@flozen said in Can I ask for invite to gay-torrent.org?:

@bi4smooth As background, the invitation rule you provided is from a 2007 post. It's on the same thread that notes "derailing conversations, to complain about topics or individual posters, is not allowed." Now, there's an enforcement challenge that would really amount to something.

I'm not trying to be a policeman - I'm in no position to enforce any forum rules.

Honestly, I previously had responded to just such a post - and provided an invite to another torrent site. I was subsequently chastised/warned by a Moderator that I was in violation of the forum rules - citing that very page.

I don't do that anymore: other than in the Politics section, I try NOT to annoy the moderators of the site... I like my porn!

I made no threat, not even a warning... I just posted that it was a documented violation of the rules... the same Administrator (@raphjd) who posted those rules is the current Administrator. If there have been changes in policy, I'm not aware of it - and there is no reason anyone would single me out to update the policy... Also, if the policy had changed, I'm pretty sure moderators can delete posts...

We could ask the moderators to clarify... but honestly, I've found the less you involve the "cops" and handle things yourself the better... you never know what the "cops" will do! And it's seldom exactly what you want them to do!

As for the implication that I "derailed a conversation",I'll just point you to the original post... a question... CAN I ask for an invite to gay-torrent.org... I answered that question, specifically and directly.

Sorry to get defensive...

@kekkaishi

Most likely your ISP is blocking the ports you use to connect.
In your torrent client, open up your preferences and change the port you're using.

If you have an OLD router, or have otherwise manually opened ports or configured port-forwarding, you will need to change those settings too.

This is a violation of the Forum rules:

https://community.gaytorrent.ru/topic/7643/forum-rules-condensed/2

@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1 :

MGF became a thing in the last half of the 1800s. Not only was it supposed to cure evil masturbation but it also prevented or cured several diseases caused by masturbation.

There has been no argument from me that the procedure - whether performed on men or women - is ill-conceived and brutal. Circumcision in men has been around for thousands of years - its commonality has waxed and waned over the centuries, but it has been a part of the Jewish & Islamic faiths from their formations! (Christians essentially "inherited" circumcision from their Jewish foundations, but aren't supposed to practice it - see reference to Paul below...).

NOTE: Islam, not unlike the Jewish faith, has some differing "factions" - some of which REQUIRE circumcision (as Orthodox Jews do), others do not. (YES There is such a thing as an uncircumcised modern Jew - I've tasted one!) LOL! Worldwide, Christians largely DO NOT circumcise their male children (other than in the US and a few smaller countries), because Paul (aka: Saint Paul) taught that the many "laws" of Leviticus were overturned by the "New Testament of Jesus Christ"... The Vatican (Catholic Church) strictly prohibits circumcision for religious reasons - but allows it for medical ones... The point being that: even the 3 major Abrahamic religions can't make up their minds on circumcision!

Quick Rabbit Hole: I once caused quite a stir in college when I said that it (circumcision) was proof that God was a woman or queer! After all, sacrificing humans & animals to the One God was forbidden, but penises? By God, the One God wanted those! ROFL...

MGF was not made illegal in western countries, but female circumcision was. Thankfully the SCotUS saw the bigotry in the law and threw it out.

If you're just presenting a fact, no argument here. But if you're referencing my writing, you're conflating "legal" with "religious and social"...

Liberals call it mutilation when it happens to girls, but call it circumcision when it happens to boys. I flipped it around.

This isn't (at lest as I can see in my area if the US) a Liberal vs. Conservative issue at all... I know both liberal and conservative parents (remember, I'm active in the Foster and Adoptive Parent communities 'round these parts - so, I know a LOT of parents!) who have decided both ways on the question of circumcision. When I am asked, I always counsel AGAINST... for one thing, because it is something that cannot be UNDONE, but also because it IS something that can be done LATER.

BULLSHIT about girls being body-shamed but guys are not.

As usual, you can't see a nuanced argument - you see only black and white. I didn't say women were the ONLY ones body-shamed, only that they were MORE... FAR MORE... body-shamed by Western Culture (esp. in advertising) than men are... but I ALSO pointed out that there is "movement" in that difference... and that the movement is in the WRONG direction: men are starting to be body-shamed (also largely in advertising) more and more...

