Hi Pig!

[eris]

oh, and I also enjoy suffering from a number of other paraphilias; besides liking teenage boys and sadism and masochism I have urophilia and agalmatophilia. I also have a fondness for transvestites.

although, this is not news to any of you guys since i never shut up about it

[odeon]

You know, I came in here - and I was so excited.  I have so much I want to write about.  I was willing to take some ribbing, but the lies about "freedom of speech" sicken me.

Bye, BC.

[odeon]

Folks, this is (was) BC in yet another incarnation. He is not welcome here and will be banned every time we get positive confirmation, regardless of the role he happens to be playing.

If you endanger the site, you will be banned and you will not be allowed back using a sockpuppet account. I would have thought the concept to be easy to grasp.

[Adam]

Personally I don't care that it was banned. I cant remember why bc was banned (and dont care really), but assuming it was a valid reason then it's right that the new accounts are banned too if he's giving no reason to believe he's come back as a genuine, reasonable member. I might feel differently if I'd found his trolling interesting or funny but this kinda stuff didn't do it for me.

[odeon]

He was banned because he asked people to post stories about cp and didn't stop in spite of parts asking him to. How would we know if he would actually want to participate? By him telling us? Why should we trust him now when he broke that trust earlier?

He does this for the lulz, that's all. Plenty of sites out there for the likes of him.

[Pyraxis]

How would we know if he would actually want to participate? By him telling us? Why should we trust him now when he broke that trust earlier?

By him demonstrating that he wasn't going to provoke people to the point of getting booted? Which he clearly didn't do this time.

Now I wish I'd been around for the original BC drama so I could have recognized later incarnations. I thought this dumbass was really a clueless aspie somewhere who obsessed over disgusting things and wanted people to talk to. Like I thought it was a good sign when he got in touch with eris and came back, and maybe he was newish to forums like he said and just needed a bit of TLC to figure out how the rules worked.

WRONG! 

[Callaway]

How would we know if he would actually want to participate? By him telling us? Why should we trust him now when he broke that trust earlier?

By him demonstrating that he wasn't going to provoke people to the point of getting booted? Which he clearly didn't do this time.

Now I wish I'd been around for the original BC drama so I could have recognized later incarnations. I thought this dumbass was really a clueless aspie somewhere who obsessed over disgusting things and wanted people to talk to. Like I thought it was a good sign when he got in touch with eris and came back, and maybe he was newish to forums like he said and just needed a bit of TLC to figure out how the rules worked.

WRONG! 

When BC was banned the first time, Parts tried talking to him first.  BC said that he would stop, but he just waited for Parts to log off and then he started another CP thread like the one Parts had just discussed with him.  Whatever he says now, how could he be trusted to keep his word when he has already demonstrated that he has no honor?

[El]

Keep on doing that and I will make your stay here miserable.

You'd make a scary-ass cellmate in prison.

[El]

ephebophilia is sexual preference (not sexual attraction) to mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19. It's not a psychological issue if it's just attraction, but preference to such age range indicates something's not right.

But of course, in many countries, this is illegal anyway.

This is eris.  If you haven't figured out her sexual preferences indicate "something's not right" you're so dense you prolly have your own gravitational pull.

[Adam]

I don't think theres anything wrong with preference for people the higher end of that

19 is adult. as is 18.

and technically 16 and 17 are legal here (and in some US states iirc?)

although I think that is pushing it a bit. I wouldn't want a 16 yr old gf myself lol

btw i thought epohbgfphilia (whatever) was attraction to teenagers? ie paedophilia = pre-pubescent. eppkhtphilia = 13+ ?

[eris]

well it goes in different degrees. yeah pedophilia is attraction to prepubescent and then hebephilia is like during puberty like 11 - 15 and then ephebophilia is older adolescence.

I would not be interested in a 15 or 16 year old either. Way too young. But I also dont go around carding people to see how old they are before i decide if they are attractive or not. I prefer boys from like 18  - 23

[Pyraxis]

Hey, I went after a 47-year-old when I was 21. (I think those are the ages; my math might be off.) If it had been a few years earlier it would have been horribly illegal. The law has to draw a hard line but I see it as far more grey.

[Pyraxis]

When BC was banned the first time, Parts tried talking to him first.  BC said that he would stop, but he just waited for Parts to log off and then he started another CP thread like the one Parts had just discussed with him.  Whatever he says now, how could he be trusted to keep his word when he has already demonstrated that he has no honor?

Because how can a person ever grow if you don't leave them a way out? If you expect them to be impossible, they will fulfil your expectations to the letter, so that treatment should be reserved for the rare people who are truly unredeemable.

It has to be handled delicately but it is possible to establish trust even with chronically unpredictable people. Often unreliability just means there are patterns under the surface that aren't yet understood.

[Queen Victoria]

When BC was banned the first time, Parts tried talking to him first.  BC said that he would stop, but he just waited for Parts to log off and then he started another CP thread like the one Parts had just discussed with him.  Whatever he says now, how could he be trusted to keep his word when he has already demonstrated that he has no honor?

Because how can a person ever grow if you don't leave them a way out? If you expect them to be impossible, they will fulfil your expectations to the letter, so that treatment should be reserved for the rare people who are truly unredeemable.

It has to be handled delicately but it is possible to establish trust even with chronically unpredictable people. Often unreliability just means there are patterns under the surface that aren't yet understood.

We're not denying him the right to grow, just not here.

[Pyraxis]

"We"? Vs... me?

Or is this the royal we?