Posts made by bi4smooth

@eobox91103 said in WA hello :

One can also send private messages (called "chats") to other members, which is safer for personal information such as email addresses or even physical location. This isn't a hookup site, but I've met a few other members in person and it was a good (non-sexual) time.

Careful there - because of abuse in the past, new members are restricted from direct messaging for a period when they first join... I think it's 6-mo... maybe a moderator will see this and clarify, but I'm sure there is a block on new members and the chat function...

@raphjd said in Facebook uses 1st Amendment in lawsuit:

@bi4smooth

AGAIN, since you are slow.

Facebook claims publicly that their fact checks are "accurate and well researched" which is why there is no appeal.

HOWEVER, in the lawsuit, they are claiming that the fact checks are nothing but opinion.

Which is it?

You truly cannot read, can you?

Making a "public relations" statement to "defend" your actions is NOT THE SAME as making a legal argument...

Maybe BOTH are true: maybe the fact checks are based on truth/fiction, and maybe they're protected because those decisions can be called an opinion...
Maybe BOTH are false: maybe the fact checks are based on political bias, and those actions are not protected...
Maybe... Maybe... Maybe...

My point is: this is now before a court and a jury... how 'bout we let them decide? With ALL the facts that the plaintiff and ALL the facts that the defendant care to muster!

Of course, you, with your Russian troll masters and your Tucker Carlson blood transfusions (oops: opinion transfusions), naturally think you already have all the information you need: Facebook = bad Why should you need data or testimony to back that up?

@raphjd said in France’s Macron Stuns As He Declares Un-Vaxxed ‘Not Citizens’.:

You get no argument that me that the "rich and powerful" often flout the same rules they seek to enforce on everyone else! But why limit that to COVID-19? That has always been the case (look, for example, at all of the "fair labor" standards - that exempt Congress!)

That doesn't make it any better when they do it with COVID rules, but it also shouldn't stand-out just because it's COVID!

Getting back to the point of the article: The stupid statement - which was not an official declaration, just something said, albeit to intentionally upset the un-vaccinated, to call attention to the issue.

He (Macron) has been lambasted by both sides... let's just say it was like a racist joke that wasn't all that funny to start with, wasn't taken well, and wound up offending everyone... when all you REALLY wanted was a chuckle...

@geobear40 said in The truth about liberal media:

@raphjd
It is only about women because they are the weaker sex and need to be protected (a sexist would say) or maybe it's the Liberals adding to their litany of is-ims. The MSM thinks they can put out a sexist story that plays on peoples emotions but it's OK because they are in the RIGHT. If Joy Reid with her raciest rants are ok then what's wrong with a bit of sexism

Sorry, @geobear40 - and this should shock no-one, but will indeed shock many - I agree with @raphjd

When the statistic is that 51% of the population makes up only 25% of the homelessness, then something is askew.

Your diatribes about the poor aside, your virtual assault on women is laughable... and clearly something akin to an original thought - because it has literally no basis in reality.

Statistically speaking, in America, the chances are pretty good (well over 50%) that your mother didn't get pregnant with you on purpose. It was, maybe, a happy accident - but an accident, nonetheless.

Personally, virtually all of my children was mine - on purpose - ... because I adopted them. I would venture to say that most, if not all, of their biological parents were probably surprised by the pregnancy that created them (which explains why they were such terrible parents!)

@wils said in Seeding rate dropping drastically:

I can't help but notice what a tricky system this is. But whatever keeps the lights on, or in this case, the site running...

So I think y'all are making invalid assumptions... specifically, you appear to be under the completely false assumption that you're downloading "content" directly, or even indirectly, from the site!

When you download a torrent file from the site, you download a "description" of the files that make up the torrent's content:

• file name(s)
• checksums for each block (blocks can be of varying sizes)
• address(es) of the trackers

The final item there - the address(es) of the trackers tells your torrent client program where to go to find sources for the torrent's contents... the "tracker"...

The tracker acts as an "introducer" between the parties:

• The tracker keeps lists of "seeders" - not just usernames, but IP addresses and ports - who have the contents of the torrent
• The tracker provides this information to "leechers" upon request (assuming your ratios and other account settings are good!)

After that, it's all up to the seeder and leecher... ALL of their communications (which means every BYTE of the contents of the torrent) are made by direct connections between the seeder(s) and leecher(s)...

