I don’t like moderation. I feel like before ppl could just ignore someone and we kinda self moderated. I personally don’t find the spamming that annoying. Other kinds of trolling bother me, like when someone tells a lie to win an argument and then goes back on it, and debate trolls who are never wrong and never concede a point. I feel like any moderation shows a sort of favoritism.
Freedom of speech has its limits - e.g. you can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater.
w.r.t. the discussion board, one thing is to have different points of view and differences of opinions, but for some on this board it's not a difference of opinion they ate interested in but just overboard with the flaming purely for the sake of flaming - plenty of times good threads get totally derailed/hijacked by someone's personal desire to just flame - it's selfish and bushleague
Well lots not forget that the main target these days is a self-admitted pedophile. You have come to accept that your buddy (hopefully ex-buddy) is a pedophile by now, haven't you Papi?
If you have a problem with vincemichaels then why not handle it with him via a PM, why use the discussion board to constantly air your grievances with a particular member
I notice you didn't answer my question, but I'll still answer yours:
The reason I post to the entire board is that I do not want a self-admitted pedophile's existence on this board to be very comfortable for him.
BJ99, does your club have bouncers?
Think of it this way. You have been having a good time at your club for quite a while. Then one evening, a drunk comes in and starts yelling for attention. People look the other way and try to ignore it. Next night, he gets louder. Following night, a second drunk sees the opening and joins in. 5 nights later, the club is overrun by drunks yelling and the regular patrons are annoyed and can’t enjoy the dancers, so they start putting on headphones. New customers show up, and you gently explain, “We just go to our lockers and put on these special headphones so that we can’t hear the drunks, you should do the same.” The new customers and several of the existing customers, decide I don’t want to put up with this, I’m leaving.
For example, should PoleDancer have to put up with the way Trucidos treated her? I was happy to see she was back, but you saw how Trucidos treated her, is that ok with you?
I would much rather have the bouncers take out the unruly guys than have the board decline because they ruin the experience.
The ignore button is a beautiful thing. It gives each person the ability to self moderate what they read about without limiting another persons freedom of speech. I have used it freely to increase my enjoyment of the board.
Every TUSCLer's post is there for everyone to read and draw their own conclusions - in the end it is Founder's website and he gets to decide who's on the board and what it should be about, if he so chooses - nobody else should anoint themselves TUSCL sheriff
Yes, but we get to choose what we post about too, and Founder can decide if he wants to ban me or not. If I get banned for posting about @vinceygirl's self admissions of pedophilia that is fine. If it's board which is going to protect pedophiles by banning people who go after them: then fine might not be one I wish to participate in. Let's see what happens.
I analogize the situation to the following: A group of people is invited to share an evening of convivial discussion at the home of a host that knows that they all share a common interest. One or two of that group share an intense dislike for another member, perhaps even justifiably so, who knows? Instead of leaving so they would not have to socialize with a person they consider an undesirable, those one or two instead insist on continually attempting to hijack the conversation by loudly and constantly berating the object of their dislike. The host politely intervenes and suggests that the discussion be limited to the purpose for which all were invited to his home. Instead of doing what any persons with a modicum of respect for their host and fellow guests would do, which would be to either leave or bite their tongues, they take a shit on the host’s dining room table. What does the host do at that point? I think the answer is obvious.
Personally I don't think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion, that's why I don't have anyone on ignore other than some aliases that the *only* thing they do is spam/clog the board.
I'm just with Founder in that the flaming and ganging up on certain members takes more away from the board than it adds.
I consider myself positively in the corner of the First amendment but lets remember a website is more like a newspaper than public discussion from a legal standpoint, meaning a webmaster has the same prerogatives to have editorial discipline on content that a newspaper or magazine editor would have.
Speech is good, and plurality of differing opinions as well. Shouting down everyone with repeated bullshit and personal attacks? You've crossed the line from free speech to a personal vendetta
@ anon, no. My club doesn’t have bouncers, and your analogy not only sucks, but is insulting; Just bc I’m a stripper doesn’t mean that all I can relate to is the strip club.
But what if the place NEXT to your club had a vulture who kept flying up to customers and exposing its cochlea? Would you call the Department of Natural Resources to relocate it to the McDonald's across the street from your club's primary competition?
