Posts made by eobox91103

@bi4smooth said in Man Threatened With Arrest For Wearing MAGA Hat:

Look! One bad cop and it's the start of a dystopian nightmare! Dogs are raping cats! Children are grading teachers! Dems are going to force you to save your own damned life by wearing a cloth mask...

I liked the TX School Board who made masks part of the dress code. Appropriate!

It's possible that we don't have a bad cop here. Let's take another look at the video: There's no sourcing for it, no date, no location. There's a queue of people in the background, so I suspect it was probably taken at a voters' polling station...where there's a "neutral zone" of 50 meters or so from poll activities where one cannot campaign or display campaign signage, literature, posters, etc. Given that most people in the queue were wearing masks, this could have been the November 2020 presidential election in the US.

We all know that "Make America Great Again" is a campaign slogan for a specific person and the political party for which he is Dear Leader. Displaying that slogan too close to a voting place would be just as illegal as wearing a shirt that said "Build Back Better," which was a chief slogan for the Dear Leader's opponent.

So, the cop may very well have been doing his job. We don't know enough about the situation to judge. (Of course, "knowing enough"--or even "knowing"--is frowned upon in some political circles.)

@flozen It's disappointing when something is labeled "voyeur" or "hidden," and the subject clearly knows he's being recorded--sometimes holding the camera himself. A guy wanking in a locker room mirror might look "risky," although if he's a trainer at the gym and the place is closed, there's no risk.

The three films you mention were indeed hidden camera material, part of the "Straight Off the Mat" series, showing weigh-ins and showering at university wrestling matches somewhere in the US. I did some searching on those a while back, and needless to say it caused some reaction among that community. I seem to recall that university names were blurred out, but I'm not sure. (There was similar reaction to the "Allen Snaps" still photos taken at California swimming and water polo matches. While those didn't show nudity, they featured bulging speedos, some worn by pre-18 guys.)

There remains, though, the issue of privacy and its potential violation thereof. In most jurisdictions, photographing someone is a violation of privacy only if the person photographed "has a legitimate expectation of privacy." In real hidden camera material, the subjects have not, by definition, given consent to being photographed. But to what extent does someone on a public nude beach, or in a communal locker room/shower, have a "legitimate expectation of privacy?" He is giving de facto consent to those around him to see him nude, but does that consent extend to people watching a video? I haven't researched the case law on this; if someone has, please provide input.

This is entirely different than the growing number of "over the stall wall" phone videos of lads wanking in the toilet. These guys do not want to be seen by anyone and clearly have an "expectation of privacy."

And, finally, there's the issue of age: Much hidden camera material has younger men as subjects, and while it's nearly impossible to determine a guy's age by looking at him, there's no guarantee that this anonymous person is 18+, which is the marker for "child pornography" in most places. University students are usually 18+, but I've seen some toilet wank videos where the subject was most likely younger. That's not something I want on my computer...or on this site.

A final technical note: I'm baffled by the quality issues of some older VHS-to-digital conversions. There's a lot of cheap and effective software available than can correct brightness, contrast, and saturation. I don't know why people haven't used that.

@viskykick Thanks very much for this. The older videos are intriguing because cameras were quite large back then. Today anyone can turn on their mobile phone camera and put it in their pocket and nobody notices.

Many so-called "spy" videos are in fact staged, and sometimes it's hard to tell. I tend to think that many that are taken in a shower room must be staged, because one can't easily hide a camera while taking a shower--but they're still hot.

@andergarcia said in EU begins legal action against Hungary over anti-LGBT law:

It may be a bit "radical", but countries like this shouldn't be members of the European Union... I don't have anything to do with governments like this one

https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/15/eu-begins-legal-action-against-hungary-over-anti-lgbt-law

Hungary has certainly disqualified itself from being a "civilised" nation. Orban's homophobia is just the tip of the iceberg of his horrible record.

Not surprisingly, some time back Trump praised Orban (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/13/trump-latest-viktor-orban-hungary-prime-minister-white-house), saying he was "highly respected all over Europe."

@ianfontinell said in It's just too bad to stay as it is:

Browsing the forum as it is at the moment is just... Not worth it. It's too annoying. Each 30 seconds connection is lost, then you're randomly kicked out and have to login again but each time this happen there's an unnecessary captcha to make things even more annoying.