Also, in your typical all-or-nothing mentality, you cannot seem to accept that some positive action has occurred - because it wasn't everything you wanted, it was a complete and utter failure in your eyes. Pity... Progress is progress!

Men have always been body shamed, in the same way, women have. The only difference is that women have been whining about it forever and a day.

You're either willfully blind or ignorant. I don't need to provide evidence to counter your argument: literally every reader out there will have experienced the falsity - no: absurdity - of your argument in their actual lives.... at least any who have any women (sisters, mothers, daughters, friends) in their day-to-day lives!

Even the fat assed heffers don't want fat men. This is made clear by several surveys.

Clearly you don't frequent fetish porn! There are people who ADORE obese men and women! But we're talking about "societal norms" here. And body shaming isn't recognizing people who "look good" - it's about shaming people who don't fit the current criteria for what's supposed to be "looking good"!!! Especially for criteria that may be genetically defined!

Ask any man who is, say, 40 lbs overweight if he is often called FAT by his friends or coworkers? Or if they ever reference his weight - even with terms like "he's a big man"... and at just 40 lbs overweight, he likely will say "not so much"... or "a little"...
Ask the same of a woman who is, say, just 20 lbs overweight the same - and they will say "all the time" or even "constantly"...

Again: this issue isn't whether it is happening more or less to men or women - it's that it's happening at all, and whether steps are being taken to minimize it - for any!

The 80/20 rule of dating exists for a reason.

I have no idea what 80/20 rule of dating you're referring to... my understanding of the 80/20 rule of dating is that if 80% of your time together is "great", your relationship is doing OK... the other 20% being "not great" is normal...

Good-looking people, of either gender, do better than ugly people.

LOL - once again, you conflate body shaming with "fairness" - life isn't fair, and it cannot be. While there is a "bias" towards "beautiful people", the definition of what is beautiful changes:

• 100 years ago, most of today's "beautiful" women would be excoriated as "sickly stick figures"... women were expected to "have curves" - including significant breasts and wide hips!
• 50 years ago, chest hair was "in" - if you had it, you showed it off (this was parodied by Mike Meyers in the Austin Powers series)
• 10 years ago, chest hair in men was OUT - some men were even LASER removing hair from their chests! Only to find that particular pendulum swinging BACK in favor of chest hair again currently...
• When I was growing up, having a deep, "bronze" tan was "the in thing" (clearly for whites!)... not so much now, as we realize that this tanning caused serious skin damage - even skin cancer!

Body shaming is cruel - especially when the body "parts" in question may well be genetically defined. (This includes shaming men with small penises and women with small breasts!) The only people who should be talking to a man or woman about their weight should be their Dr.! If their weight is "healthy" for them, then it's none of the rest of our business. If it is NOT healthy, then it is up to the patient and Dr to figure out a plan of action - it is NOT up to me or the rest of society to weigh in!

Does that mean it doesn't (or won't) happen? No! We'll never be able to make society "kind and accepting" - but we can STOP making it socially acceptable to call someone "fat" or whatever... especially in public.

The psychology behind ugly ass guys being in porn is that when guys watch it, they think that even they can get the good-looking chicks.

Yeah - that's why the guys in porn also have average-to small dicks! Because they want the "average guy" to think "that could be me!"... makes perfect sense to me now!

If you ask me (and I've DONE porn)... the only part of a male actor STRAIGHT males look at is their dick... while they look at the whole package when they look at/fantasize about the women. (Exception: in fetish porn, they look at the fetish - e.g. large breasts - not the whole body...)

Because of the constant portrayals of almost solely large-dicked men in porn, it is a common "belief" by men in counseling that "I'd be more successful in life/sex if I just had a bigger dick"...

Locally, an injury law firm is actually satirizing that very thing... their billboards all proclaim "Size DOES matter!" (they claim to be the largest injury law firm in the country...)

@raphjd said in You are all banned:

I was shown a post on another site that said that I ban everyone who refuses to kiss my ass.

Since I don't want this person to be a liar, you are all banned.

As side note, I'm also working on finding a Nazi uniform that I can wear while I commit genocide.

As one of your "arch enemies" I can attest that you don't ban people who argue with you (or even call you names!)...

