regardless, then we have a responsibility to provide a response that actually carries weight—one that doesn't simply rely on:

"My colleague and I both hold a rather skeptical view regarding the concept of open relationships," noted the moderator.
It seems to me that people in committed relationships simply lack anything substantial to offer those of us currently navigating the single life, so they resort to these little displays just to satisfy their own whims.

Furthermore, any decision of this magnitude ought to be accompanied by a coherent, well-reasoned justification—ideally one issued directly by the forum administrator or the owner themselves.

I said a long time ago that I've never posted an ad in the Classifieds because looking for a partner for a threesome isn't allowed. 😉

Dennis Jackson38 said:A significant number of people are reading this.

And regardless of whether readership is declining or not, I fail to see how you could possibly argue that discrimination should be met with applause. It shouldn't be. 😁

Furthermore, I am curious: if we are operating under the rule that any hint of sexual content is prohibited in an Advertisement—even when merely implied between the lines—does that same restriction apply to our discussions here? 😁

That wasn't really what I was asking.

Nicholas King said:In dubio pro reo. That’s really all there is to it.

If there were some higher reasoning behind this—say, "we're panicking because Google might flag us as a porn site," or "we're worried about advertisers revolting," or something along those lines—there would be a way to let the average forum user know, in one form or another.

But the actual issue here is that the moderators insist on acting like their arbitrary decisions regarding what is "allowed" or "not allowed" constitute some sort of coherent policy for managing PDFs and threads. From where I’m sitting, this entire situation has perfectly demonstrated that when it comes to the "can/cannot" criteria, they are guided exclusively by their own personal values—which, frankly, isn't exactly a solid foundation for moderation. I mean, who actually cares about subjective sentences like "Personally, I am against this or that"? Not to mention that incredibly muddled attempt at formulating the rule: "if this were truly a serious Advertisement from someone living in a polygamous relationship/marriage, then we would decide how to handle it based on the written text and the implicit message it sends."...

Even when people are being foolish, they generally don't appreciate being treated like they're stupid. And this level of arbitrariness in moderating an Advertisement—without providing a single meaningful explanation as to why something can or cannot stay (or rather, what catastrophe would occur if a problematic 🙄 Advertisement wasn't deleted)—is precisely that: "we did it because we felt like it, so, what, a breakup? Is this a game of cat and mouse?"

I haven't received a single answer to my question yet (which I already asked): why are sex Advertisements banned?

As far as I'm concerned, if someone gets hit for deleting a paid ad, then every single ad looking for sex should be getting wiped too.

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.

What exactly are you basing this "fact" on—that traffic to the US Forum would tank if they banned diverse profiles in ads? Most of the people posting there are using their main accounts for everything else anyway and just use a burner for the ads. So, honestly, what you said doesn't really hold water.

Kevin Ward3 said:Not bad, just hoping baboons aren't the main villains.😁

I caught a glimpse of some spaceships in the trailer, so I’m feeling pretty optimistic about this one. 😁

Joshua Jones13 said:Sure. But it’s up to the moderators to decide if your ad actually follows the rules. Meadow already pointed out the specific rule:

I guess your ad looks like you're seeking a third for sex to me, too. 🤷

So, what else is there to say? I’m looking for a throuple—anything else is just filler. You can find endless advertisements like this all over the internet if you know where to look.

Nicole Ruiz said:First off, I really appreciate the quick and thorough response...

Honestly, I have to wonder who exactly this post could possibly bother: 😕😕😕🤷

The guidelines in the rules state:
Regarding the ads themselves, they should include basic information such as gender, age, and location. We recommend writing a bit more about yourself or the person you wish to meet, as this will likely attract more people, so please don't be too brief.

So... I wasn't allowed to, excuse me, *emphasize* how my girlfriend and I look? And that's despite the fact that I went overboard with the physical descriptions, listing our height, weight, age, gender, and location (exactly as requested in the moderator guidelines)

As for what you put in quotes—this "preferences" thing—it isn't even worth commenting on.
I mean, gay men can post ads... sure, they can openly look for other men, explicitly stating they are gay and thereby expressing (and I won't use quotation marks here) their preferences. Women can also look for women quite openly...
But a guy and a girl aren't allowed to look for anyone? Because apparently, that counts as breaking the rules by essentially offering sex.
Of course, when someone posts an ad saying: "Gay guy from Smalltown, USA looking for a gay guy nearby, young and handsome," etc.—he isn't posting that just to hook up; he's doing it so they can be friends and watch the birds in the sky...

So, you've decided the ad was posted exclusively to find someone for sexual experimentation? Fine then, by that logic, every single ad containing phrases like: "a girl with X look, X age, for coffee, going out, and something more..."—well, we could shove all of those into that same category.
In fact, following the exact logic you described in the quote I am responding to, I could go back and review the last 50 ads and find at least 20 that wouldn't meet your criteria either.