I really want to browse the forum, there's lots of interesting stuff but I guess people won't have this bs for much longer. Just close it already until it's fixed or at least revert it back to the old one. If it's so hard to fix make another one, I'm sure there are lots of people here who would gladly help with that, myself included.

I sadly agree. The forum is pretty much useless now. It's a real shame, because it used to be that people posted lots of thoughtful comments--some gay-related, other household hints, etc.

It's especially tragic given that occasionally there would be a post from someone, likely young, experiencing serious depression and seeking support, or at least conversation, from people in the forum. This new forum software has likely destroyed that mechanism.

Even if things got fixed, I think enough people have been alienated from the forum that it will probably never return to its previous value.

@raphjd said in Are there any other websites for gay torrents?:

@eobox91103

You can use the private chat either in the forums or on the main site.

Great news! But it's not obvious to me how that's done. Perhaps you could show a screenshot?

@manhandler said in TX Dems catch C-19 in their political stunt:

@eobox91103 No. The function of a vaccine is to present the body with a weak version of the virus so that the body can easily learn to destroy it, then remember when it is confronted with the virus in the future. This is the purpose of "vaccines." The mRNA "vaccine" is not actually a vaccine. It is genetic manipulation. It destroys one of the two types of macrophages or "firefighters" in the body so they can't clean up the mess (increase in miocharditis and blood clots - US ARMY research) and introduces spike proteins that cause the body to attack itself over and over again repeatedly like cancer. You clearly haven't done any research. And now the number of Fleebagger Dems infected is up to 6. Looks like the "vaccine" is totally ineffective. And your statement that "virutally everyone who has died of Covid in the US in the last month has not been vaccinated," is based on the lie that Fauci told recently - read the post I made yesterday showing analysis that 63-64% of Covid deaths are in the "vaccinated." More people are dying of Covid who HAVE been vaccinated, not the unvaxxed, because the unvaxxed have natural immunity. Your claims are totally bogus and just that - claims, not based on any citations whatsoever.

Your postings are pure crap.

People who get vaccinated very rarely die of covid. People who do die of covid have almost universally not been vaccinated.

Fauci was not lying, nor are all the reputable media out there. If you wish to believe the fictitious garbage that appears on your favorite tinfoil hat conspiracy websites, go ahead. But do the rest of us a service and don't vomit it back into the forum.

I know you like to have the last word, no matter how idiotic, so open your sphincter and blast forth. Don't expect a reply from me. Your postings are a waste of time and nobody with a working neuron takes them seriously.

@gozerrrr Getting an invite requires a member of that site spend 350 bonus points (I have close to 40,000!) and give that site your email address; they send an invitation to you with a hyperlink that you use to sign up.

Two potential problems here:

1. This site (gt.ru) used to support private messages between members, so you didn't have to put your email address in a public forum. That functionality seems to have vanished with the recent software changes here.
2. I think there's a forum rule about not promoting other torrent sites--which makes sense, as this site needs advertising revenue to stay afloat, and if a user spends time on another site, that's not time spend here getting revenue.

I'm happy to help out, as long as the privacy and following-the-rule matters get worked out. Perhaps a Gentlemember of the Staff can chime in here with guidance.

@manhandler said in TX Dems catch C-19 in their political stunt:

@eobox91103 They're vaccinated, and yet FIVE of them got it...

And that should not surprise anyone. Recall what I wrote above:

@manhandler Let's back up to Immunology 101: Vaccinations do not stop people from becoming infected with COVID. Instead, it stops them from getting quite sick with it, and perhaps dying. The whole concept of vaccine immunity is based on pre-positioning antibodies within the body so that when COVID does enter the body, it gets nuked very quickly.

Vaccinations do no prevent serious infection. Instead, they help the body quickly neutralise the virus so the person doesn't get seriously ill and possibly die.

People who are not vaccinated do not have this protection, and many get sick and then die. Virtually everyone who has died of COVID in the US in the last month or so has not been vaccinated, many by choice. It's hard to understand why people would choose to be in that group.