Personally, I think you do a good job of keeping your personal views (at least in the politics section) out of your "administrator" duties.

I've seen you ban people - people who crossed the well-defined rules/lines - and, generally, also ignored warnings.

If you were going to ban people for arguing against your point of view - or even beliefs - I have to think I'd have been booted out a LONG TIME ago!

Then again, when you DO boot someone, it shouldn't be surprising that they express displeasure where they can... which won't be here!

And demonizing you (as the banner-in-chief) is just part of their self-soothing ritual... after all, THEY couldn't have done anything to have DESERVED IT! It must just be UNFAIR!

Again: as one of your chief antagonists, I have no complaints about fairness here...

Perhaps make a suggestion in the helpdesk?

But be specific... say:

• Why not create a reverse SBP program where you can purchase SBP with upload credits? Say, 10GB upload credit will buy you 500 SBP

NOTE: If you do that backwards, it takes 600 SBP to purchase back the 10GB upload - and that would prevent "churning" (going back and forth)...

Just an idea... from one massive seeder to another (even though I download a TON too! So, my ration isn't that high...)

@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1 :

I'm going to summarize several points made here, by multiple people... thus, no quoting:

Circumcision:

• I am not for circumcision, and I no more believe there is any ONE reason all people (well, who ARE) are circumcised, any more than I believe there is only ONE reason people eat breakfast in the kitchen. But the puritanical roots of American social norms should not be overlooked or undervalued when looking at circumcision in the US.
• The idea that circumcision reduces masturbation is a strong motivator in some circles - especially religious ones - including in the American "good society" of the 1940s-1970s that was far more puritanical than Western society is, generally, today.
• The procedure is called circumcision - not "genital mutilation" - and it is practiced on both males AND females in different parts of the world.... in most cases for religious reasons, but in some areas (like the US 50 years ago) it has extended beyond pure religion and become cultural (cross-religion). IMHO the effects of circumcision are worse for women than men - because biologically their clitoris has FAR MORE nerve endings than just the tip of the penis. But it's silly to argue about which is worse when both are just wrong.
• Calling it "genital mutilation" is just purposefully inflaming the issue, and it is unnecessary (not unlike calling abortion "baby-killing" - and I'm anti-abortion as well!)... this is a practice @raphjd is all-too familiar with, as it infects a majority of his "opinion pieces"...
• Circumcised penises are the unnatural form, so uncircumcised is kind-of-a-double-negative, no? The opposite of circumcised is just: natural.
• Circumcision has no medical purpose, unless you project purposes ONTO it in hopes of propping up your already weak argument (like this one: HIV is more easily spread by natural men... so for that to carry weight, you're assuming that HIV will still be a deadly disease in 15 years when your little newborn will start shaking his dick at other people? Sorry: no! Or this one: it will make keeping his penis clean easier. True, but cutting off the outer portion of his hears will help keep the dirt from gathering "behind his ears" too... if you can teach your son to wipe his ass and clean behind his ears, you can teach him to clean the head of his penis! And are you seriously telling me you are NOT teaching your daughters about FEMININE hygiene? Or this one: I want him to look like [the others and/or his father] - which is just a total capitulation that you have no reason other than "because they did it to me"... no way!)
• There are RARE instances where a circumcision is needed in some males - but not as DRASTIC a circumcision as is practiced routinely! The ENTIRE foreskin VERY SELDOM needs to be removed - just "opened up" a bit!

Body Shaming:

• The idea that any current society - Western, Eastern, or otherwise - "body shames" men in the same way or to the extent that they do women is just blindness (or, perhaps, ignorance or even complete stupidity).
• There has only recently been an "awakening" among men in Western Culture that their LOOKS mattered to anyone other than other men (in a "manly" way). IMHO, it started with the "metrosexual" movement around the turn-of-the-century, and today many men (mostly younger) are regularly and routinely applying makeup & hair treatments as part of their "morning routines"... the same as women do.
• Sadly, to me this is a sign we're objectifying MEN as much as we used to objectify WOMEN... and that (IMHO) is movement in the wrong direction (for mental and overall health).
• Want proof? Ron Jeremy was a truly UGLY man, by almost any measure... his sole "saving grace" (physically) was having a big dick and a willingness to perform in porn for multiple decades. And he was not alone - outside of GAY PORN, there were few "good looking" men in porn until the 2000's. Show me one truly famous or successful FEMALE porn star who was butt-ass ugly - EVEN if she had size 144 breasts!
• Body shaming is bad - for everyone! It is a waste of breath to complain that it's WORSE for some than others... it affects ALL people! Even the rich/beautiful have their "body shaming" moments! But complaining that improvements intended to help WOMEN overcome body shaming in advertising are somehow wrong because they don't address male body shaming is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater! Perfection is unachievable, but it is approachable if we make small bits of progress here and there (where we can) and build upon it.

Equality and Fairness:

• EQUALITY is a liberal myth. Things cannot be truly EQUAL in any society, because each person has a unique perspective. That gives each person a different definition of what EQUAL truly means to them. While we can have strive to improve and gain some level of equity, we should not delude ourselves that we will ever reach true EQUALITY. One man's equality is another's inequality.
• Likewise, 100% FAIRNESS is another liberal myth: an unachievable, pie-in-the-sky goal. We can work towards making things MORE FAIR, but true fairness cannot be achieved. Consider the two statements below... how do you "fix" either one?:

• What teenage boy doesn't think it isn't fair that the "other guy" in his school has a big cock, big muscles (and a home gym) and gets to drive his dad's Porsche, while he has an average dick (most do), has acne, and gets to drive his mom's minivan...

• What teenage girl doesn't think it isn't fair that the "other girl" in her school has bigger tits (or ANY tits yet) and whose mother pays for her to get her hair and nails done every weekend, while she has to work at the fast-food joint and cook and clean for her siblings while mom works her 2nd job on the weekends.

Life isn't fair. It never was. It never will be. It cannot be made to be so. If anyone has ever promised you life would be fair, they LIED!

@noyc said in ProblemwithGTrutracker:

Btw, it worked perfectly until yesterday

More likely to get help via the helpdesk, but you might changing the ports you're using... this is a private tracker, so there's only 1 IP/port your ISP has to block to kick you offline here... with public trackers, there are many many more, so that may explain why some others still work.

You change the port in your client settings.

@eobox91103 said in Party of family values part 1 :

Circumcision only reappeared in non-Jewish or Islamic communities in the late 19th century in the United States when the medical community thought it would prevent masturbation, which was considered by many to be a sin (again rooted in the Old Testament "reproductive imperative," but that's another topic.) There does not appear to be a medical "need" for the practice today.

You hit the nail on the head: the re-introduction of circumcision in America had no medical reasoning behind it - it was religious / societal!

Indeed, the primary "reason" for male circumcision is the same reason some societies circumcise GIRLS (yes, there is such a thing as female circumcision! Google it yourelf tho)... that reason is the terrible crime of masturbation. (I will admit - I could have written several books if I collected the time I've spent masturbating over my entire life! Hell, even just in 1 year! LOL)

How is circumcision supposed to prevent masturbation (in boys or girls)? By literally cutting away the nerve endings that make masturbation (not to mention sex) pleasurable!

I've mentioned this before: I am the father of 9, FOUR of whom are boys, and I have not allowed ANY of them to be circumcised! (Unfortunately, my parents followed the societal norms of the 1960s and had my penis cut... )

@kamyk said in Attempting to download a torrent, same porn two torrents, both halfway done then says dead no seeds:

@john32123666 I know donation is optional. Somehow, in spite of asking about this company around 4 days ago, I missed the freelech. There are dozens of seeders right now. My ratio is ok at the moment, and I'm only downloading 24gbs of the torrent. Not missing the boat again whether I have to donate again or not. I'd just spend the money on cigarettes anyway.

hmmm... spend the money on cigs (hurting your lungs, but getting the short-lived nicotine buzz), or on keeping your dick happy for weeks to come (or: weeks to cum)...

You chose wisely, grasshopper!

@kamyk

Your timing is bad - the torrent with 129 SEVP videos was recently FreeLeeched... but it's expired now.

The GOOD news is you can, as described above, download only parts of the torrent (you do not have to download ALL of it!)... AND because it was recently FL, there are PLENTY of seeders!

