@raphjd said in Scotland officially bans free speech:
What do you call this;
Lol, no they don't. Alarmist, whiny BS.
Is that an attack or is that just being a good liberal?
It probably counts as an attack. Unfortunately, nobody has a monopoly on name-calling and insulting other posters in the forum, although I've noticed a couple of people who seem to be competing for that title.
@raphjd said in Scotland officially bans free speech:
@bi4smooth
I didn't attack him for a different opinion, but for his useless claim ...
Thank you for admitting that you attack people, rather than address issues. That is the essence of the (useless and pitiful) ad hominem style that has no place in thoughtful discourse. It makes the Politics and Debate section almost useless.
@djsoapbubble Welcome DJ. I taught in South Bend for a few years, and Chicago was a welcome diversion for culture and shopping.
You'll find a variety of boards and topics here, and many are quite interesting. The "Politics and Debate" topics sometimes get swamped by angry postings, but there's plenty of other stuff going on.
The boards were recently redesigned, and are, IMHO, more difficult to use. I think traffic has dropped off as a result, but should gradually return as people become accustomed to the new arrangment.
@homppeliboy Welcome to posting on the boards. Unfortunately, you've noticed the worst thing about them: There are a few trolls on here who, when they disagree with your viewpoint, will start insulting the poster, rather than making arguments. This is the classical fallacy of arguing ad hominem...which essentially means that when someone can't make a reasonable argument, they just start calling people names. At that point, the forum thread has lost any value and is best ignored.
I hope you post on other threads that don't get similarly corrupted.
@bi4smooth said in "Healthy at any size" vs C-19:
I think you missed my point. I don't object to someone opting-out of a vaccination, if they have an intelligent reason (I have a neighbor who says she's allergic "to everything" and she's afraid she'll have a reaction - that's reasonable!).... thinking that the new vaccines will turn you into a robot... that's just not rational!
Actually, I do agree that if someone has a legitimate medical reason for opting out of a vaccine, that makes sense. But this is a tiny segment of the population, and while those people are at risk themselves, and a risk to others, it's a very small number. (Of course, COVID started with a "very small number" and has now killed millions.)
Unfortunately, most anti-vaxers are that way for wholly irrational reasons. They might not buy into Q-anonish crap like microchips and robot transformations, but instead follow a social/political agenda the discounts the dangers of the virus and put themselves--and others--at great and unnecessary risk. I find it ironic (to use a polite word) that many of these folk have a Dear Leader who not only contracted COVID himself, but then got covertly vaccinated.
@bi4smooth said in "Healthy at any size" vs C-19:
Thank you for the kind words and additional wisdom.
Hear, hear! Some people make a habit of extrapolating data to the point of hyperbole... At 6'4, 240 is considered overweight... my doctor disagrees and say's I'm quite healthy! He considers my bloodwork and says (convincingly) that I should "keep up the good work"... even when specifically asked "Should I lose weight?" his response was "only if you want to for aesthetic reasons - there is no health risk at your height and build to being your current weight"... (yay me!)
You have a good doctor. The standard "body mass index" calculators would suggest that you are not only overweight, but just a few pounds away from being obese! You'd need to go down to 204 lbs to be considered "normal weight" for your height. I have a hunch that shedding 36 lbs would not improve your life.
I read an interview with someone who's choosing NOT to accept a COVID-19 vaccine because (and I'm not making this up): "He doesn't want to be a guinea-pig and wake-up next year a robot or something"
Thankfully, we live in a free country, and being THAT STUPID is not illegal!
This starts to get even more complicated. In theory I accept the idea that people should have the freedom to refuse vaccination...but only as much as I have the freedom to not be exposed to them. If someone declines vaccination and stays perpetually at home, or goes off to live in an anti-vax commune somewhere, fine. But I don't think they should go out in public, into stores, onto airplanes, and God forbid onto a cruise ship.
It reminds me of a sign I saw at an airport security post somewhere: "You have the right to refuse security inspection. If you exercise this right, you will not be permitted into the gate area."
@anythingold I agree with what you're saying. My posting was a bit tangled up because there are several issues going on here:
Bottom line: Yes, indeed it is complicated, but many people crave simple solutions to complicated problems. The best we can do is follow the current cutting-edge medical advice to protect our own health and the health of others. I've had my two Moderna jabs...and while I'd rather have other things stuck into my body, it's still a good feeling.
@raphjd said in "Healthy at any size" vs C-19:
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/04/health/obesity-covid-death-rate-intl/index.html
Despite what we've been told for the last 15 years, being obese is not healthy.
While age is the main factor in hospitalizations for C-19, being overweight is a very close 2nd.