I certainly don't mind anyone enjoying TUSCL however they like--unless it interferes with my enjoyment. Sure, it's not critical, but it's irritating bullshit that those of us who don't have a dog in that fight shouldn't have to put up with just because a few arrogant assholes belief they can impose their opinions on everyone else by spamming the board.
Seems Founder is okay with people threatening others with violence as @vincemichaels has done, and which @SJG guy is doing all the time. He's also okay with having self-admitted pedophiles on the board. However, Founder does draw the line at threads going after the self-admitted pedophiles. Really outstanding!
-->"On this board, a thread goes down to list no matter how popular it is. This means that the spam threads clog up the forum and make it harder for everyone else to see the quality threads."
DC, I hear you; this is very inconvenient. So, I hacked into the forum code, and added a couple of radio buttons at the top of the main page. If you click on Last Comment, the board will function like all the other boards, where the latest comment will jump a thread back to the top, rather than just aging it. I also kept a Date Posted button, for use by those with IQs under 78, and retrograde ejaculators.
Also, I join the group in offering a big thanks to Founder on the board cleanup.
Founder is too kind. If it were up to me, all these juvenile assholes creating threads for the sole purpose of attacking and insulting people who don't agree with them, or who don't do what they want, including Founder himself, would just be banned outright. Freedom of speech only requires one thread. Multiple threads on the same subject, and certainly threads created for no other purpose than to troll, wouldn't be tolerated on any other message board I can think of.
A few people here are talking about the First Amendment, free speech, and libertarianism for some reason, but those are concepts that apply only to the government, not a private website. You can tell someone to shut up when they are in your own home, and you can kick them out if they refuse to comply. You can tell your employees to not talk about certain things, and you can fire them if they disobey you. That's because you're a private citizen with property rights.
In other words, this issue has nothing to do with free speech. The First Amendment and the Constitution are about the government - not about a strip club website where lonely middle-aged men come to discuss the proper technique for orgasming in their pants. The government can't shut you up because of the First Amendment. But Founder can shut you up because he owns this website. This site is Founder's property and he can censor it as much as he pleases. Overall, I think he's showed a great deal of restraint, given the sheer volume of spam and trolling. I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.
I think the point is if that a little board can't be governed according to a libertarian spirit, people are going to break down and start censoring when they get into a thorny situation, how on earth do you think a large country could be governed by libertarian principles?
^^^^ "If you have a problem with vincemichaels then why not handle it with him via a PM, ..."
If the OP wants to swallow founder's load of spunk sauce then why doesn't he handle it in private instead of broadcasting it to the masses?
The fundamental problem seems to be that people are trying to blame the messenger for the fact that @vincemichaels is a self confessed pedophile. May they think if they delete the bad news, it changes the truth of the matter?
It's founder's board and ultimately he will do what he wants.
Personally, I don't think anyone's voice should be universally stifled. The ignore feature allows each individual an opportunity to self-censure. To me, that is a good compromise.
@Dougster... When you refer to libertarianism, I think you mean anarchy (or, at the very least, minarchy).
A libertarian government would be very small but still there is a core of central governance (or, to our purposes, moderation) that exists for strictly limited purposes.
In anarchy there is absolutely no central state and it is up to the people to rule themselves. In the ideal anarchist state, the animals run the zoo, but it works out. Up until the last few days, that is what this board has tried to do.
So, this board is currently more analogous to libertarianism. In the most minimal way possible, our "central government" has stepped in to put the train back on its tracks. Whether or not you like the implementation is a whole other thing...
But this is all a bit pedantic. I suspect that Founder just wants the strip club forum to be about strip clubs, and not about one guy (regardless of how horrible he might be).
BHO: Thanks for your informed post on the First Amendment. So, so many people misrepresent what Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion mean under the constitution. You got it right.
@Dougster I only going to answer once, you’re a smart guy but you and the folks that keep on crapping up the board think anyone that disagrees with them is stupid. That in and of itself is stupidity defined and you know it. There is no one here that has not seen all of the dumbass posts about nonsense. IDGAF what an anonymous poster on an Internet forum thinks about me and I never will.