Again: the site - including the tracker - has no torrent contents! Only the .torrent files themselves, that provide a "guide" on where to find the contents! After that, you have to contact each seeder individually and request the parts of the file(s) that you need!

@mrker1234

While there IS some evidence that the 2-1-1 dosing of PrEP can work, it has not been studied well...

On the cited CDC page, it states clearly: "This type of use is not currently part of CDC’s guidelines for PrEP use, which still recommends using PrEP as prescribed for those at risk for HIV. Taking PrEP as prescribed is currently the only FDA-approved schedule for taking PrEP to prevent HIV. When taken as prescribed, PrEP is highly effective for preventing HIV."

That said, my perspective about PrEP is that it's use allows the individual to TAKE CHARGE of THEIR OWN sexual health! Rather than "trusting" the partner to accurately report their own HIV status and/or maintain constant and proper condom use, the person who chooses PrEP asserts a level of control previously unavailable.

If YOU are comfortable with the 2-1-1 regimen for PrEP, then that's your decision! Good for you for at least taking control! Unlike COVID-19 masks and vaccines, the only person you're "protecting" with PrEP is yourself!

In reference to the original question: I've been on PrEP since 2015 - over 95% compliant (never missed more than 1 single day, but have from time to time lost a day in the shuffle of day-to-day life!)... and I have had no noticeable side effects.

@geobear40

Why is it people "like you" care so much that women who get pregnant KEEP their babies, and give birth to them, and then once they're born, they're of little to no consequence or worthy of your regard?

As an embryo, they're priceless...
As an infant, they're disposable...

You sicken me... morally, anyway...

@geobear40

OK - arguing this point with you is akin to arguing the validity of Dec 25 being an even remotely possible actual date for the birth of Jesus (regardless of his divinity)... for you, it's a religious-belief... even the FDA itself cannot dissuade you from your belief that the Pfizer vaccine given nearly 10-billion times so far is identical to the "Comirnaty" vaccine approved.

From the FDA's own release:

The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty (koe-mir’-na-tee), for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older.

I'm not sure how you find that confusing, but I have no interest in convincing you - I'd as soon argue with a rock that it needs to move to get more sunshine! (They even make it clear in that statement that "Comirnaty" is a marketing name... FACTS!)

Rather, I am writing to those readers who are interested in facts, not beliefs.

@hingstkuk

Unrelated to your search for porn that has both condom and bareback in the scenes (you might do a search for "stealth" - as that is what it used to be called when the top would "fake" wearing a condom)

Several years ago, I used to host sex parties... some bottoms would insist on condoms, others would insist on bare... but my favorites let the top decide.

That said, I'd estimate that ALL, or at least nearly all, of those bottoms became HIV+ in time... being a "party bottom" is not synonymous with "safer sex practices"...

@duncandonots said in Hello there!:

I just wanted to say hi and that I look forward to being part of this community. Thanks to everyone here!

Welcome to the GT.ru Forum community! We're a pretty low-key group, unless you wander into the politics section - which is "bareback and rough" LOL

Feel free to ask questions - and explore! There's a lot to uncover! LOL

@geobear40 said in The truth about liberal media:

@bi4smooth
If the only reason you posted was to correct my spelling then I would assume you agree with my suggestion?

Actually, I found your suggestion that "We need a generational purge. Where we stop making it easy on people who have made poor personnel decisions and discouraging people from making them." to be absurd - I assumed it was sarcasm!

If "society" wants to start "purging" unwanted peoples, WTF makes you think homosexuals won't be HIGH on the list??

@geobear40 said in Russia rejects European Court of Human Rights order to recognise same-sex unions:

@bi4smooth said in Russia rejects European Court of Human Rights order to recognise same-sex unions:

Sigh... why must every political argument in here circle back to US politics? That's just sad... as-if the US were the only country that mattered.... pathetic and sad....
For what it's worth,

I am a citizen of the US and am only concerned about international events that have a direct effect on the US or that we can learn from their mistakes. The American Experiment has worked for almost 250 years we are the model for others.

Considering that the US accounts for about 4% of the world's population, and that we continue to battle economic, social, and criminal injustice - institutionalized injustice - I would say you are demonstrating a level of HUBRIS common among poorly educated US citizens, and often derided by the rest of the world as "Ugly Americans" (not in appearance, but in attitude).