I hope these arguments clarify my point.
My ad didn't violate any specific rule, and more importantly, it doesn't deviate in any way from the other ads you consider legitimate that are currently active in this thread!
We expect, and kindly request, that it be reinstated.

It’s perfectly logical to assume your colleagues might side with you, but I truly ask that you consider my perspective as well.
I genuinely believe my post follows all the rules to a T. If you feel otherwise, then by that same logic, quite a few other posts should probably be taken down too.

Furthermore, the guidelines explicitly state:

In case anyone needs a reminder, this is a serious matter. This thread remains open solely because there are people who genuinely want to meet someone, and this platform provides that opportunity. We are fully aware that some people use fake identities to mess with those who reach out, but unfortunately, we simply don't have the resources to catch every single one of them. Ultimately, it is up to you to decide who you respond to and where those conversations lead.
We aren't pretending to be anyone we're not; we've been as honest as humanly possible. In fact, that's exactly why we do it—so we don't waste anyone's time.
The whole point of keeping this topic active is to facilitate real connections for those looking for genuine introductions.

And look! Just today, we actually connected with a girl, swapped emails, chatted for a bit... and we even set up a meeting for coffee tomorrow. And I mean COFFEE—not a hookup—just a casual meet-up to see if there's a vibe. So, mission accomplished! The purpose of this entire thing actually works.

See? 🙂

It's also important that she takes care of her appearance, is easygoing, and is actually down for hanging out, going out, and playing games together.[/I]

You're looking for a girlfriend just to play Monopoly and Risk? Give me a break. 😁

steelskipper5 said:That’s exactly why someone would want a troll... just to post on Improve Your English. 🥳

I’m pretty sure some of that stuff is covered back in elementary school. 😬

graniteeagle6 said:this is the unacceptable reckless behavior and the lacking intelligence or common sense decision by moderators!

That English is criminally bad.

Amy Barrett44 said:It’s not just one single post; it’s an entire string of them. It's basically the same exact message recycled over and over again across ten different topics.😁

And they're all dropping within five minutes of each other.🙂

Since I already know exactly who we're dealing with—and I've called out that handle before—I’m giving it a solid five out of five. 😉

Amy Barrett44 said:answering a question with another question isn't really an answer, is it?😁

So, if anyone actually has an answer for me, I'd really appreciate it.

If this involves LJS, we don't go for that here—just report any post you suspect is from a troll.

Amy Barrett44 said:You spot a troll, so you call them out on it.

Basically, I’m wondering if it's actually okay to tell someone they're being a troll?

Is it against the rules, or what?

Thanks for the help

How can you even tell if someone's a troll?

Nicholas Williams7 said:Look, that was wrapped up in the rest of my post, and I honestly don't see why a fantasy would be an issue if the actual event isn't! We aren't out here retelling a novel; we're talking about things that are already being written down—desires! Not many people have massive life experience in this area, so a little bit of fantasizing is actually pretty helpful, and it's already happening anyway. Besides, since this is a BDSM thread, I think it fits perfectly fine. I really don't agree with this warning.

The warning was just that stories, whether they're real or made up should go in the specific thread designated for them. You don't have to agree with me, but since we have a collective thread specifically for erotic stories, all stories belong there.

Nicholas Williams7 said:So, I’m back at it again. On the BDSM thread—post number 1835, to be exact—I just got hit with another warning from the same moderator. Apparently, my post doesn't belong there and I need to move it to a different section!

You were actually asking for someone to write a story, if I recall correctly:

It would be great if one of the submissive ladies on this forum could share a fantasy or a real-life experience.

That's exactly why Kate Ward16 pointed out that for those kinds of erotic stories, there’s a specific thread dedicated entirely to them—whereas the BDSM thread is meant for discussing the lifestyle itself.

Henry Hernandez7 said:Why would they be quoting me? Is there some kind of penalty involved?

I’m guessing it’s because you’ve started over 35 different threads on those local forums, and people are probably just getting a little burnt out by it all. Just my two cents.

Nicholas King said:Basically, it works wonders as an idiot-eliminator whenever someone tries to brilliantly shut you down with that unbeatable classic: "you clearly don't have a life if you're posting this much"...

Right, because that genius "get a life" argument is the one thing even the people with the highest... post counts can't seem to defend themselves against.

Joseph Gomez39 said:That's just nonsense. Every single thread has people rambling, and apparently, that rambling counts toward your total. It makes it seem like anyone posting in threads where the count doesn't register is somehow a "lesser" member of this community. Some threads are even just meant for messing around. I actually got shut down recently on a serious topic because someone told me I had nothing to contribute since I was posting in the wrong place.

Wait, how exactly does a user become "less valuable" just because their post didn't trigger a count? Since when did a post count become the ultimate metric for someone's worth around here?