Some of your other topics are quite interesting and as a result of you speaking out about investing has actually helped me learn more about those topics and I appreciate all of those even the ones I disagree with, for helping me to be more informed about those subjects through their posts, I also enjoy the strip club forum it has made more aware of what is happening in any given club, many times it has given me a reason to broaden my prospective, more often it reinforces what I already knew.
You need to grow your mind after all what is the use of intelligence if you don’t use it
There is no one here that knows everything and respect needs to be earned. Carrying on incessantly about one member or another does not earn any respect in my book.
That is all I have to say on this topic.
“i do not understand why vincemichaels "whose words created the reactions that led to those postings" is essentially being given a free pass to continue posting here.“ The answer is pretty simple. VM is not the one spamming the board with gibberish. There was a news story a couple of days ago about an airline flight that was forced to divert because a passenger smeared feces all over rhe restroom. That is essentially what the trolls are doing here.
@25: Sorry but I think it is you who lacks practical intelligence and lost alot of respect due to your defending @vincemichaels even after it was very clear that he had confessed to being a pedophile. You had no backbone on the issue. That does not earn respect.
As for the spamming accomplishing nothing, apparently, LE is looking into the matter and requested TUSCL's database. This is a good thing, IMO, and shows we did accomplish something.
Spin it anyway you like, @Dougster that is a lot of horse manure and you know it. The only thing I ever defended was his right to be as much of a jackass as the rest of y'all.
@mark94,
Thanks, but I'm sure it went in one ear and out the other for some people here. People seem to want the government to ban certain types of speech, and yet they get all huffy and indignant when a private company imposes rules on its own employees - more evidence, as if you needed it, that the overall libertarian project is a doomed enterprise.
I always think of raising children as the perfect example. I don't have kids, I don't want kids, but if I ever did have kids, I would raise them with some rules, structure, and discipline. I wouldn't just let them do whatever they want at all times. Disciplining children is in no way incompatible with libertarianism. That's how to raise children. Being a libertarian means that I don't want the government to raise our kids. Similarly, if I ran a website where someone was being disruptive, I guess I would eventually have to censor him. But I wouldn't want the government to do it.
I think the fact that mark94 has been completely annihilated so many times when it comes to Bitcoin analysis clouds his objectivity.
I have little doubt that it was the deleting of threads that would have prompted LE to act.
@Dougster,
The point is that vincemichaels didn't disrupt the board, the anti-vincemichaels posters did. VM is just another sorry low-life who once broke the law. But his admission didn't disrupt the board - his trolls did.
Regardless of your opinions, there is a statute of limitations for child abuse and statutory rape. And there is probably one for engaging in "transactional relationships" with adult women too. Who knows? But having LE looking into the inner workings of this website is a very bad thing. I would just like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that everything on this website is a work of fiction... especially everything I ever wrote! I haven't broken any laws. Good luck with your lives, people. It's been interesting LOL
"I have little doubt that it was the deleting of threads that would have prompted LE to act." Yes, of course. Law enforcement is always ready to spring into action when someone's feelings are hurt because their inane, rambling spam threads are deleted.
The only thing I know about VM is what I have seen this board. I don't know him, have never met him, never talked to him, never exchanged a PM with him. I basically don't give a shit about VM. I am not defending VM or anything he has ever said or done. I am condemning the constant barrage of spam about him, just as I would condemn it if the subject was anything else (like Indian packers and movers), because it detracts from the board and shows a total lack of consideration for the other members, not to mention the Founder who has clearly expressed the opinion that it should stop.
doctorevil: "it detracts from the board and shows a total lack of consideration for the other members, not to mention the Founder who has clearly expressed the opinion that it should stop."
In this case it was justified though since it served a high purpose. One that we seem to have won on the end too.
But tell you what: now that we have LE looking into it: I agree no need to barrage/spam the board about it anymore.
Oh, also, to clarify the above. If LE was interested in the board because it was sheltering a pedophile then when stuff started getting deleted, then, yes, it's very likely that's would prompt them to act. The threads themselves weren't evidence, but once the deletions started who knows where it would end.