Thanks for the link. The story is a bit sloppy: The actual study linked COVID death rates with countries' overweight percentages, but then the article soon dwells on obesity. Being overweight and being obese refer to two different ranges of body mass index. The news piece doesn't make that clear.
Also, it would be helpful to find the actual source data. While there very well could be a connection between COVID severity and being overweight, the data is likely to be skewed given than 20% of the COVID deaths are from the US: While that country does have an overweight problem, it also had a terrible public health program (or lack of one), and that's going to affect that outcome of this kind of study.
@bc22 Let me try this with an uploaded image:
which should show up above.
The worst of the lot has to be "very vintage" scenes that were filmed with no audio, and then somebody dubs fake moans onto the video. It would be hilarious to watch a couple of guys in a studio recording these sounds while the (silent) video was playing
@andergarcia said in What kept you from completing suicide?:
@bc22
Had never thought of completing suicide... If I ever thought of that, I would just need to think of all the great people I have around me (my boyfriend, my parents, my brother, my closest friends...).
I had a boyfriend some years back who committed suicide. The wreckage that leaves among family and friends is overwhelming. I've had some dark times now and then, but I could never have my legacy be that kind of destruction.
Suicide is not a grand Shakespearean "to be or not to be" existential decision. It's about ending one's pain. But it doesn't solve anything--it's surrendering to the pain and darkness because one cannot see any alternatives.
I am not passing negative judgment on those who attempt/complete suicide--I still love my lost boyfriend very much. It is, though, tragic that he, and many others, did not see an alternative to resolving their pain.
@anythingold said in Do you have a good gaydar?:
Our culture has changed significantly, and now we have more trans people that exists more than ever. I think it takes a lot more careful observation to spot a gay guy nowadays. (just my opinion).
I agree. A radical take on this would be from the [late] sociologist Michel Foucault, himself a gay man, who saw "gay," "lesbian," and "bisexual" as social constructs, rather than actual categories of people. He didn't deny that GLB people exist, only that they were sociologically more similar to "left-handed people" who aren't a social category. (This is a simplification of his view.)
I'm not saying I agree with him, but it's an interesting idea to consider.
@fezobe said in Do you have a good gaydar?:
Problem with such shows is that you cannot really check them - their supposed orientation could be designated at random (or specifically) by screenwriters with the real thing being completely irrelevant.
That's true; like porn, they're fiction. But I can say that I lived in Los Angeles for a while and hooked up/dated one of the gay-identified guys from "Boy Meets Boy," and he was most definitely gay. (No, I'm not going to say which one, out of respect for his privacy.)
If you'd like an amusing test of your gaydar, download "Playing it Straight" on here at https://www.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?returnto=%2Fmytorrents.php&id=0fcf8d30b4bef36f3f627acd8bc2072fdecd2cf98061038f, or "Boy Meets Boy" at https://www.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?id=0e3e6ff1611472b33f627acd8bc2072f739d8c510482de62. These are similar miniseries (one British, one American) where a girl/guy dates a bunch of guys, some of whom are straight, and some gay. You don't find out which until someone is eliminated. (Note: Don't look these up on Wikipedia, as it will tell you who's gay and who's straight, and that takes the fun out of it.
PS: The torrent for "Boy Meets Boy" is an unnecessarily large DVD/ISO file. If you want it in .avi/.mp4 format, let me know and I can share it.
@beachbum99 said in Hey everyone! Bore da!:
Send some snow our way, Ill take some pictures in it haha
We can send snow, but maybe we can also send you some you some vowels. With place names like Cwmystwyth and Bwlchgwyn , it seems like you might have a shortage of them...
(Just kidding/teasing; my family is from the England and I remember nice visits to Wales when I was a wee lad.)
And guys think that they have to have perfect bodies, huge cocks, and cum liters to be "normal."
The worst take-away from porn as an educational tool is that the models never talk to each other--they're being told what to do by a director. In real life, communication is what makes sex even greater.
Rolling out new software like this has to be a lot of work.
One feature of the previous layout was an option to show new responses to threads that I had posted one, which was very convenient. Is that available here? I haven't found it, but then I don't read "icon" very well. Thanks.
Was it wrong of me to ask about this? Im just curious thats all.
I'm not part of the site staff, just a long-time member. I do know that the site operators have norms and rules that they need to follow to keep the site out of hot water, and not all of those practices are published.
For example, several years ago the site had a link to a log of actions taken, regarding both torrents and users. I found this helpful, because if I saw an old, dead torrent that was deleted, and it was something that I thought more people would like, I would upload a new one. This log was taken off the site, and when I asked (in the forum) why, the answer from a site administrator was that it was "for secret reasons." Needless to say, I don't know the secret.
The operators of this site have a tough job and put in a lot of work, most of which we don't see. Sometimes things happen on here that are hard to understand, but it's their site and they get to make the rules.