@kamyk said in Advice for sucking cock and breathing:

@kekkaishi
If it really is your thing (and it's partially a thing of mine too) realize this: There are many people who do things like swim or dive, or other things of that sort who practice holding their breath. Some can hold their breath for up to two minutes, Some even longer, although that is not the norm. And of course, they are not forcibly inserting something down their throat at the same time, which complicates learning the technique. It is partially about breathing, learning to pull off far enough to get a lungful before going back down, but also about extending the time you can hold your breath.

I am able to deep throat for about 1 minute before having to back off enough to get some air in through my nose at least. There is also a reason why you see people in porn lick around the head and shaft a minute, or rub it on their cheek, before continuing, and it's not purely cock worship.

Also, if the idea is not abhorrent to you, some people like to make you gag, both for the feeling of control, and because it makes your throat tighten around their dick. You can also learn to control the gag reflex caused by choking, at least far enough that you don't throw up. Either way, gag or not, as the person above says, practice makes perfect.

At 57 years young, I've never believed I had enough practice... I always need to "work on my technique"

@eobox91103 said in Is it just me? WHO pulls out of a fine ass to cum on a dude's face?:

@bi4smooth said in Is it just me? WHO pulls out of a fine ass to cum on a dude's face?:

I don't get it... SO MUCH porn these days features this "ending"...

2 hot guys fucking - sometimes even flip-flopping - and at the last minute... when the top is about to cum... he pulls out, quickly re-positions himself, and shoots his load on the other guy's face... not even in his mouth, just "across his face"...

Porn directors like to show cum shots on screen, presumably because they believe that's what the audience wants. I agree that's it's unrealistic--in real life fucking or sucking, most guys (giving or receiving) want an internal cum shot.

Another "unrealistic" part of porn is that the actors never communicate what they want--the director is telling them what to do. The best sex happens when guys say what they like--and don't like--as they're doing it.

All good points... the "external" cum shot (what we used to call the "money shot") has to be visible (as in unwritten rule) - tho I find it EXTREMELY HOT when I guy cums in the ass and you can see his cock pulsating the cum into him - you can literally see the tube along his shaft pulsing with the flowing cum... that earns a rewind and cum shot of my own, usually!

I just (personally) like it when they pull out, cum to show you it's real, then plunge it back in to get the full "force and effect" of the orgasm...

Porn is 100% about fantasy - and mostly about picturing yourself as one of the players... maybe bottoms like it when a top pulls out and cums on your face?

I should point out: I've worked in porn (a VERY LONG time ago)...

In the condom age it wasn't uncommon to pull out (wearing a condom) and to shoot on the guys face... that was safety! (It was also sometimes as long as 20-30 minutes after the bottom came!)

• The ass was open and raw - cumming on his ass after fucking him was not much safer than fucking raw to begin with
• The actor being cum on back then, usually was careful NOT to get cum in any "openings" (eyes, mouth, nose, etc)... for the same reason: if the other guy had HIV and his cum got in your nose, you could conceivably get the virus.
• It was rare - back then - for a guy to pull out, yank off the condom, and cum on his face in a "single take"... it happened, but usually there was a scene cut (and, to be honest, a significant delay) before the top came on him (usually, back then, yes - on his face)...

But the porn where I'm suddenly seeing this predilection for pulling out and cumming on their face is newer (and bareback) porn...

to coin a phrase: this ain't that

Maybe the directors are just old farts (like me) who remember the old days? ROFL

@utf16 said in Is it just me? WHO pulls out of a fine ass to cum on a dude's face?:

It’s ok not to be aroused at something you see in porn. Someone else will. At least 90% of porn content is completely unappealing to me personally.

I hear ya... and I totally agree... but while I get a lot of fetishes: e.g.: I don't give a flying fuck what you're wearing - my goal is to get you OUT of them anyways! Leather? Lace? Jockstraps? Speedos? It's nothing to me sexually until you drop 'em and we get down to business! But, I get it that a LOT of guys are INTO leather and these other scenes... and I totally support that! Porn is fantasy, and we all fantasize about our own things...