^^^ O please spare us your stupidity, for founder this is more of a pain than it is for you dumbass you think it’s fun to get your records subpoenaed I wouldn’t be surprised if it costs him a bunch of legal fees and the wasted time alone involved in gathering the records to comply will most likely come from his own pocket. You are just a fucking troublemaker doing this shit for your own entertainment SMH
Oh, now I'm stupid? When I agree with you say I'm smart. Gotcha!
I think you let your friendship with @vincemichaels cloud your objectivity. And you certainly aren't the only one. That compounds your inherent inability to admit when you are wrong. Which you are here.
Really you seem to have trouble comprehending I said to spare me your stupidity never said you were stupid, why should founder have to be out of pocket, because you decided to entertain yourself in such a dumbass fashion. I think you were just bored. I’ll bet that there are 50 sexual predators living within a few blocks of where you live (assuming from your postings that you are in the vicinity of NYC) do you have a crusade going to get them all out of your neighborhood as well? If not than drop your sanctimonious attitude.
VM's post was ambiguous. I have communicated with him over a year ago. Very unlikely that he would ever do anything seriously illegal. Dougie, you are just making an ass out of yourself.
Stop posting words which draw LE's computers and stop making it look like you are encouraging fantasizing.
SJG
look at rear view pic as well
[view link][view link]
again, see the rear view
[view link][view link][view link]
omit panties of course
[view link][view link][view link][view link]
@25: You know I also consider you an intelligent person and have said so before. Normally even when we disagree I at least understand where you are coming and can see why someone could come to believe whatever position it is you have.
On this one: don't get your stance at all. Why is it bad that LE is investigating someone who has admitted to being a pedophile? Seems like a good thing to me?
Why all the concern about Founder's financial hardship? He has made money for years hosting this site? Seems the cost of doing business of this nature. Tell you what though: if it is a real financial burden for him start a crowd sourcing campaign with ZCash and I'll contribute to offsetting whatever it cost him. Hell he can even charge for his time.
As for why I don't spend my time going after the alleged 50 predators withing a few blocks of me? I don't know the statistics on pedophilia. I'll take your word for it. I don't go after the because I have no idea who they are. Since I'm not LE I don't have the tools necessary to do the investigation, nor, frankly, the inclination. So many wrongs with the world and me not devoting my time to all of them. I pick and choose who I help. Won't get into the personal details behind that but you can bet that I am spending my own time on them... If any of these 50 pedophiles within a few blocks of me put in my face like @vincemichaels did on here, then, yes, I would make point of doing something legally in my rights about it.
I have no problem with LE going after louses at any time my problem is that I dislike hypocrisy, and this has become nothing other than a total farce, I have agreed that If VM did this he should be prosecuted, but until you agree that he is within his rights to be a jerk, and an idiot, just like the rest of us then you are a hypocrite as well. If he actually did such a heinous thing and I am within my rights to have my doubts, if you want to disagree with me that is your right, but slandering and mischaracterizing what people actually said is the hallmark of bullies and has become very common lately, and I don't like it at all.
As far as founders problems with running this business I also run a small business and let me tell you it's no picnic. There are enough day to day problems that come up along with associated costs, that unlike the large firms that you appear to be involved with, that I sympathize with his POV. There is no corporate deep pocket here the man has done the work and spent the money for this site to operate as it has for some time now, and he deserves to be able to run his business without us making problems directly to his detriment.
At my end there was an outage of a few minutes.
We need to start being careful and have a rebuild plan in place.
To keep the community together, if there is a problem.
[view link]
Dougster is must being an over the top jerk.
SJG
@25: "my problem is that I dislike hypocrisy... but until you agree that he is within his rights to be a jerk, and an idiot,"
Sorry, I think his admission go a little beyond "jerk" and "idiot" into some versus serious territory? Are you one of these people who is grasping at the straws that he made it all up just to get attention?
25: "but slandering and mischaracterizing what people actually said"
We (me, txtittyfag, DoctorPhil) gave directs quotes to what he said including the exact threads, and quoting the context verbatim. People read it and were able to come to their own conclusions. No "slander" or "mischaraterization" involved.