@raphjd I think governments at all levels (and all political views) are largely screwing up the mask issue: Having a mandate or law about something is not the best way to get results. Instead, I favour an educational campaign that shows people why it's important to wear masks (or get a vaccine) is going to be more effective in the long run, but it's harder to do.

Clearly, the people on the bus without masks made a serious error, and also sent the wrong message. They're probably all vaccinated, and thus very likely won't get ill, but they could end up spreading it to others. That is definitely not leadership.

@manhandler Let's back up to Immunology 101: Vaccinations do not stop people from becoming infected with COVID. Instead, it stops them from getting quite sick with it, and perhaps dying. The whole concept of vaccine immunity is based on pre-positioning antibodies within the body so that when COVID does enter the body, it gets nuked very quickly. This is settled science, but if one doubts it, research words like "polio," "smallpox," or "measles." (Looking at tinfoil-hat conspiracy websites does not count as "research.")

The overwhelming majority of people dying from COVID in the last few weeks have not been vaccinated. (If I were filling out the death certificate for unvaccinated person who died of COVID, I'd be tempted to add "ignorance and stupidity" as contributing causes of death.) Again, you can research this. I won't spoon-feed links here as it will be a valuable exercise for one to learn how do to this.

It's still important for vaccinated people to wear masks indoors. If they are infected, there's a slim chance that they could spread the virus to an unvaccinated person who could then get sick and die. Many people find this to be a bad outcome.

@everyone Wikipedia needs to be approached with the same caution as any other online source: Look at the references cited to see if (a) they exist, (b) they're relevant and credible, and (c) actually say what the main article infers them to say.

Some Wikipedia articles are as well-referenced as a scholarly paper. For example, the article on "BitTorrent" has 114 references.

Other articles might have few or no relevant references, and there's an automatic banner at the top of the article basically saying "reader beware." I've seen this many times, and I take those pages with a large boulder of salt. Most recently, for example, I looked up the "Vallée Blanche Cable Car" in France. At the top of the page, the reader is warned,

• "This article includes a list of general references, but it remains largely unverified because it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations."

It reminds us of the first lesson in Web Surfing 101: Don't believe what's on a web page unless you check its sources.

@dsowner said in Let's discuss those 'baited and exposed videos':
You make some very good points

Straight up, we don't know how old they really are, no matter what they claim. And they all look super young.

It's hard to judge a guy's age by looks, but some definitely look under 18. There's another gay-themed torrent site that only accepts content produced by established studios, which significantly reduces the risk of having under-age content. Conversely, there's a tube site (and no, I won't identify it) that seems to have lots of very questionable self-made videos.

Second, even if they're of age, these were uploaded without consent, obtained under false pretenses.

This starts to get complicated: .
As for consent, the guy making a baited selfie-vid is clearly consenting to uploading his video, but most likely to someone he hasn't met, and he falsely believes that it will remain private. That is naive, given that "the internet is forever." But many teens don't understand this, and at the very least it's uncool" to take advantage of this naivete.

A related issue involves hidden camera locker room/shower videos. Those that are real (as opposed to ones that are posed) are clearly not made with the subject's consent, and in most places making the video would be considered a violation of the person's privacy--and thus subject to penalty. I don't know how various laws would apply to posting/sharing that content, but I would think that similar violation of privacy issues would attach.

Overall, I do share your desire to have this site be "low risk" so that it can continue for users' benefit.

The main torrent site (and I think the previous forum) would "blind" URL's to other sites, going through an anonymous site (such as anonym.to or url.rw so the destination site wouldn't know that the user came from gt.ru. I notice that the new forum site doesn't do this "blinding."

Maybe that's not important, as the forum is a discussion group..but I thought I'd mention it anyway. Traffic to other sites will increase once all the software problems in the forum get fixed.

@manhandler So this begs the question: "Would you eat pussy in order to survive?"

@lololulu19 said in Blocking videos from BROWSE function:

In the BROWSE the gallery function, there does not seem to be a way to block categories. This is very annoying. For instance, today - someone decided to flood the site with 30 videos of fat, japanese, bears. I know of 2 other sites which are so loaded with asian porn that - which don't show plumbing - that I don't even bother looking at those sites.

I think I know the site that's flooded with the heavier Japanese content. I still have a membership there but I rarely check it as I don't have time to wade through stuff I don't like.

