Choose your Daddy

[de****]

5 hours ago, FETMOD-BD said:

None of your comments have been deleted. You just have to be patient and wait for them to be approved.

Also, having to approve conversation disrupts the natural organic process of conversation and most importantly the organic learning process. It means you are not just choosing what we learn, but when we learn it. What if it was a situational question like “I have a date tonight and how do I do x,y or z”.

[FETMOD-KF]

37 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

And why does the ability to express one’s self have to be approved? It’s the guilty before being proven innocent scenario. Seems rather odd to me that a person can’t freely express themselves on their terms on an app that say it supports free expression, particularly in a challenging subject like bdsm, fetish, kink.

This part of the forum is viewable on the app, which is available on app store, play store, etc. so it has to be monitored and approved to ensure it fits within their guidelines.

This has been explained to you before.
The full website, which is not viewable on the app, is much more relaxed about what can be permitted.  

[ey****]

1 hour ago, devilsdreams said:

You didn’t address what the line is and what takes priority when, attraction or preferences. What if you find yourself attracted to (which you have no control over) someone to not only doesn’t fit your preferences, but has features you swore you’d never like. It would mean that there’s no such thing as preferences. It’s a chicken or the egg type problem. To put it in relatable context, a female, sub or slave is almost always going to prefer someone who is taller and stronger, for the success of the dynamic, which superceeds the notion of attraction based on pure personality (which she has no control over). Further, the point of my original post is that a person gets all the information they can before choosing a partner in any context, which also superceeds attraction…..unless they don’t have access to all the necessary info, then they are ***d into a risky situation or say no to everyone and everything.

You say you're hear to "learn" but it's abundantly clear on this and other threads you've already made up your mind.  You're at best sealioning for responses. 

[de****]

27 minutes ago, FETMOD-KF said:

This part of the forum is viewable on the app, which is available on app store, play store, etc. so it has to be monitored and approved to ensure it fits within their guidelines.

This has been explained to you before.
The full website, which is not viewable on the app, is much more relaxed about what can be permitted.  

No this has not been explained to me. If it was I would have asked “what is the specific legal requirement by each app delivery system.” Because if the delivery system is in the unites states, it would directly violate free s***ch laws of the USA.

[ge****]

1 hour ago, devilsdreams said:

If I didn’t read your post(s) then I wouldn’t be able to respond in context regarding them. Plus, you don’t know what’s in my head to know what I do and don’t understand. Assumptions are bad for your mental health, all of your relationships and particularly dangerous for bdsm situations.

2+2=4 you can say =4 is a “sweeping generalization” but the reality is we have systems in place that check and recheck that it =4 for you just as much as it does for me. This here Internet wouldn’t exist otherwise. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of people have common preferences in a partner and tge overwhelming majority of people will never “choose” a specific characteristic or ‘type’ of a person.

I’m not going to “assume” that you are commenting adversity/bitterness because you yourself are not considered “generally” attractive to a good portion of the population. But you have to make a case as to why someone would be attracted to someone that not only doesn’t fit any of their preferences, but some of the others traits repulses the attracted person. Because it sounds to me like you think there’s no rhyme or reason to human connection at all.

Once again totally missed the point and haven't addressed a single point I made - and that's not assumption but blatantly obvious fact based on my post and your response.
.
None of what you've said makes any sense whatsoever to be perfectly honest - you're trying to fit and objective viewpoint into the entirely subjective situation about what makes up "attraction" and applying some very outdated views in doing so.
.
If that's how you choose to view it then by all means do so, but do not try to apply those views to others who may hold very different ones from your own.
.
As I've said more than once now physical attraction and make up of course form *part* of what makes someone attractive to individuals but it's not the whole of that attraction, in fact it's not even a majority of it for many people, myself included - personality, character, values, interests and a whole lot more feed into it too.
.
To use an old example, Naomi Campbell was once held to be one of the world's most physically attractive people - yet from all I've read about her as a person I find her wholly unattractive, not because of her looks, but because of the person she is.