25: " There are enough day to day problems that come up along with associated costs, that unlike the large firms that you appear to be involved with, that I sympathize with his POV"
I don't think he has stated his POV on matter: if he feels an LE investigation is warranted given @vincemichaels words or not. Nor whether it is right for LE to ask him for the database. For all we know he might be in full agreement that he should had in it over. Maybe even volunteered it. I would wait to see what he has to say. Although with it being a legal matter it's understandable if he can't comment.
^^^ Well how about what I actually said. That has been mischaracerized ad neauseam.
You're right founder hasn't actually made a POV clear, I might have been projecting my own feelings about extra work and expense involved .
You know either @vincemichaels cast such a spell on you that, for the first time I can recall, you came up with a completely incomprehensible position: "he was just lying to get attention". OR I misunderstood and mischaracterized what you said.
Why not remind us of exactly what your position on this is?
You won't admit to mischaracterizeing my post, so instead you just deflect, you need a straw man, just like everyone else. so you took my statements none of which defended or condoned that kind of behavior, and you GD well know that, I don't believe for one minute that you or anyone else misunderstood what I was saying so back off.
I never saw you admit once in all of my time on this board that you were mistaken about anything and I doubt that you are capable of doing so.
Go find yourself another bogey to play with, this bullshit is old.
Tell me what your position is. As far I can tell it's "He was just lying to get attention". How do I reckon that? Because above you say he is only guilty of "being a jerk and an idiot".
So just chill and tell us what your real position is. If, in fact, it isn't what you said above. If I mischaracterized it, I'll admit it. Or you'll have trapped me not admitting to mischaracterizing it when I did. Seems a can't lose situation for you if I really did mischaracterize it.
So let's hear what it really is, if I got it wrong.
@25: "I never saw you admit once in all of my time on this board that you were mistaken about anything and I doubt that you are capable of doing so."
Actually, @BJ99 propped me for exactly being able to do that. I guess you have a selective memory/confirmation bias.
Here's just one thing I've admitted to being wrong about. At first I thought DoctorPhil and txtittyfag were the same person. I admitted I was wrong and no longer believe that.
Spin it anyway you like, @Dougster that is a lot of horse manure and you know it. The only thing I ever defended was his right to be as much of a jackass as the rest of y'all. Good Night
As I said above, big difference between admitting to being a pedohile and being a jackass. Or are you saying the two are the same thing? Or you don't believe he admitted to being a pedophile?
Looks to me like you are tap dancing your way around the real questions here. Actually I should say "were tap dancing" now you are putting on your running shoes.
I prefer to stay out of the tedious 25/ dougster fights, but since he called me out, I have seen dougster concede points, in discussions, and recently w RD. He acknowledged once in a discussion ab govt subsidies w me, that food stamps might disproportionately bennefit big companies who are more able to take advantage of accepting them.
As usual your just looking for the straw man, sorry I don't wear dancing shoes and I never run from anyone, if you see me putting on running shoes, it might be time to make yourself scarce, because I wouldn't be running from you I'd be running into you like a fullback.
@flagooner I also thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken.
Honestly, it kinda looks like you both resent each other telling other ppl here (us dumb sheeple) what to think, bc you think we will listen. :P I can’t speak for the other sheeple (everyone not dougster, or 25), but I can decide for myself who is a creeper, so you guys don’t have to fight for sheperding rights.
^^^Nah nah that ain't it, my sole issue is not whether any one here thinks VM is a creeper some of the shit he says is creepier than fuck but @Dougster and his band of sycophants misrepresenting what I have said.
@Dougster wrote:
“On this one: don't get your stance at all. Why is it bad that LE is investigating someone who has admitted to being a pedophile? Seems like a good thing to me?”
Do you really believe law enforcement could charge VM based on message board posts and that it is a good thing that LE is examining TUSCL’s board?
Founder didn’t say they were only investigating VM posts. Think of how many members have openly described acts with strippers that easily qualify as solicitation of prostitution, both directly and in reviews. If you believe VM can be prosecuted for a few posts from long ago, you sure opened up a lot of the regular posters for prosecution with postings much more detailed than VM.
