-
I've just about given up on trying to get people to post photos in the photo gallery. I know Jackson has also made a valiant effort several times.
No matter how many reminders get posted that this is a "photos only" section, there is always a hundred newbies that want to impress everyone with their brilliant erudition on this or that inane topic. That prompts someone else to impress us with their opinion, and it goes on and on...
Wouldn't it be great if the program could select for jpg images when people tried to post? No jpg, no post. I know it does this for message size and even banned words. This wouldn't restrict the comments, but it would make the inclusion of a photo the "price of admission" for posting comments to the photo gallery. Oh well, probably just wishful thinking.
Cronin
-
I would agree with Cronin that the Photo Sections be jpg posting restricted, with minimum descriptions added. Maybe make the "minimum" standards used for senior status upgrade requirements the standard for photo gallery viewing.My two monetary units.
-
But do not forget that some people have no pics to post...
For example myself, I have made some post on the Saudi board, but trust me there is no way one can take a pic of those women...
-
Rene,
So if they don't have photos, then why post anything at all on the Photo Gallery? If you/they don't have a photo to put on the gallery, why do people feel they have some burning need to register their opinion. And you can plainly see, its not just their opinions of the photos. Its pages upon pages of arcane nonsense.
Are their family photo albums at home filled with pages of comments about grandma's latest surgery complications or sister's problems interacting with people of different races? No. They're filled with photos...right?
Thank you's can be PM'd. Comments can be PM'd. Discussions can be posted to general discussions. Just possibly there could be another section added for Photo Discussions. But frankly, I for one would never log into it. They are NEVER as interesting as the photos themselves.
Just my arcane opinion.
Cronin
-
I would suggest relaxing the prohibition of repetitive posting when it comes to something relatively non-temporal. Examples include 'hot' districts, legal issues, local custom or [i]modus operandi[/i] etc.
Most forum users are expected to read back no more than 10 pages without compelling reasons. When time passes, postings scroll down at various rates. If a particular article scrolls beyond a certain point, the author may feel the need to re-post it. The prohibition should be relaxed more if more additions or revisions of the information are made.
-
You have to make it a complicated enough process to become a "picture viewer" that people can't just post a series of photos or posts some day and wait for it to happen. But simple enough that all the main people who post here (generally defined as senior members) have access.
I think the senior member method as suggested below or even something a little more demanding is the best.
That may have a side effect of making us a slightly more exclusive club in the long run by having a few less regular members (those who don’t really want to post more than once in a LONG time but keep coming here for the pictures) of course those are probably the people costing more than they are worth.
-
I would like to suggest that the forum rules be changed to reflect the legal age of consent (LAC) in the area of the report. For instance, the LAC in Alabama is 16, but is 18 in Tennessee. If the activity is not illegal, then I believe that people should have a right to post about it. Here is a link to the LAC for different countries and states. I use this like a bible when I travel just in case something is in question. Many countries LAC is as low as 13 for females.
I myself do not participate in sex tours or mess with individuals under the LAC. I believe that this forum should reflect the laws that are enforced in each country.
http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
[blue]The existing Forum rules shall remain in effect. There shall be no discussion of any person or persons under the age of 18 on this website.
Jackson[/blue]
-
Gee Jackson,
I know how you feel about child molestors. Any comments on Mr E's stated personal preferences? I personally find the need to carry such a reference while travelling quite repugnant.
LoveLOS
-
LoveLos,
Needless to say I totally agree with what you're saying.
The E said: "I believe that this forum should reflect the laws that are enforced in each country."
Does The E mean that illegal activities in general can not be mentioned on these pages?
That would mean a nice little clean up, leaving only the Singapore and The Netherlands sections...
Child abuse is child abuse, the LAC is not meant for grown ups to see how low they can go and definitely not for paid sex with minors, it is meant for people of similar age to get together without too much hassle.
I very much doubt the reasons behind making sites that show 'legal ages of consent'.
-
my previous post was not meant to offend anyone, nor was it meant to show my "personal preferences". being in my 20's i am probably one of the younger posters on this board. i have been in the hunt since i was 16 years old. i do it for the sheer thrill. i am not a child molester, nor do i have an interest in **** girls. but younger guys may be interested in finding younger girls. i was a member of this board back before it was in this great format and i wanted to find "younger" girls becasue i didn't want to mess with old farts. but at the time i was like 19 or 20 so i was always looking for girls that were around my age. and like i said, the lac in alabama is 16, so i was always looking for girls between 16 to about 20. i love my freedom too much to break any laws conerning the lac. i am positive that almost every guy, at least once in his life has meet a "younger" girl and he should be aware of the lac where he is.