I would love to be able to block any videos that are in the categories of Scat, Mature, BDSM, Trans, Bears, Chubs

We can opt in/out of many categories with the search function, but not with "browse." I don't know how hard it would be to implement that feature--sometimes things that seem simple can be a software nightmare.

I am sure there are some people who would like to block videos in the categories of Twinks, Fit, Attractive, Functional Cock videos

I wouldn't mind blocking "non-functional cock," as I find a bottom with a limp dick unappealing...but that's a topic for another thread.

@manhandler said in 82% Miscarry After Vaccine: Prestigious Medical Journal:

@eobox91103 https://www.newswars.com/top-doctor-covid-vaccines-killing-babies-in-first-trimester-at-astonishing-rate/

Texas A&M professor of medicine Dr. Peter McCullough warns against vaccinating pregnant women for COVID-19, claiming the vaccines are completely unnecessary for pregnant women and are “directly killing babies in the first trimester.”

One nutcase on a conspiracy website. No more need be said.

@john32123666 said in NEW RULE!! Picture Spamming may lead to Warned Account status!!! Example::

@t4nt03f4z simple: you have 2 option to choice from either report the torrent [link located below / report button] or you should warned and notify the uploader /OP through comment section...[Remember be cautious, you must report only accurate information] feel free to ask helpdesk: https://www.gaytorrent.ru/helpdesk.php

If the spamming/bad image uploading is from the uploader, he might read a comment. If it's from somebody trying to harvest bonus points, he probably won't see a comment, and reporting/help desk is probably the only option. That said, the staff of this site are very busy with lots of things and might not be able to take action. Perhaps there's a software module that could be added to prevent picture spamming, although it would be tricky to write.

But I strongly concur with the sentiments expressed in this thread. I do not like spamalot. (Not to be confused with Spamalot, but I digress.)

@hubrys said in MyPillow Guy, Mike Lindell, is Caca for Cuckoo Puffs:

There is absolutely NO way absent a violent coup that Trump will ever be reinstated into the White House this August. Not even if God himself came down and exposed an infernal contract signed by every Democrat in the country in baptized baby blood, would there be a legal mechanism for removing Joe Biden and replacing him with Donald Trump.

The PillowPrick is a good source of humour...and it will get even more amusing when September arrives, and Trump is still an obese guy who spends his days cheating at golf.

It's always interesting to see the reactions of cultists when some Great Cataclysm in the Future doesn't happen. I remember the doomsday predictions for Y2K, with survivalists moving to the desert. After 1/1/2000 they argued (correctly) that the 21st century wouldn't begin until 1/1/2001. When that day came and went, we heard little from them.

Then there was the predicted end of the world on 21/12/2012, which I think was based on the Mayan calendar. I remember going to breakfast at a Gordon Ramsay restaurant in London on the 22nd, to kickoff my life after death. They had a nice "Doomsday Omelette" on the menu that was quite pleasant.

Recall also that the Q-anon folks were sure that Trump would return to office on this past March 4. They were curiously silent afterwards.

We might not hear much from Lindell after his August data passes. That would be fine with me.

@manhandler said in 82% Miscarry After Vaccine: Prestigious Medical Journal:

@eobox91103

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/ocqrto/the_new_england_journal_of_medicine_shows_that/

You're mis-reading the statistics.

First, let's dismiss the reddit post--it's on their "conspiracy" page.

Next, let's take a careful read of the NEJM article. The sample set was of 35,691 women. Table 1 shows that 86.5% of these were pregnant at the time of vaccination, and the remaining 15.5% became pregnant shortly after the vaccination. This does NOT mean, as conspiracy theorists want to believe, that the 86.5% somehow lost their pregnancy shortly after vaccination. It means that those 15.5% were women who became pregnant after the study and thus were included in it.

What was the outcome of the vaccinated pregnant women? Let's look at Table 4. The pregnancy and neo-natal outcomes from vaccinated-mother pregnancies were completely in line with incidence rates from the larger population--in fact is some areas, adverse outcomes were a bit lower than the larger population averages, but a much larger study would be needed to establish that.

So, based on real data rather than prejudiced preconception, one can confidently assert what the researchers (and their peer reviewers) stated:

RESULTS
Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.