It's to bad you got kicked out of the Senate, you'd have seen the post from one of the admins about them not caring about the pics people use as thier profile pics, porn actor or not, and how that's not the criteria for them determining if the person is a scammer or not. You're enforcing your rules over the sites rules, which is fucked up, to say the least.

Those are your opinions.

Follow them if you like but you have no right to force others to do so.

The discussion should be about you flagging people for not breaking the sites rules. It's harassment, plain and simple, and in my opinion is just as detrimental to the site as scammers. So puff your chest out all you want and preen about this "service" you think you're providing, but it's all in your head.

You apperantly blocked me from the watchers group, thanks. I poked around in there when this all started and was shocked at the members bad behavior there. In all honesty you should be ashamed of that place, but when someone runs thier own little fiefdom...fuck it, this isn't worth it

@1of5 My roommate (Kafirah) is in Senate - I know precisely what was stated by CS10.
That particular statement is now posted to "Watchers" because it's pertinent to the group goals.
Now all members there will understand how administration handles these bogus accounts.

As for being removed from the group - If you state you don't respect a Group's basic purpose? You get removed. It's that simple. And Kafirah is the mod. there and she's in Senate. - So there were plenty of blocks this week.

As for Porn star photos? They get pulled very fast. Usually linking to multiple scammers being outed in photo searches.

We submit accounts to administration to be checked - and that is ALL we do. From there it's entirely up to them. We can't know how many those accounts follow (Some hide that figure) or if they're PMing in huge quantities to multiple members. (I imagine admin does know those stats).

I think we do okay for having only part of the information.

If by bad behavior you mean someone laughing about a porn star photo being used on an account? Yup we will do that from time to time. I spend time on this every single day - because I choose to.

And trust me I fully enjoy how much members sneer about that (sarcasm) - I do it because it's something I see regardless. Should I ignore that I've seen another scammer and let them go about their business? That seems pretty morally bankrupt to me.

I do not control what other members chose to say when they see a scammer posted. I'm not their minder. And I've seen no one swearing in my group or being half as nasty as what people were to the "Watchers" members or people who agreed with them this week.

We will blow off steam from time to time.

The discussion about this member however - was entirely on point. It was in other groups where it descended into a flame war. I wouldn't let that happen in my group.

Pretending to be who you aren't is going to get you reported. That's the simple equation.
Because it's something online predators do.

And because we only see half of what happens - we report it and let Administration sort it out. There are accounts they let stay after reporting btw - so they don't just pull them.
They are doing Their due diligence as well.

Members also complained when this was done through silent reporting so this was done above board in the appropriate group. It's why a group formed in fact. We've argued this before. And having a group means a searchable photo base. Though that remains a PITA. It's there. For repeat offenders.

Other than the nastiness that ensued for some good members - I don't have regrets that it was reported - there are still inconsistencies that I'm sure administration is now keeping an eye on that account for.

This in no way is "member harassment" unless members are making it so.
Members can now make an informed decision about interacting with that member.

@RavenCT Roommate? Suuuuure. I'm buying that.

Excluded because one doesn't agree with the purpose of the group? That's juvinille and quite wrong. I do believe in the purpose of the group, it's just the fucked up over-self-importaint people who are trying to do it i don't agree with. The stuff i saw in there should embarrass you. That you're proud of that speakers volumes. Just because someone doesn't swear doesn't mean they aren't being nasty.

You (and your group) did harass her, plain and simple. She's never used a pic of herself before and yet you or one of your sycophants did an image check for some reason when she changed her pic. There was no reason to question an established member, yet for some reason it happened. One of the watchers members IM'd me claiming that CB just must be either a scammer or a data miner, no question - even though this person had not a single clue how data mining works and if she were a scammer the flags admin uses would have id'd her as one through her activity. If shes messaging me spreading unfounded rumors about a member, how many other character assasinations are happening behind the scenes? At least I got her to admit that she doesn't like CB, so there was that moment of honesty. I can't help but think that's your entire motivation for harassing her - you just don't like her. THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLINATION FOR IT. Investigating established members for that reason is the last thing you want in the sites self appointed cop. Why you are still allowed to do this is a mystery to me, but then admins done lots of questionable things arohhnd here.

This whole episode has me asking the question "what the fuck is wrong with these people?". The answer, unfortunatly, is quite a bit.

So I'm done here. Go on about with your floundering justifications for unjustifiable actions, I'm not going to even bother reading them - it won't be worth it.

@1of5 WTH dude? Character assassination my arse.

People with actual concerns. About the most fictitious looking account on site.

Who has so many holes in her story you could drive a Semi through it!

No idea who bothered speaking to you - you've obviously been won over with porn.