[De****]

36 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

You say you're hear to "learn" but it's abundantly clear on this and other threads you've already made up your mind.  You're at best sealioning for responses. 

Hit the nail on the head.

[FETMOD-KF]

24 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

Because if the delivery system is in the unites states, it would directly violate free s***ch laws of the USA.

Content deemed sexual explicit is not covered by 'Free S***ch' laws in the US.  

[De****]

As to the OP I stand by a post. Someone puts a ring on someone or a collar around their neck it wasn’t about looks. Maybe there was original attraction, but choosing a long term mate, for most of us, is not about looks. Secondly, you can’t know ALL information. Not a thing. Not possible. You don’t even know all the information about yourself. Life is self discovery. We learn as much as we can and do our best.

[de****]

44 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

You say you're hear to "learn" but it's abundantly clear on this and other threads you've already made up your mind.  You're at best sealioning for responses. 

“‘Here’ to learn”. However I’m here to teach AND learn. the concept that a person can’t be or is disinterested in learning is a false one. Because in order to have any ideas at all, one must have learned something from nothing. In order to change someone’s mind, you simply have to present a much more compelling reason. But absolutely nobody with problem solving and critical thinking skills is going to accept “I’m right, you’re wrong because I said so”. But if sea lioning is a thing, then the entire stem field is full of sea lions because they rely heavily on debate, critical thinking and the more empirical evidence the better. As for trolling, troll is a derogatory term insecure people use when they can’t accept the truth. Further, trolls are NOT interested in progress, telling or learning the truth. Sure I’m interested in reaction, reaction that furthers learning as opposed to sparks assumptions (assuming is actually what trolls do).

Before you go there, there are reasonable assumptions like I can reasonably assume that the sun will come up tomorrow because the empirical evidence shows that it came up the last billion years. Just as I can reasonably assume that the “posts must get approved first” line and moderators are fishy because some of my posts are put up right away (which means they would have to accept in 5 seconds, which I write posts like this that take more than 5 seconds to read).

Nobody is asking you to enjoy open dialogue, debate, free expression and different points of view, but in the interest of teaching and learning for all, we are asking you to tolerate it.

[De****]

Also, stop comparing laws to user agreements on a mobile app. If your biggest issue to “fight head on” with is app moderators - that is really concerning. For the record, most of us don’t see you as “free thinker” who is battling “the man.”

[de****]

9 minutes ago, FETMOD-KF said:

Content deemed sexual explicit is not covered by 'Free S***ch' laws in the US.  

Then how is “sexually explicit” porn able to be published in the USA? Or anywhere for that matter. More importantly, the digital millennium act absolves social media platforms from legal action if a user posts illegal content. That is unless the specific platform doesn’t do anything to remove it AFTER the illegal content is posted. You’re putting the cart before the horse.

[FETMOD-KF]

2 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

Then how is “sexually explicit” porn able to be published in the USA? Or anywhere for that matter. More importantly, the digital millennium act absolves social media platforms from legal action if a user posts illegal content. That is unless the specific platform doesn’t do anything to remove it AFTER the illegal content is posted. You’re putting the cart before the horse.

Please take this argument up with the Google Play Store and Apple App Store.

Thank you.

[FETMOD-KF]

And with this in mind. This is heading off topic.  So either the thread can return to the topic it was supposedly about, or I'll assume the discussion is over and lock the thread.

[ge****]

11 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

Then how is “sexually explicit” porn able to be published in the USA? Or anywhere for that matter. More importantly, the digital millennium act absolves social media platforms from legal action if a user posts illegal content. That is unless the specific platform doesn’t do anything to remove it AFTER the illegal content is posted. You’re putting the cart before the horse.

