@raphjd said in Facebook bans the truth, yet again:
You are the communist since you don't believe that people have rights.
people have all kinds of rights - mostly equal rights to all of them...
YOU don't get special rights... not because you're white, not because you're male, not because you're queer, not because you're in the UK, not because... well, not because of anything - you are NOT special (unless we're talking special needs here)...
@raphjd said in BLM threatens riots if Mayor-elect Adams reinstitutes NYPD anti-crime units:
You have a well-documented habit of posting from liberal sites.
It's funny that I post a link to the actual video, but you don't like it, claiming that it is out of context but I can't find a video where he "predicts" rather than threatens.
Outside right-wing extremist media, this isn't a story... at all! It's not there because it's not newsworthy to them.
My comment that it was a prediction, not a threat, came from PRINTED material, not video... because when the right-wing media twisted his comments, he posted the transcript of the entire statement, not just the snippet that's being played on the media.
Just because your Russian friends/handlers think it's newsworthy, doesn't mean the rest of the (non-Trump) world agrees!
@raphjd said in Facebook bans the truth, yet again:
You are in total lockstep with the CCP/DNC when it comes to hating the rights of people, except to riot and loot.
You are a communist! You want the State to enforce your vision of fairness.
Facebook has just as many rights as you - no more, no less. You want to post your stuff, post it! Just not on Facebook!
I don't know what their issue with that story would be - but that's not the point! The issue isn't whether the censorship of that post is MORALLY right or wrong, it's whether it is LEGAL... which it is, and you just get your panties in a wad every time they "decide" against you...
And to that end, I have no problems... you can be a whiny little bitch all day every day... (holding my tongue... physically LOL)
But when you take the NEXT STEP, and propose that they should be FORCED to allow your content - BY LAW.... well, that's communism (the State making decisions about who can do what, where, and when - in the name of the "common good"), and I want no part of it!
@flozen said in Why is everything new being deleted from the "Fan Sites" category?:
I feel as if half of the posters (guess) are late for their Ivermectin boosters.
Conspiracy?
Are the takedowns the conspiracy? Or are the wild-ass guesses about the takedowns the conspiracy?
@raphjd said in Facebook bans the truth, yet again:
Ok, Feng Feng, whatever you say.
According to the FB auto-ban on the article, it says the moderation staff found it to be a "privacy concern" and "abusive".
I do love how, as a self-proclaimed "libertarian" you don't believe that humans have rights, but businesses do. Whatever, you do you or do the CCP/DNC.
You are butt hurt and screechy about Kyle, but you try to hide Bicep Bitch's crimes. Why is that? It reminds me of how you desperately tried to downplay the summer of love.
You continue to have a problem with the difference:
In other words: they are wrong to do it (moral), but it is their right (legal) to do wrong (moral) things on their own services!
You have NO right (legal) to use their platform! It is a privilege that they give to you (and they clearly give to a wide swath of people!), and they have the right (legal) to rescind that privilege at a whim!
Look: @raphjd is the Administrator here - on GT.ru. He's the OLNY person I've ever seen with that label, so let's assume he's the ONLY Administrator.
As such, @raphjd has the RIGHT (legal) to censor me, or even ban my account! But exercising that right (legal) - and I am thankful that he does NOT choose to exercise that right (legal) - would be wrong (moral).
Facebook (or Meta) is a little bigger than GT.ru (just a little, tho!) - and so there are LOTS of "administrators" at Meta... EACH OF WHOM have the shared right (legal) to censor (or censure!) content on their site! That doesn't mean it is right (moral) for them to do so - and I've repeatedly said I do NOT agree with their inconsistent and overly partisan application of their own wishy-washy rules.
If understanding the difference between a legal right and a moral one makes me a "liberal elite", then I accept that... just the same as being a supporter of "Law and Order" apparently does too...
If your definition of Conservative is dumb and blindly following Donald Trump, then count me out. But I'm keeping my Republican Party membership (voter registration)...
@raphjd said in BLM threatens riots if Mayor-elect Adams reinstitutes NYPD anti-crime units:
I've seen the video posted by a lot of different people.
Why haven't I seen it on your beloved liberal media?
This will come as a shocker!, I'm sure:
As such, I cannot answer for them... unlike some, I try NOT to put words into other people's mouths - at least not without making it clear!
@raphjd said in Facebook bans the truth, yet again:
Umm, why the fuck are you attacking me?