She used that photo initially - took it down - and put it back up. When it went back up we had a new search engine available. Surprise!

She can pretend all she wants that was a 'look alike' image - sure that's what all young women do - they go looking for a "look alike" among porn star images to use in their profiles. And then don't mention it until confronted that it's a stolen image.

Nothing inconsistent about that at all.

Her entire story reads like fiction - but you do you.

Time spent on site will never be an indicator that an individual is real unless there is cooberation - the one person who vouched that she's real? Is also using a stock photo image.

No members are saying 'we've met IRL'.

Or even exchanged post cards.

Also stop dissing the roommate - the photo proving there are two of us is still on my profile.
Hell look at a writing samples? Gees.
Two individuals.

Fortunately for me, my beard is large and neat. whew dodged a bullet there.

Finding people here seems to be hard enough, but using DL photos would hasten the extinction of the species, I'd think.

Multitudes do, evidently

People getting themselves all worked up over nothing? When hasn't that been a thing?

84 billion dollar a year industry in the US so yeah, it probably does for a lot of people.

[statista.com]

@1of5 no doubt!

I expected very few responses to this.

It seems to make people feel importaint/empowered/like they're contributing when talking about standards and rules that need to be adopted that never will. What's stunned me about this is no ones called in the courts - yet.

I think you give the creators to much credit. I used to think it was for mid term voting research, but experience has shown that there's no way that was part of the plan.

@1of5 i think there might be more than one plan. The mid terms certainly made sense. Non church going, baby boomer, white educated liberals, are simply too attractive of a demographic. I don't know if the site failled to gain enough traction, to make it more than a fun experiment, and it was abandoned, or if it continues to be a cheap enough data repository to make it worth funding, to see if things change. Data is cheap.

It was heavily advertised as a dating site, at first. That sure sounded like a possible business scheme, but considering the zero effort put into creating or improving those features, I'm calling that a flat lie. I think was just a hook to get people to "just sign up, and give it a try" while honestly sharing personal demographic details.

I do kinda wonder if whoever first visioned the site (Some PAC? The DNC? The deep state Russian Chinese?) Paid an enthusiastic ideologue (aka admin), who was willing to get the rudimentary site going. Now it's just kinda there, but it's like that old storage building in the back yard, you keep thinking it's not worth hauling to the dump and it's still got a few things in it you don't feel like moving. There were some feeble attempts to fix it up and rent it out, aka bring David Silverman on board and revision things. But hey it might be useful again in a few months, but until then, it's certainly not worth much investment in time or security.

@MarkiusMahamius more than 1 plan? Aren't you the overachiever.

They spent to much money on advertising instead of coding, and it's never recovered. Oh well.

@1of5 yeah I don't think there was much intention for it to be a functional site. It was a failed experiment, but cheap enough to keep alive, and maybe be reused in the future.

The big question is, does that make you a better person, or even a more enlightened and superior being? We need that here, it seems.

@MarkiusMahamius I don't know if it makes me a better or more enlightened person, but it does mean I spend very little time in front of a mirror.

My picture is au naturel as well! No makeup necessary for that super CUTE face.

Fair points, but that isn't the question.

@1of5 My response should have been I don't like polls that don't give the option for none of the above. If some one chooses to put their picture up, I appreciate that, if they choose to put up an avitar for what ever reason, I'm fine with that, if it doesn't affect me, I don't care.

@glennlab yes or no questions don't get a none of the above option.

@1of5 yes or no with qualifiers should. I don't agree completely with either option as qualified.

@glennlab what qualifiers? It's a simple yes or no, does changing ones appearance intentionally make them dishonest?

@1of5 that is not your question as stated or your answers as given, my answer to your restated question is it depends.

@glennlab oh my god, I'd just have to repeat what was written that you originally didn't like.

So whatever.

@1of5 You would have to rewite it with more clarity and less bias and more choices. You are reading way too much into this. Nothing is black and white.

How many keyboards do you go through in a day? Your claws must just ruin them.

@1of5 that's not a problem for me . Few cotton candy and a caramel apple every two weeks , and that bitchy useless unicorn who also lives w us ( what for ???) chews them down to perfection.
That is his only contribution I believe to our household . I believe ones he pooped some glitter, the pink elephant and I weren't impressed at all .

@Pralina1 free pedicures sounds like a decent contribution to the household. Not enough to cover rent, but still something of value. Bet it doesn't make up for the bitching, though.

Unicorn glitter gets everywhere and takes decades to remove, and can drop the resale value of a castle by around 20%, according to my real estate agent. That's why we got our unicorn from a reputable breeder - it farts rainbows. Worth the shipping costs from the east coast, imo.