You're welcome to have interests solely in US politics and news, but shouldn't you then leave discussions about World Politics alone, rather than steer them to US issues?

I mean, you're free to post in any topic you want - I'm not the content police! (LOL) - but it would seem to me to be more respectful of others for you to NOT steer their conversations to your own myopic, US-centered view...

When you're not under the jurisdiction of those courts, I would call them independent countries!
The US has, for decades, ignored World Court and other countries' court's orders... citing our sovereignty! Why is it we're so upset when other countries do the same thing?

The United States is not a State Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute), which founded the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002 as a permanent international criminal court to "bring to justice the perpetrators of the worst crimes known to humankind – war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide", when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so.

There are plenty of examples of the US declining to participate in treaties the rest of the world - in some cases, UNANIMOUSLY - approves of (for example, we won't sign on to the treaties that ban the use of land mines...aka: Ottowa Treaty - although we are not alone in that one...)

But, I should point out, you appear in this statement to be in support of my argument that the Russians are not under the jurisdiction of the EU courts! LOL

Not that I agree with the Russian failure to recognize (or legalize) same-sex unions, but they do have a point they are not members of the EU, and are not subject to their courts!

The Russian Federation ratified the European Court of Human Rights May of 1998.

https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=signatures-by-treaty&treatynum=005

Silly @geobear40 - ratifying the treaty did not put them under the jurisdiction of the EU courts! Indeed, I'm not aware of a single non-EU country that has agreed to "submit to the authority" of any EU court!

@geobear40 said in Utah Billionaire Leaves LDS Church, Donates to LGBTQ Group:

Being a former Mormon myself anyone leaving the church is a good thing.

But why now? I am wondering did he come out to himself? or maybe his business interests forced him to choose between his religion or the Woke mob.

I'm confused.... when you refer to the "Woke mob", are you referring to:

• The liberals who support LGBTQ+ rights, or
• The conservatives who want to suppress, even amplify, discrimination (and recrimination) of LGBTQ+ people?

@geobear40 said in The truth about liberal media:

@raphjd
Why does it matter that one in 4 women are homeless?

Is it not also their own decisions that brought them to this situation?
They didn't pay attention in school or didn't graduate at all. They had sex before marriage and or didn't use birth control. Maybe they got hooked on drugs or just have untreated mental issues. Either way it is not my responsibility to care for them.

We need a generational purge. Where we stop making it easy on people who have made poor personnel decisions and discouraging people from making them.

I'm going to refrain from poking fun at you (other than pointing it out) that you're using the wrong word:

• a personnel decision has to do with hiring/firing people (as-if these homeless women were employers!)
• a personal decision (what you meant to say) has to do with a decision about one's self

I'm actually surprised that the percentage of homeless women is so low - think about it: women make up about 51% of the population (no, it's not 50/50!)... so that makes men 3x more likely than women to be homeless...

There is a line from Jesus Christ Superstar:

• "There will be poor always, pathetically struggling, look at the good things you've got!" (from the song "Everything's Alright")

@geobear40 said in France’s Macron Stuns As He Declares Un-Vaxxed ‘Not Citizens’.:

@bi4smooth
The vaccine that the FDA approved is "Legally Distinct" from the one administered in the USA. It is called COMIRNATY and is not used in the USA.

https://heavy.com/news/comirnaty-vs-pfizer-vaccine-legally-distinct/

If it was the same vaccine then the FDA would approve it.

Why were boosters not given to the full FDA advisory panel? Did the FDA which receives 45% of it operating budget from the Pharma industry have a vested interest in pushing vaccines?

No, it is NOT distinct... under the EUA, Pfizer cannot legally market the vaccine, so it cannot have a "name" - once it was approved, Pfizer - as they do with all of their products - gave it a name when it was approved!

READ THE FDA APPROVAL NOTICE

You don't need a PhD to understand it, nor a legal degree! It's in pretty plain English!

As for boosters, they are the exact same vaccines as the other doses... the only vaccine doses that are different are the ones for children, which are at a lower dose.

Once approved by the FDA, there is no "separate" approval for administering the vaccine in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th dose! (FWIW: many people with compromised immune systems have received WAY MORE than 3 doses!)

