General Reports

**Mattis1775** · 12-22-25 16:16

Originally Posted by MisterPoop [View Original Post]

Could you provide more information about Cida in Everett?? Location or a link, thanks!

https://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/bt...903829812.html

**MisterPoop** · 12-22-25 10:40

Originally Posted by Mattis1775 [View Original Post]

She's the best - https://bodywaxingbykelly.com/.

Professional, a bit rough. But gets it done quick! Indirectly, she makes sure that you're not thinking about funny stuff. She's been around for a long time and very experienced. If you're looking for wax and HJ, Cida in Everett is good. Waxing takes too long. But a lot of attention to Mr. Happy.

Could you provide more information about Cida in Everett?? Location or a link, thanks!

**Mattis1775** · 12-17-25 23:38

Originally Posted by BostonMan781 [View Original Post]

Any leads on male waxing spots?

She's the best - https://bodywaxingbykelly.com/.

Professional, a bit rough. But gets it done quick! Indirectly, she makes sure that you're not thinking about funny stuff. She's been around for a long time and very experienced. If you're looking for wax and HJ, Cida in Everett is good. Waxing takes too long. But a lot of attention to Mr. Happy.

**BostonMan781** · 12-17-25 08:05

Any leads on male waxing spots?

**PewPewPewPew** · 12-14-25 10:49

Watertown Police Will Soon Start Using Cameras That Can Capture License Plate Info, ACLU Expresses Some Concerns.

In the next few weeks the Watertown Police Department will have access to new equipment that can capture images of license plates of passing cars. The technology is intended to help with criminal investigations, but some have expressed concerns about how it will be used, including the ACLU of Massachusetts.

City Manager George Proakis provided information about the Flock Safety program to the City Council on Nov. 25. The Flock system was approved in the Fiscal Year 2026 budget and eight cameras will be installed on major roadways in Watertown.

"What the cameras do is they capture the rear license plates of passing vehicles, similar to the way a toll camera would and upload the image onto a secure system, and the system they're uploading it onto is accessible only by the Watertown Police Department," Proakis said.

Watertown Police have already been assisted by information from Flock cameras set up in other communities, Proakis said.

"The reason why our Police Department brought this forward, and the reason why I believe it makes sense to keep moving forward with these is because these cameras are going to significantly contribute to public safety in Watertown," Proakis said. "In fact, we have already benefited from the Flock safety images captured by other Massachusetts communities when they've been willing to share them with us. Our formal requests to other Massachusetts departments have led to arrests tied to an armed robbery in Watertown already, and helped the Police Department in locating a missing person and also helped solve a breaking and entering case in our City, as well. ".

The ACLU of Mass. Reached out to Watertown officials, Proakis said, expressing concerns about how Flock can be used. Proakis noted that the group did not completely oppose the use of the cameras, but had recommended conditions for using them.

A statement on the ACLU of Mass. 's website reads, in part:

"Individual departments should stop voluntarily sharing data with out-of-state and federal agencies. They should redraft contracts with Flock to ensure their department retains full control of all data they collect. Finally, police departments must adopt internal policies requiring that every Flock network search be justified by a specific, documented reason for the inquiry, clarifying to all officers and staff that a non-descriptive entry like "investigation" will not suffice. ".

Proakis said that Watertown's policy for using the data from the Flock cameras include all the group's suggestions as well as some others.

'The Watertown Police Department will not share any images or access with any federal agencies or any departments outside of Massachusetts," Proakis said. "They'll also automatically block all requests related to anything involving some of the items that have been very concerning to people in the information I've received about protected health care cases, about immigration cases, the sort of things that are not related to the type of criminal investigations that Massachusetts police departments spend their time doing. ".

The cameras take pictures of the rear license plate of vehicles, Proakis said, and do not capture video or have a live feed. Watertown Police officers can only access the information under certain circumstances.

"Internal police staff will be able to access the images, but they'll need to document a case or investigation associated with each search they're only if they're looking for something related to a case," Proakis said. "The history of all internal access will be audited by a captain in the (Watertown) Police Department each month to ensure that the internal access is being used appropriately. ".

Watertown's contract with Flock states that the City of Watertown is the sole owner of the images taken by the flock cameras in town, Proakis said, and the Police Department maintains strict control over access to the data that is captured.

"No other department or agency, internal or external, has access to it," Proakis said.

He added that, "The Watertown Police Department will share images of the license plates, but only with other Massachusetts municipalities, and they'll have to submit a formal request connected with a legitimate criminal investigation. Each of these requests will be reviewed and either accepted or denied by the Watertown Police Department. ".