And putting the cart before the horse is a bad thing in this instance because?
.
If the site decides to protect the majority of its users from either inappropriate content or the possibility of being censured because they posted something inappropriate - surely that's a good thing not a bad one?
.
Regardless of that if the site chooses to moderate content, as many do, then you have two choices - either accept their terms and conditions for using the platform, or not accept them and get out of Dodge.
.
Either way this has gone way off topic

[de****]

21 minutes ago, denver725 said:

As to the OP I stand by a post. Someone puts a ring on someone or a collar around their neck it wasn’t about looks. Maybe there was original attraction, but choosing a long term mate, for most of us, is not about looks. Secondly, you can’t know ALL information. Not a thing. Not possible. You don’t even know all the information about yourself. Life is self discovery. We learn as much as we can and do our best.

How would your partner feel if you admitted to them that you are not with them “because of their looks”. 2+2=4 aside from learning g what the characters mean and how that equation works there nothing more that needs to be learned about it. My point is, there are instances where it’s possible to know everything about a thing. But in a broader context, experts in their field can be “pro efficient” in their vocation. That’s not limited to working, people can most certainly become experts on their partners. Which brings me back to my original post, you can make assumptions and act impulsively towards choosing your daddy, or you can do all the research you can about them and the act you want to do with them.

[De****]

7 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

How would your partner feel if you admitted to them that you are not with them “because of their looks”. 2+2=4 aside from learning g what the characters mean and how that equation works there nothing more that needs to be learned about it. My point is, there are instances where it’s possible to know everything about a thing. But in a broader context, experts in their field can be “pro efficient” in their vocation. That’s not limited to working, people can most certainly become experts on their partners. Which brings me back to my original post, you can make assumptions and act impulsively towards choosing your daddy, or you can do all the research you can about them and the act you want to do with them.

Okay, I asked and they said “that’s great. I would be disappointed if I was dating them for their looks.” 😂😂😂

[de****]

16 minutes ago, FETMOD-KF said:

And with this in mind. This is heading off topic.  So either the thread can return to the topic it was supposedly about, or I'll assume the discussion is over and lock the thread.

How is that consistent, you the moderator are the one that perpetuated the off topic direction by stating the “posts must be reviewed first” thing and then the “explicit is not free s***ch” thing. It’s like the rules apply to me but not to you. Anyhow, I already know you’re going to close it because moderators here don’t support diverse/critical thinking and open conversation (only support learning on your terms not the communities). And most of all moderators here can’t accept being wrong so they have to punish when they (the moderators) are in fact wrong.

[De****]

11 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

How would your partner feel if you admitted to them that you are not with them “because of their looks”. 2+2=4 aside from learning g what the characters mean and how that equation works there nothing more that needs to be learned about it. My point is, there are instances where it’s possible to know everything about a thing. But in a broader context, experts in their field can be “pro efficient” in their vocation. That’s not limited to working, people can most certainly become experts on their partners. Which brings me back to my original post, you can make assumptions and act impulsively towards choosing your daddy, or you can do all the research you can about them and the act you want to do with them.

Actually, not true. 2+2=4 was the subject of my advanced calculus class. We had to prove it. Then use that proof to create the proof that real numbers exist. My guess is most people don’t know that. So they have more to learn about 2+2=4. Now I’m over feeding your troll tendencies. Have a good one.

[FETMOD-KF]

2 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

, you the moderator are the one that perpetuated the off topic direction by stating the “posts must be reviewed first” thing

I/we did.  In response to you asking why your posts were deleted. They weren't. They were just awaiting review. And then we explained why they were waiting for review.  Posts are going through fast because I am online now, but coverage isn't always real time unfortunately.

Our aim is to not close the thread, but to keep it to the topic it's meant to be.  There's stuff which, we do have to stick to as part of the sites agreements with the app store. Just as there's a user agreement that all the users must stick to.

[de****]

4 minutes ago, denver725 said:

Actually, not true. 2+2=4 was the subject of my advanced calculus class. We had to prove it. Then use that proof to create the proof that real numbers exist. My guess is most people don’t know that. So they have more to learn about 2+2=4. Now I’m over feeding your troll tendencies. Have a good one.

Actually if it’s anyone posting “off topic” it’s you.

