Posts made by MrMazda

Well… As some of you may know, on May 7, 2013, I was sent to jail for something that I did not do.

Well.... 1 year and 2 days later, and I'M BACK!!

Thank you to the people who were keeping my accounts up and running.

Call me crazy if you must, but wouldn't the better term be "cross-generation"?

So according to the laws in Canada, an accused person is allegedly supposed to be considered "innocent until proven guilty", however I believe this to be a myth. All it takes is ONE person to step forward with an allegation that holds absolutely NO truth to it to get you arrested, sent to jail, and then have the next 3+ years of your life forever fucked up and taken away from you. Here's the worst part… Because of a biased jury, it is very well possible that I could end up going back to jail over something that I didn't do. The reason is quite simple... The reality is that in today's world, it is guilty until proven innocent. Check it out:

Here's the reference to the condensed "Reader's Digest" version of how things went down in court at the trial:
hxxp://www.aidsactionnow.org/?p=1057

And now, for the piece to make things even more "heated"... The petition. PLEASE!! If you're reading this, PLEASE sign it! It's about time that we all stood up for human rights. Here's the petition that I created as the result of the trial:
hxxp://www.change.org/petitions/the-government-of-canada-ban-the-use-of-the-criminal-code-for-prosecuting-an-sti

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!! If you're reading this, SIGN THE PETITION!! I beg of you!

What rolls down stairs, alone or in pairs, and makes a buzzady sound?

It's a great slinky song parody.

It's also done by a group of film students looking to get a little extra credit for doing a hilarious parody project.

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zP55ugFoDk

This is what happens when you have too much time on your hands as a group of film students doing a video project on homophobia.
hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t35GTsTBFnE

I'm a little skeptical on the concept of HAART having an impact on someone of such an age. What it doesn't mention is which tests were run to confirm the absence. This is a critical key in being able to determine whether or not this is possible. Also, it doesn't take into account that some people are what is known as an "elite controller", whereas even without treatment, they will remain at an undetectable viral load. Also, for the ELISA test, it doesn't mention anything about the number of bands that they looked for, as there are actually 8 of them that can come back reactive.

Just sayin'… I can't say for sure what exactly went down as I wasn't there, however from what I do know of the subject (and from living with it for just over 4 years now that I know of), without further explanation of the case and what exactly was tested, which ARV's were used, etc. it's quite hard to say as to whether or not this would actually work. The reason for this is primarily because if HAART can accomplish this in such a young person, why does it not yield the same result in an adult? Curious minds can't help but wonder.

@uicuic:

Are you saying that you actually do bareback with your hiv negative partner? Sorry if I misunderstood. How is working so far? I'm not judging.

Yes… Some may call me strange for where my mind is at... More particularly that I believe in the right to freedom of choice. This includes the freedom to choose what level of risk (if any) that you are willing to take. That being said though, if the risk a partner wishes to take is to engage in unprotected sex with a known HIV+ partner, I am very well known for making damn sure that they FULLY understand ALL of the consequences before making such a choice, as that goes to their right to make an educated and informed choice.

The answer to that question is dependent on a number of things, including your own body chemistry balancing, and the emotional and sexual chemistry between you and the person you're with. Depending on the person, it is possible for me to do such things, however it requires the right kind of connection with the person.

In short, it's mostly a matter of genetics, not training.

From the perspective of someone who was well educated on the subject when they found out, I can tell you this for sure. No matter how well educated you are on the subject, there is absolutely NOTHING that can prepare you for finding out you're HIV+. It's also a proven fact that the majority of people who discover their status end up going on a mental break that in a lot of cases, without the right people being around IMMEDIATELY to give them the proverbial slap across the face that they will need, they would go suicidal. I know this for fact… I was one of them.

While the concept of such a test does seem like a great idea, I cannot stress enough that they have great potential to become a home suicide kit real fast, especially for people who engage in random sexual acts with partners of an unknown status. It has also been scientifically proven that a person can have contracted HIV and be infectious to others, but not show a positive test result. This "problem" comes directly from how the test works. The test in itself has the unique flaw that it tests for the anti-bodies that the body produces when it becomes infected. These antibodies however are not produced in the body until the virus breaks the system down to this critical "rock bottom" point, at which point the body begins the process of seroconversion, which generates these anti-bodies. In most cases, this can take 2 - 3 weeks, however this is not a concrete time frame. The body can begin seroconversion in as much as 3 months...