i mean, why turn down perfectly good pussy if it's legal? and i have read many post time and time again where they wanted to and the girl solicited them, but they turned it down because she was 17 and he failed to realize that she was the lac.
and as far as the comment concerning this forum reflecting the laws associated with each country/ state... i was referring to the lac (like you didn't already know that). being caught with a prostitute is one thing... being caught with an **** prostitute is another.
and one last point. i'm not sure if you guys are aware of this, but there are some places in the world where the lac is above 18. 18 is a standard that american's just have stamped onto thier brain, but the truth is that it doesn't apply to many states or to the rest of the world. that's why i made the suggestion. no need to start a flame war about it. this website is all about posting information. i only wanted to add more useful information to the site.
-
E,
Thank you for clarifying your position. I agree it is one matter to have sex when you were a child also, but I have to think back to my teenage years and reflect the maturity and decision making abilities of my conquests of those days:
My conclusion is that, despite the LAC, a sixteen yr old girl is still a child in a woman's body, and an adult needs to respect how fragile she is at that stage of development. Now that you are an adult, I seriously urge you to consider the effect your actions have. A child will likely be more deeply affected by your actions than would another adult who has the mental and physical maturity to deal with a sexual situation.
Hell, 18 is probably too young also, as you note, but that is where the line is drawn in much of the world, and, significantly, that is where Jackson drew the line for us.
And I thank Jackson for clarifying his position in the matter also...
This does not constitute a flame, just a statement of a strong opinion. [b]Just becaue something is legal, does not make it acceptable, and visa-versa[/b]. Nobody much gives a rats ass about legality on this forum anyway, in case you haven't checked the local laws in most states in the USA, [b]PROSTITUTION is illegal[/b] here; but that is still the topic of the day on this forum!
You also make note that 16 year olds are not in your "personal preferences," unless, of course, they happen to be in Alabama, where they are at top of the list ("perfectly good pussy"). Somehow that just does not make sense to my feeble reasoning.
LoveLOS
-
LoveLOS
Truthfully... pussy is pussy to me. Whether it's 18 YO pussy or 35 YO pussy.
If I am attracted to the female, she's the LAC, and she let's me fuck her, I most likely will. I am not going to go to jail over pussy and therefore I follow the established laws, whether they be in Alabama or Pakistian.
We can sit here and debate when a female is old enough to make her own decisions about sex. Some may think it's younger, some may think it's older... heck, I have female friends that consider girls under 21 stupid, dumb, and vernable regardless of what the law states. But if you fucked a willing 20 YO does that make you a bad man? It's all a matter of opinion. You say 18 and I say LAC, whatever that may be. But I will again warn you...
The LAC in some places is ABOVE 18. So please don't go on the rest of your life thinking that 18 is the golden number. You may end up behind bars and have to register every time you move into a new neighborhood.
-
E-ster,
I am very clear on the OVER 18 in some localities issue. Perhaps you would be good enough to catalog and post a warning for the localities in which 18yos are considered jailbait? That would be helpful.
I previously agreed with your assessment that some women are still childish and immature at 21. However, in most places they are still considered a woman, not a child.
I also agree with the statement that pussy is pussy in the 18YO - 35YO catagory.
Where we seem to disagree is in your comments that 13YO to 17YO pussy is also fuckable pussy if she is unfortunate enough to reside in a locale that has lawmakers that are not particularly protective of young girls. My opinion is that she is a child, your opinion is that she is fair game for fucking.
I think I have stated my concerns as well as I can, and I feel I understand your thinking. So I guess we will have to agree to disagree since we have little common ground on our points of contention. Others may be less charitable. Also be aware that Jackson has now made his ruling on your comments and you are advocating a position that is not in agreement with his preferences and forum rules.
Be safe,
LoveLOS
-
Jackson,
You have clearly stated your opinion on this matter, yet [b]The E[/b] still insists upon discussing sex with girls under the age of 18 -- reference his comments in several posts below:
[i]"If I am attracted to the female, she's the LAC, and she let's me fuck her, I most likely will"[/i]
[i]"why turn down perfectly good pussy if it's legal?"[/i]
[i]"It's all a matter of opinion. You say 18 and I say LAC, whatever that may be."[/i]
[i]"pussy is 'pussy"[/i]
Frankly, I'm shocked that LoveLOS, skinless, Freeler, and others haven't already turned him into smoking cinders, but the flaming is sure to escalate unless this kiddie-fucker is stopped NOW.
Please remove this pervert from the forum.
Thanks,
- Atlanta Monger
-
I am going to move my comments to the complaints about other members section. The E-hole is at it again, and he must be stopped!