Troll is a derogatory term insecure people use when they can’t accept the truth.

[ey****]

3 minutes ago, denver725 said:

Actually, not true. 2+2=4 was the subject of my advanced calculus class. We had to prove it

I also wasn't going to go there, but... 2+2 doesn't always equal 4.

Some of this isn't basic maths, but, not always how we're taught.  An easier to explain example isn't using 2+2 but, for example

8+7=3

10+6=1

6+6=1.5

in those cases, 8am plus 7 hours is 3pm

10 ounces plus 6 ounces = 1 pound

6 pints plus 6 pints = 1.5 gallons

We accept 2+2=4 actually, for most people, it's taught without question.  That it's taught as matter-of-fact that 2 and 2 is 4, when it's not always - and it's only if you've proved it via advance calculus that you have evidence that in the most traditional sense 2+2=4 

I guess another one is we're taught the square root of 4 is 2, because 2x2 is 4 - but -2x-2 is also 4, so the square root of 4 is actually +/- 2 

I appreciate that this seems off topic but to wind it back in - it's a good example of how we can't state we know everything.   

There's a lot of facts presented on this thread (looks is most important, sub girls always want taller stronger Dominants etc.) which are simply assumptions and not truth.  Even if, they can be true.  

[de****]

8 minutes ago, FETMOD-KF said:

I/we did.  In response to you asking why your posts were deleted. They weren't. They were just awaiting review. And then we explained why they were waiting for review.  Posts are going through fast because I am online now, but coverage isn't always real time unfortunately.

Our aim is to not close the thread, but to keep it to the topic it's meant to be.  There's stuff which, we do have to stick to as part of the sites agreements with the app store. Just as there's a user agreement that all the users must stick to.

Congratulations, you just proved my point to my original topic.

[de****]

13 minutes ago, FETMOD-KF said:

I/we did.  In response to you asking why your posts were deleted. They weren't. They were just awaiting review. And then we explained why they were waiting for review.  Posts are going through fast because I am online now, but coverage isn't always real time unfortunately.

Our aim is to not close the thread, but to keep it to the topic it's meant to be.  There's stuff which, we do have to stick to as part of the sites agreements with the app store. Just as there's a user agreement that all the users must stick to.

Are you going to delete the math comments as well, flag then for”off topic” and put them on a time out? Or are you going to let organic learning flourish?

[FETMOD-KF]

1 minute ago, devilsdreams said:

Are you going to delete the math comments as well, flag then for”off topic” and put them on a time out? Or are you going to let organic learning flourish?

we cannot discuss action taken, or not taken, against another user.
 

[de****]

11 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I also wasn't going to go there, but... 2+2 doesn't always equal 4.

Some of this isn't basic maths, but, not always how we're taught.  An easier to explain example isn't using 2+2 but, for example

8+7=3

10+6=1

6+6=1.5

in those cases, 8am plus 7 hours is 3pm

10 ounces plus 6 ounces = 1 pound

6 pints plus 6 pints = 1.5 gallons

We accept 2+2=4 actually, for most people, it's taught without question.  That it's taught as matter-of-fact that 2 and 2 is 4, when it's not always - and it's only if you've proved it via advance calculus that you have evidence that in the most traditional sense 2+2=4 

I guess another one is we're taught the square root of 4 is 2, because 2x2 is 4 - but -2x-2 is also 4, so the square root of 4 is actually +/- 2 

I appreciate that this seems off topic but to wind it back in - it's a good example of how we can't state we know everything.   

There's a lot of facts presented on this thread (looks is most important, sub girls always want taller stronger Dominants etc.) which are simply assumptions and not truth.  Even if, they can be true.  

Except you are mixing units of measurement and adding context where their was none.

Also, you are arguing anomalies. We don’t change every keyboard on the planet just because 0.04 percent was born with 11 fingers. Yes there are some women and subs that are not height supremacists but again they are the exception to the rule……which all rules have right? Or are all rules generalized?