In other words... If a person engages in more than 1 sexual fling every 3 months, there is potential for this test to render a false negative, thereby potentially resulting in the transmission of HIV without the knowledge of either person. The sad reality is, this is a common occurrence that happens far too frequently... More frequently than you might expect. Don't let that get you bogged down though. Medical research has proven that the risk of HIV transmission for someone who is on antiretrovirals and has a viral load below 1500 (preferably closer to undetectable) engaging in bareback sex where ejaculation occurs is actually lower than the risk of engaging in protected sex with an HIV+ partner with a high viral load (such as 60,000) and no antiretrovirals. What a lot of the tests and other publications fail to take into account when examining risk assessment is simply this:

Nowadays HIV is a lot like TB… It's only infectious if left untreated!

All in all, it is also proven that the average risk factor for unprotected receptive anal sex where ejaculation DOES occur only constitutes approximately a 1% risk of infection (or 1 in 100). These numbers are based on a viral load of approximately 57,000 and no antiretrovirals. The only time that the risk becomes damn near absolute certainty is in a case where either the top's dick has a sore that exposes a bloody discharge, or if any of the lining of the rectum walls are torn or otherwise aggravated sufficiently to present an abrasion of some sort. These cases are not as common as you may think, and generally only occur when either insufficient lube is used, or when doing something stupid like being the virgin to try and take a 13" and thick cock. Don't fool yourself though because a person's highest transmission potential actually comes BEFORE the point of seroconversion, and generally lasts until a couple of months after they begin antiretrovirals. This directly means that regardless of any test and regardless of any medication, it is always safer to either pull out to bust a nut, or to otherwise wrap it up.

As for the proposed concept behind the test, I must say that I do much prefer the concept of the test from a public health stand point. My reason for this is quite simple really… When going to a doctor's office or to a public health office, once a test result comes back positive, there is a government mandate within North America that requires that the attending medical staff (doctor, nurse, etc) report the results of the test to the public health officer. From my own personal experience, these "public health officers" do not have a sufficient understanding of STI's, and as such, they like to push their own stupid ways onto the person, trying to force them into a number of things (some of which they actually legally can). From this stand point alone, I completely agree with implementing a way to by-pass this Public Health BS, and deal with it under your own terms. It's great to see that there actually are some people out there in the medical field who actually may believe that Public Health has no business in our bedrooms.

Nice Cock… The visual effects with the lighting are also pretty cool too

Yes… Very nice. Show more

That's good to know. That's a technology item that would be worth doing some more research on to see if it's possible to throw off such places by modifying or removing it.

While poking around the internet, I found an interesting video. It turns out that there is in fact a cure for homophobia. For details on how this works and such, please see the YouTube video at:

hxxp://youtu.be/t35GTsTBFnE

There are always ways in which to be able to download videos and such from a streaming website. It's just a matter of having the right tools for the job. That being said, if I had the access credentials to be able to login to the site to stream the content, I could rip the content from the streams quite easily. I've got all the tools and resources to do such things. There is no such thing as DRM in my world. That includes copying of materials that supposedly "cannot" be copied.

If you have such credentials or have access to them, I could possibly hook you up with either with the uploads, or the tools in which to rip the videos to upload them.

You're right… That is worse... It's funny because it's true

From the sounds of it, that's what they're trying to make this out to be. The real question here is will enforcement actually take effect? After all, SOPA flopped… It's possible that this may as well.

Ah. You do bring a good point there. My only "qualm" with DVD-5 is that in some cases, the DVD-5 format is a shrunk down version of a DVD-9 format. I can definitely appreciate the disc space that it would require, as I myself am finding a constant need to upgrade my hard drive storage capacity.

Perhaps you are correct in that leaving things the way they are for now is probably the better way of doing things. Thank you for this information.

Perfect. That's what I thought, but I wanted to double check first as to avoid potential trouble with the site at a later point in time.

Ignore this post… I hit the wrong button

Thank you for the clarification. I will go back to my bf and get the original store bought discs that are in the original DVD-9 format and will rip them to ISO in such a manner that they will retain their original DVD-9 format, as well as keep the non DVD (DVD-ROM) content contained within the original untouched ISO.

Given that there's a certain amount of question as to whether or not uploading a DVD-5 version when a DVD-9 version already exists would constitute a "duplicate", may I suggest a discussion among the staff to see if a mutual decision can be made collectively among the staff? My goal here is to be sure that everyone can be on the same page, and that the rules are made clear in order to be fair to everyone. While you are correct in that the size difference alone renders it another format, it stands to reason that it is in essence uploading another copy of a torrent that already exists, just in inferior quality by comparison.

Don't get me wrong though, I also would seem to think that uploading a DVD-5 when a DVD-9 does exist could constitute a duplicate, particularly seeing as how if you have a program such as DVD Shrink, you can render the DVD-5 version yourself. So all that being said, is this something you can bring to the staff for discussion for me please? I think it may help to clear a lot of potential headache in the future.