Even in real life if you want to fuck while wearing a bear suit, I'm down! The bear suit doesn't do anything for me, but if it makes it better for you, I'm with it!

I guess what I'm looking for is the plethora of porn fans who are watching a good fuck scene and thinking to themselves: Gee, I hope he pulls out and cums on his face! - you'd think they way they're doing these scenes, there would be a LOT of those guys out there... but I've never met ONE! Not a one!

That's not to say that oral scenes aren't hot, and flip-flop scenes are my PERSONAL favorite (I get it - a lot of guys don't like flip-flop scenes because a top is supposed to BE A TOP, not turn around and give-up his ass to the bottom! - and if that's you, I respect your opinion... I don't want ALL scenes to be flip-flop.... OK, that's a lie... I personally DO WANT that, but I don't EXPECT that...)... but my own expectation of porn in general is that the studios go where the fetishes are!

There is a new series out from Helix with guys wearing costumes! Cool! I know that fetish is out there, and I know how hot some guys think it is! Cool! Get 'em hard and let the spunk fly! But I'm not expecting to see costumes in nearly ALL Helix videos in the future! Just a few while the fetish remains "in force"...

But the "pull out and cum on his face" thing seems kinda recent to me, and I'm pretty sure it's not really a fetish per-se, so I'm wondering if there is ANOTHER explanation?

Anyone?

@kekkaishi said in Advice for sucking cock and breathing:

I love to suck cock very much. In my head I tell to myself that I can suck for hours, but when start to suck a dick (regular size and above), I'm having difficulty breathing even though my nostrils are open.

It mainly happens when I deepthroat, I can deepthroat no problem, but even regular size dicks i'm having hard time breathing.

Depending on the dick size and how deep you go, I can suck a dick at most for 30 seconds without a break for air

I am aware that while I have a dick in my mouth, I try knowingly to breath through my nose, but it's not enough

I don't have this problem with small dicks though

any tips?

Understand the biology - and equally understand that porn is fantasy - when you see what looks like a guy staying all-the-way down on a 9-inch cock for long periods of time, it's not real - it's spliced together.

So, biologically speaking, the air pathway for your nose-breathing "meets" the air pathway for mouth breathing - pretty much right at the back of the mouth... See here

As you can see, the air pathways join pretty much right at the end/back of your mouth... so any cock you're taking beyond that point, you're taking into your throat - which is shared by both mouth-breathing and nose-breathing.

You could (purely theoretically) get a tracheostomy - a tube inserted into the base of your neck and into your breathing tube (your trachea - hence the name)... that would allow air to come in well below the end of all-but-the-largest dick! But, IMHO, that'd be a little extreme! LOL

No, the fact is, you have to pull off far enough to get air (through your nose OR mouth - try it with your mouth - the cool air rushing around his hot, wet cock can be quite exhilarating for him!) every few moments to catch your breath...

@raphjd said in I actually AGREE with Bette Midler!:

@bi4smooth

Before you talk a ton of shit, let's not forget that you have blatantly lied about what is still exactly written on a website.

I quoted and posted the link directly to the Mayo Clinic's website for C-19 and I quoted directly from their webpage, where they said that if you get the vaccine, it will PREVENT you from getting C-19.

You made up all kinds of shitty mental gymnastics to claim that the exact words on their page didn't actually say what it literally said.

You routinely do this.

You also routinely downplay EVERYTHING done by Democrats or done that favors them.

You downplay the fact that all the things that the Carter/Baker Commission said would cause voter fraud, the Dems did.

I point out Dems who have been prosecuted for multiple counts of voter fraud and you excuse it away.

I point out (with a link) the woman in Wayne County who confessed to doing it for over 20 years and in the triple digits each time, but you pretend it's nothing.

I point out how an entire election in NJ was so dirty that it had to be thrown out. Well, the Presidential election was totally clean, said the judge, but the rest of it was extremely dirty. Of course, you ignored the fact that the judge just so happened to be a Dem.

Every topic is the same.

So before you talk shit about me, clean up your own damned house.

You silly Russian Troll - I don't DOWNPLAY Dem bullshit - I've written plenty about them... what I don't ABIDE by is INFLAMING shit purely for the fun of trying to make things WORSE than they actually are!