All I said was that Facebook has banned news about Bicep Bitch.
Nice to see you once again siding with the liberal crowd, though. Go back to snortching Pelosi's gin-soaked pussy farts.
If it's a liberal idea to "just say no" to 17 y/o vigilante "justice", then count me in!
But since when were the Libs the "Law and Order" party?
I don't have any idea on what basis Facebook would have denied your story - it's a legit story... the guy is a police antagonist with a long list of "interactions" with the cops. That's (apparently) a fact.
Facebook (or, should i say "Meta") has been a crazy place for a LONG time - I'm not no it, and don't think I ever will be. I'm also not on Instagram, SnapChat, or most of the other social media outlets...
You haven't seen me supporting Facebook's actions - what you've seen me do is say they have the RIGHT to be idiots and assholes on their own platforms! It's a private company, not a Gov't!
@deliverator9 said in Seedbox sharing?:
Hi all,
I share a seedbox with a buddy of mine. We don't live together and have different IP addresses. Since we share a seedbox, should we share my account as well, or should he sign up for his own? I don't want to break the rules of course, and I don't have a problem sharing the account with him.
If I am reading the FAQ correctly it seems I should probably just share my account with him.
Thanks for any clarification!
Multiple users from the same IP address (same seedbox, in this case) will be flagged as multiple accounts.
I use a VPN - exclusively - to connect to this site (and esp the tracker), and since I use a common VPN, sometimes other users wind up on the same VPN server as me... in the past, I've been flagged - however, the staff hasn't flagged me in a while so I think they've improved their VPN "detection" so this doesn't happen too often.
So, yes - share a server, share an account!
You guys are just awful pieces of shit, aren't you?
Most victims deserved it?
As for the witness in the Rittenhouse trial - did you actually READ the charges against him? Clearly not!
He has a history of being antagonistic to the local police: his "prowling" charges are for videotaping off-duty cops. His defense in some of these other charges is that he's being targeted by the cops because he's constantly revealing their abuses of power and "blue privilege"...
So, if I can summarize @raphjd: it's GREAT if you go out onto some obscure, dark-web, porn site and RAIL against the cops... but go out and actually REVEAL their bad behavior ... well, then you're a bad-guy?
Talk about (and apparently, that's all you will do) having your cake and eating it too!
Is he some angel? no! But the judge in the Rittenhouse case has a reputation for being a hard-ass, by the book jurist, and both sides (prosecution and defense) have suggested that he has shown that in this case.
The question in Rittenhouse isn't really WHETHER he's guilty of something, but rather WHAT he's guilty of - how LONG will he spend in jail. His claims of self-defense were demolished by his own testimony: he knew the one guy was unarmed, they threatened each other, and out of fear that the other guy would take HIS gun, he killed him? No. Sorry, it's not self-defense when you goad the other guy into being aggressive with you and YOU are the only one with the gun to start with! Things might be different if there had been an actual (non-verbal) struggle... but this wasn't that...
"Honest officer, it was self defense... I poked my gun into his back and told him "Hands up" - but he turned around after he put his hands up, and he had a real threatening look in his eye - I was afraid, HONESTLY afraid - so I shot him right then and there before he could hurt me."
@musclelv1972 said in Why is everything new being deleted from the "Fan Sites" category?:
I wish something more could be done to prevent the sudden removal of fansite stuff right after posting. I mean there was a rip of Iggy Lopez's stuff and it didn't even begin to download and seed because it was removed so fast.
So unless I'm mistaken, once the connection is made between seeder and leecher, the tracker is no longer a required part of the equation. And the DMCA (as well as duplicate) removals just take them away from the tracker - they have no way to infiltrate the seeder's systems and remove content!
So: if you're seeing a torrent come up, and it's seeder starts to seed, and you get connected to that seeder, and while you're still downloading, the site removes the torrent (for whatever reason), your download should continue until completion.
Because the torrent was removed, you won't be "charged" for the download, but you won't be able to SEED it either, upon completion.
I know people are often confused about this part of torrenting: the tracker doesn't contain any part of the actual files! All of the content is on other users' computers! The tracker is just an "arbiter" - connecting people who want to people who have!