@serenity said in Russia rejects European Court of Human Rights order to recognise same-sex unions:

@geobear40 I am not excusing Biden, I have not heard of it. And Biden is not socialist. But we were talking here about European affaires, not American.

Sigh... why must every political argument in here circle back to US politics? That's just sad... as-if the US were the only country that mattered.... pathetic and sad....

For what it's worth, @geobear40

What do you call a leaders and governments that doesn't adhere to court orders?

When you're not under the jurisdiction of those courts, I would call them independent countries!

The US has, for decades, ignored World Court and other countries' court's orders... citing our sovereignty! Why is it we're so upset when other countries do the same thing?

Not that I agree with the Russian failure to recognize (or legalize) same-sex unions, but they do have a point they are not members of the EU, and are not subject to their courts!

BTW: I wholeheartedly agree with @eobox91103's description of Russian history... though I would suggest that the failure to "westernize" in the 1990's was more due to the population's willingness (almost DESIRE) to accept authoritarian rule again (vs. democratic government)... it's all they've ever known!

@geobear40 said in France’s Macron Stuns As He Declares Un-Vaxxed ‘Not Citizens’.:

@serenity
It was clear how he was using the word "Citizen" in his statement.

The vaccines are for use under a emergency use authorization and have not yet been approved by the FDA. You should look it up before you write here. They are not doing what they intended to do which was provide 90%-95% protection from the virus. So they are "Experimental" as to what they actually do.

FDA approval of the Pfizer vaccine is completed. I have posted the link to the FDA website itself in the past. That you continue to claim that this is not true is either stupidity on your part, or a deliberate attempt to deceive. Either way you are EASILY proven wrong in that assertion... time to move on to something equally ludicrous but less easily refuted, if you ask me! LOL

It's kind-of-hard to find information on the full-approval status on the Moderna or J&J vaccines, because results are overwhelmed by results on their EUA and Pfizer's full approval status... but I did find a site that seems to be tracking it: GoodRX

In summary:

• Pfizer is fully approved for ages 18+
• Pfizer's approval for people ages 12-18 and 5-12 is still in-process, but they remain available under the EUA (authorization vs. approval)
• Moderna applied for full approval for ages 12+, but there are some questions about the myocarditis some have experienced with the Moderna, so approval (aka: full approval vs authorization under the EUA) has been delayed
• Moderna's authorization for ages 12+ remains under the EUA
• Johnson & Johnson has not yet applied for full approval, but remains available under the EUA.

To be clear here, he's not using Executive Authority to remove their citizenship... he's just saying so to "piss them off"... something he makes clear, and something he's getting quite a bit of push-back about.

Probably not a great strategy, but he's getting his name in the headlines... I can think of another politician who used to say truly stunningly stupid things to make sure he was in the headlines... what was is name again?

@amazeingrave said in WA hello :

Hey all, from WA and looking to be part of the family here. I've been here a few days now and really like the feel to this community.
I'm looking for friendly nice people to chat to.
I'm in a very loving relationship.
I'm into sports - I play hockey. I love good action movies and anime.
The guys I like to see in porn is ones that have really nice hair.
I love chillin with my friends and playing a good D&D game.
I just joined the day before new years here so I'm only 6 days old.

Welcome to GT.ru, and to the forums! Glad you're finding it a welcoming place! Feel free to ask questions while you learn about the place... there is LOTS to explore!

@raphjd said in Facebook uses 1st Amendment in lawsuit:

@bi4smooth

Facebook (all big tech) publicly claim that their "fact checks" are factual.

In this lawsuit, as always, they are singing a completely different tune.

Now their "fact checks" are simply OPINION.

Strangely enough, they still maintain that their "fact checks" are completely factual on their site. They don't allow appeals to "fact check" claims based on them being "accurate and well researched".

The Meta claim is that they are protected by their First Amendment rights - not from you, who wants your crap posted - but, from Government intrusion into their private enterprise... that which you call Facebook.

It remains to be seen if those claims will hold water... but, either way, they aren't claiming the factual or non-factual basis as a defense, rather that the Government cannot interfere regardless because their "editing" of their site is protected by their 1st Amendment rights.

As for their PR defense for removing posts conflicting with their LEGAL defense for the same.... well that is unique...

NOT!