And while you are right about the MAYO Clinic saying the vaccine would prevent the COVID-19 illness - you made it sound like they were saying it would prevent the VIRUS - and those are 2 different things... and unlike you, I was clear and specific about what the difference was and how plainly & utterly stupid your argument that it (the vaccine) could actually prevent the virus from entering your body was... but you, in your Trumpy way, cannot admit that you made any error of any kind, and insist that, no matter how small the point, you are/were/will-always-be correct!

But you keep on being your Russian Troll supporting self: keep spreading your lies designed to hurt and divide the country (starting tomorrow it'll be about the California election being stolen... because, after all - if the 5-million registered Republican voters in CA can't out-vote the 10-million registered Democrat voters in CA, there must be fraud! - indeed, ANY election you lose, MUST BE FRAUD... it can't be that even Republicans around the state (of CA) can't abide by replacing the idiot Newsom with the DANGEROUS and DERANGED Elder. )

I'll keep shining a light on those lies and exaggerations - and keep on supporting REAL Conservative political principles... and I'll keep trying to calm the overall temperature of the politics - even it that means inflaming you (and your type)!

FWIW: If you'd bothered to read: I am anti-abortion - even in the case of rape and incest (since when do we, as Americans, punish the child - the unborn child - for the sins of the father?) ... but I do NOT support the false narrative that Dems want to legalize the murder of newly-born children (except, of course, for when they want to eat them... isn't that part of the extremist narrative too?).

Even though this false and inflammatory narrative purports to support my side of the argument, I don't support the false demonization of them (pro-abortionists) purely to falsely prop-up my own side... my side has decency and morals (from all major religions) on it's side, it doesn't need lies and exaggerations to make it's point more correct!

@john32123666 said in IS THIS CONSIDERED A DUPLICATE?:

A duplicate must be same size and file type.
Same movie in different formats are allowed ...

MP4 and M4V are the same file type - the extensions are interchangeable.

Post at your own risk - but, unless you make a habit of it, I don't hear any complaints about mods punishing people who post dupes. So, I don't think there's much "risk"

@perro2492 said in IS THIS CONSIDERED A DUPLICATE?:

I have a movie with the next data.
Duration - 02:07:19
Size - 3.63 GB
Aspect Ratio - 1628x880
kbps - 4091
Format - M4V
Subs - English + Portuguese

And I changed it to.
Duration - 02:07:19
Size - 3.63 GB
Aspect Ratio - 1460x790
kbps - 4500
Format - MP4
Subs - English

Does it count as a duplicate because the size is the same? or doesn't because I changed the fromat, the aspect ratio, the kbps, and the subs.

According to the rules: https://www.gaytorrent.ru/rules.php#102
that would be a duplicate... However, a Mod told me once (when I uploaded a potential duplicate) that ADDING Subtitles to non-porn videos counted as NOT a duplicate...

But, in the example above, you REMOVED subtitles. So it's a dupe.
Just another note: Mods DO care about subtitles, they DO NOT care about pics added to a torrent - so if you upload a torrent that is a dupe, but you added 1000 pics to the torrent, it is STILL a dupe!

NOTE: This is MY UNDERSTANDING of the rules... to get an OFFICIAL "ruling" you should post something in the Help Desk. (On the Torrent side of the site, under Support)

@sacrebleu3 said in HELP. Torrents magically uploaded:

It happened once again. Ive been notified with messages to a torrent. So I clicked on it only to find out that the comment was for a torrent that I DID NOT UPLOAD. . What the heck is going on? This also happened 30 weeks ago basing on MY TORRENTS. First of all, I do not collect porn anime or games to begin with. Second, if I dont have it, then its impossible for me to upload it. The first time this happened I brought it up but the moderators did not believe me.

https://community.gaytorrent.ru/topic/50099/who-rewarded-me-with-seed-bonus?_=1631367441340

Can somebody explain it to me because ive received a warning that I uploaded an incorrect file type or whatever before and now. It also says that the moderator will review my torrents before Im able to upload it.To be honest I dont fully understand what my offense was.HELP

Even though you didn't get "satisfaction" the first time this happened, you still need to report this to the mods... that would be a Help Desk item... no one BUT a Mod or Staff Member will be able to help...