When you "browse" torrents here, you're just looking at a catalog of material people are seeding. (Thousands of users means many thousands of seeded items)... When you "download" from the site, you're actually just downloading a "descriptor" of the contents (including file checksums - to make sure you're getting valid content)... your torrent client program then use that descriptor, and a connection to the "tracker," to establish DIRECT connections to the seeders.
From that point on, all of the data transfers are between seeder and leecher - with no action happening on (or through) the tracker, except that both report TO the tracker that they are talking/trading data. (That is where/how the quotas are established/maintained).
So, when a torrent is removed from the tracker, the list of seeders the leecher got are still valid, and the seeders are still seeding (they don't need access to the tracker, except that the tracker is how leechers "hear/learn about" the seeder). Thus, the torrent is "unregistered" - not dead.
Long story short, once you are leeching, if the tracker removes the torrent, your leech should be able to continue... unless the SEEDER also (typically out of frustration) deletes the torrent from their client, in which case, they are no longer seeding and the torrent really IS dead.
@deliverator9 said in Greetings from somehwere in the US 
:
Greetings from somewhere in the US. I'm happy to be here and I hope to be a productive member of the community
Welcome - Somewhere... is that anywhere near No Name, CO? or Due West, SC? or maybe Hell, MI? LOL
I've been to Hell in Grand Caymen, but never Hell in the US.... and I live in Florida... We have Christmas, Two Egg, and Yehaw Junction here! (I've been to all of them!)
@enclopius66 said in Hello from Canada:
Hi everybody, I'm Kippy from Ontario, Canada and am glad to meet you all! I joined a couple of months ago but have mostly been lurking since then
I've uploaded a few torrents and hope you enjoy them!
xoxo
Kippy
Welcome Kippy! AWESOME that you've uploaded material! This wouldn't be much of a site without people who share original content!
Did you get your upload bonus? (There is a link to the program somewhere around here - you get like 600 Seed Bonus Points - the equivalent of 10GB upload credit - for your first successful upload!
If you can't find it, do a helpdesk request... some Staffer will be able to help you find out how to request it!
@vicki666 said in Doogie Howser, M.D. (1989 – 1993) [720p/HULURIP] WITH SUBTITLES:
PLEASE POST
Doogie Howser, M.D. (1989 – 1993) [720p/HULURIP] WITH SUBTITLES
https://www.hulu.com/series/doogie-howser-md-484763ed-4bf4-44b6-a018-0c1957aa1384
THANK YOU
In spite of your attraction to the young Doctor, and/or the fact that the actor (Neal Patrick Harris) is in-fact gay, this TV series has no real "gay" connection... I am certain it is probably available on other torrent sites... but it wouldn't be appropriate here.
https://www.gaytorrent.ru/rules.php
- All non-porn material must be LGBTQ themed by its main plot and characters or contain a recurring LBGTQ subplot. Gay-interest, an openly gay actor or minor gay references are insufficient to meet this requirement.
@djsoapbubble said in copyright infringement:
@looselips Yeah, it stinks. Especially if a lot of time and effort has been put into it. Hence, the reason why I don't share as much is that I'm very detail-oriented. I've always been since young adolescence. It's a terrible trait to have and I think a lot of that has to do with me being a competitive person. But, going back to your original post, it sucks. I can empathize. Because when time and effort are both involved, it doesn't outweigh or even provide a fair equilibrium to the outcome.
I have had some minor luck in re-posting the same torrent (with minor changes - like adding a pic) about a month or so after the DMCA, and in some cases they've "taken"...
But, for example, I once posted 10 complete "movies" (collections of 4-6 scenes) from one studio... these were older - like 10 years ago... 2 were DMCA'd, the rest were not. Go figure!
Let's not forget here that we're technically sharing copyrighted material - porn or otherwise!
I personally take a "don't look a gift-horse in the mouth" approach! "Free porn" is just that!
@kytec said in G'day from down under:
G'day everyone, a collector here from down under, long time lurker first time poster.
g'Day Mate! Welcome to the Forum! Look around and have a good time. Not a LOT of participation on here - it kinda ebbs and flows...
Just be sure to wear your fireproof Reginalds if you venture into the Politics section. (Sadly, it is dominated by US Politics, but you could try to change that! LOL)
@raphjd said in Canadian woman diagnosed with "climate change":
Let's ignore her age, health issues, and living conditions so we can diagnose her with climate change.
I'm gonna see if my GP will diagnose me with time travel.
Doctors should stick to medicine, and not (at least not on medical charts) make political statements.