Proakis said the City will post a frequently asked questions page about the Flock cameras on the City of Watertown's website, the WPD's website, and the Watertown Police will host a Tuesday Night Talk focused on technology being USD in town, including Flock cameras and the body cameras worn by Watertown Police officers.

**Nrlmus** · 12-08-25 20:55

Originally Posted by Trickster666 [View Original Post]

Why is human sexuality so complicated? Is there any beneficial reason for that?

Not only human. Procreation is for the fittest. Alpha male and alpha female are the only ones that allowed to procreate in the wolfpack. The same with humans.

Males are suppose to protect females and the off-spring and females consistently test males on whether they'd be able to do that. If he can't put her in her place, why would you think he would be able to take on a t-rex? We're just wired that way but in the end it all goes from there.

As American males stop resisting female encroachment on their territory, females naturally become more aggressive in trying to get them to push back. Remember, we're suppose to be ready to die for our females but the more civilized we become the more "girly-men" we're to our females. We're no longer the t-rex hunters and women intuitively trying to get it out of us.

I'm not sure if what I wrote is gospel but I'm sure that I'm sure enough would agree that I have a point.

**Trickster666** · 12-08-25 14:40

Why is human sexuality so complicated? Is there any beneficial reason for that?

**Hobbyist420** · 11-01-25 11:28

Originally Posted by MassDude [View Original Post]

This is not the usual "low hanging fruit" type of arrest, LE went long and hard to find people to indict. This sounds like an outcall, obviously there's a trail of who the clients were.

The news piece is pretty much a copy-and-paste from the AG's press release.

"In a news release, the AG's office wrote, " Martinez allegedly set up online dating profiles for his victims on various websites, began conversations with potential buyers, and ultimately arranged transportation for the victims to meet sex buyers, engage in commercial sex acts, and give Martinez or his grandmother any payments they received. ".

"online dating profiles". I wonder if the sites were ones like SA / SB.

At some point, you'd have to think LEO is going to start scrutinizing these sites more. Also, underscores the importance to use anonymous VOIP numbers even when talking to SBs

**MassDude** · 10-31-25 20:02

Originally Posted by Rome400 [View Original Post]

https://www.boston25news.com/news/lo...LH3ZAJNWZOOPI/

This is not the usual "low hanging fruit" type of arrest, LE went long and hard to find people to indict. This sounds like an outcall, obviously there's a trail of who the clients were.

The news piece is pretty much a copy-and-paste from the AG's press release.

**Rome400** · 10-31-25 14:38

https://www.boston25news.com/news/lo...LH3ZAJNWZOOPI/

**ThizzleHats** · 10-13-25 15:39

https://www.patriotledger.com/story/...i/86619618007/

https://archive.is/XhZdd

Man that place had it all you could get some sex, go gamble, and take home a few cartons of bootleg cigarettes. I never partook of 299 Newport but did anybody ever hit the casino?

**Nrlmus** · 10-10-25 10:34

Originally Posted by ChoirBoy [View Original Post]

Damn! Sometimes I wish cellphones had a feature that would let you block phone numbers.

Check your menu. My Android phone has that. I use it all the time. I'd be surprised if Iphone doesn't provide the same option.

**BunnyMeat** · 10-03-25 08:43

It seems that the 502 issue has been resolved.

**SalamanderFour** · 09-21-25 16:32

Normally I visit on a pc, but I tried my phone, and it's a no-go. I dug into Brave browser, and got it too work. I did all this, but I'm not sure which on made it work.

I did these in settings, but they wouldn't work until I typed in the address into a new page. Reloading the old page was a no-go.

Settings changes:

Don't upgrade to HTTPS.

Allow cookie consent pop ups.

Allow all trackers + ads, cookies.

Pop up redirects allowed.

It was a struggle. Remember that after the changes you must re-type the address into a fresh page, reloading the old page is no good.

**JoeMuckInFutch** · 09-21-25 10:05

Originally Posted by Ruffur [View Original Post]

Is Firefox the best one to use.

Best? Beats me, I'm not a computer expert, but so far it is the only one I can get to work and I use private mode. Tried doing same with Chrome, Edge and Duck but no go. Others on here with more expertise perhaps have suggested settings changes, or a specific exemption but I don't want to leave a trail either.

I also sometimes use a old iPad and Safari still works in private mode too, but I always do a delete history when done just in case.