I doubt anyone, including VM, will be prosecuted for message board posts, but getting LE involved will certainly give them a short lists of clubs they could target for future prostitution stings. It is harder for them to ignore the shady behavior when they are provided this more detailed info directly.
I sure wouldn’t be proud of drawing law enforcement’s attention to the board if I were you.
@ 25, don’t worry then. You did condemn vm’s statement as creepy, and even appealed to him harshly to see how offensive he is being. Vm chose to ignore you and rant ab his asscrack in typical vm fashion. I didn’t read though this stuff here, but I did see you at that on the “why” thread. Anyone who cares ab it saw too, and can decide for themselves what they think, so don’t worry ab it.
@25: You absolutely are running. You won't answer the direct question as to whether or not you believe that @vincemichaels admitted to being a pedophile or not. All you've codemned him for above is being a jerk and an idiot. You refuse to answer the question of whether you think he admitted to being a pedophile or not. Keep on, running, @25! Run, @25, run! Just like the little runner that you are!
@BJ99: @25 can say he thinks the statement is creepy and advice him not to be offensive without actually saying he believes that @vm has admitted to being pedophile. All this if he believes that @vm was just making it up to be a liar and a jerk. Until @25 stops running and is willing to clarify he is a tap dancer and a runner. (Who says he runs from nobody but is running all through this thread).
Run, @25, run!
@anon31415: I don't think that's how investigations work. They don't get a carte blanche to go on a fishing investigation and see everything that comes out in the wash. They would need to be very targeted at what they specifically say they are investigating. That's assuming it was handed over due to a legal requirement. If it was volunteered things might be different.
Also, so far Founder has only said he was asked for it. Maybe it was just a request without a subpoena and he refused?
@txtittyfag: This ledger of @25's sounds amusing. Is that where he puts his tap dancing and running shoes. "Everyone is mischaracterizing what I said and I am pissed as hell!" "Well just clarify what you said then" "Fuck you! I refuse! And quit mischaracterizing me!"
@Bj99 Im not very worried I know what I believe and so does anyone following this make believe drama This is getting old Dougster, gets bored he finds some dumbass that he thinks might entertain him for a while then he starts calling them names next thing you know the board starts fighting and he starts posting a daily thread with the losers joining in its so predictable the pattern is the same at this point I am going to stop responding because that is what feeds their tiny egos.
Note to the idiots it’s not much different from SJGs threads you guys all have many threads where the vast majority of comments are your own tells us how interesting and intellectually stimulating the rest of the board finds you guys.
And @25 again refuses to answer whether he thinks @vincemichaels admitted to being a pedophile.
Okay, okay. It all makes sense now. Even though @25 tap dances around and runs from that question he is not a man who tap dances or runs from anyone (or any question!)
Pretty obvious why he won't answer. Because if he did it would be clear there was no mischaracterization of his position.
And seems like @25 used to find my threads on Bitcoin and politics interesting until I called him out on his position about @vincemichaels. Now my threads are just "uninteresting" and "not intellectually stimulating".
Okay, no problem. Is highly amusing!
^^^ Good move @Dougster I’ll start referring to you as the spin doctor you did it again, spin doctor spin keep on spinning you’re like a top spin baby spin. LOL
Hey, @25 here's what I would call spin. You say you are not a runner but run from the key question here of whether or not you think @vincemichales is a pedophile or not. Nice to see you admitted to projecting earlier in this, because it looks like this "spin" thing is you do it again. LOL!
Just keep running from that question, runner!
Actually @Dougster I never ran from your question plenty of people know what my answer is I’ll give it to you again I DON’T KNOW if he is or isn’t, I don’t like his statements regarding this you should feel free to spin this any way you like, unlike other threads that you post I can get attributed information and form an educated opinion does that satisfy your stupidity. Now before you start spinning and make yourself dizzy you don’t know either you only have an opinion just like the rest of the speculators here. I don’t care enough to have an opinion do you want to continue like a ten year old or accept my opinion for what it is,MY OPINION !
@25: oh, okay, just because he admitted to being attracted to underage girls on several occasions, and admitted he had sex with at least one of them we cannot know if he is a pedophile or not. Yep, that's certainly not defending him by say we can't know. You were really mischaracterized there.
101 comments