Blaming this woman's issues on "Climate change" is the moral/medical opposite of declaring a gunshot victim's cause of death as "lead poisoning"!
ALL of her symptoms (the patient he gave that diagnosis to) were attributed to high heat levels... that's medically evident. That those heat levels are a direct result of climate change is not a medical analysis! It is a political one...
@raphjd said in BLM threatens riots if Mayor-elect Adams reinstitutes NYPD anti-crime units:
Did you even see the video?
He clearly said, "We will take to the streets. There will be riots, there will be fires and there will be bloodshed".
The clip was edited - unsurprisingly, since if they played it in full context, it would likely match what was reported elsewhere: that he PREDICTED that would be the result, nor that he THREATENED that would be the result.
Anyway, you again miss the salient facts, instead focusing in the minutiae - with particular focus on ensuring your every assertion is agreed upon in its full entirety! (Ego much?)
The important facts here are that the Dems got themselves another liberal Mayor of NYC, and the bitch ain't even installed yet and the left-wing "progressives" are already attacking him as not being liberal enough! BLM is attacking him as-if he wasn't also a black man! As-if he didn't know what it was like, being black in NYC!
GOD I love it when Liberals turn cannibalistic!
They've been doing it in Congress since Biden and the new congress took office earlier this year (why SHIT has been passed so far - though this Infrastructure bill is a rare sign that they might be able to take each others dicks out of their mouths long enough to get something done! Which is too bad.... not that we didn't need the Infrastructure spending - we did - but this will be seen as a Biden "win", and he's been so GOOD at failing so far! LOL)
@raphjd said in BLM threatens riots if Mayor-elect Adams reinstitutes NYPD anti-crime units:
OK, you are clearly too stupid to get that constantly calling me a Russian troll, is the issue I'm talking about.
But, you do you, you CCP/DNC agent.
You constantly troll me as a "liberal" and a Pelosi acolyte (though are far less polite about it) - yet I refer to you as one of your primary sources, and that's too much for you?
You REALLY ARE like Trump! In SO MANY WAYS!
BTW: You should Google "Lampooning" - which, if you re-read my note earlier is EXACTLY what I said I did to you when you "Trumpified" yourself with your "holier than thou, I'm infallible and so are my sources" attitude...
Where I have a problem with you, on here, is your Trump-inspired supposition (assertion) that any disagreement with, or deviation from, your "line" - no matter how small - is a complete and utter desertion of all you stand-for - nay, all that is right and good in this world! ... And that's just silly.... thus, I lampoon you when you do it...
Oh, and I fully intend to continue to call you out on that ego-trip that is sourced from His Royal Silliness, Donald J Trump - but you seem to think is yours too!
@raphjd said in BLM threatens riots if Mayor-elect Adams reinstitutes NYPD anti-crime units:
You insist on trying to discredit me, while you are a CCP/DNC agent.
That's all I was saying.
How did I discredit you - other than your choice of source. Your original post was literally little more than a link to an outside story with a 1-liner that clearly was a response to the headline alone.
You take things too personally... whats' more, you assume nearly everything I write is directed at you... and that's not the case... by a LONG shot!
The problem isn't you - it's the "uprising" of the extremist media and their insipid characterizations of "the other side" as evil, misguided fools - as anyone can plainly see! - if you just buy into their content!
I'm not shooting at the messenger, just the message!
Where I have a problem with you, on here, is your Trump-inspired supposition (assertion) that any disagreement with, or deviation from, your "line" - no matter how small - is a complete and utter desertion of all you stand-for - nay, all that is right and good in this world! ... And that's just silly.... thus, I lampoon you when you do it...
@truthbtold6 said in What gives you the best orgasms?:
@andergarcia said in What gives you the best orgasms?:
When he's fucking me hard and hits my insides
Not sure if this is the same but when he cums inside of me. I love when he tells me he is going to cum and I get to tell him to breed me, please.
I love that too, but that's not my BEST orgasm! The BEST ones for me come when I'm being restrained and can't touch my own cock, then I'm brought to orgasm -either directly, or with some edging- completely out of my own control!
At least those are the times when I cum the MOST and HARDEST!
I've said many times: pulling out is for porn! That is: not for real-life! The penis is a semen-delivery-system designed to deposit the fluid as deeply as possible into the target. You are genetically programmed to want to pump your load deep!
