(untitled)

Please address rampant 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺𝗅 violence & misinformation. Also, please remove the filter for the plain ASCII word "𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺𝗅," calling anyone who tries to post something containing it a "spammer." That is rather ridiculous.

>>10479 ... among filters for other words/phrases. Anyway, what I'm working on right now: updating the text supported by Prolapse & Incontinence to note that the internal anal sphincter muscle seems to lack somatic innervation. If that is the case, then damage to it e.g. from anal stretching will elicit no pain sensation. Supporting studies (among others) are below. I'm not providing quotes because I'm not sure which word(s) are triggering the "spammer" response. "Internal anal sphincter parasympathetic-nitrergic and sympathetic-adrenergic innervation: a 3-dimensional morphological and functional analysis." Diseases of the Colon and Rectum. 2012 Apr; 55(4): 473-81. doi:10.1097/DCR.0b013e318245190e. (PMID 22426273) "Disorders of the pelvic floor and anal sphincters; a gastroenterologist’s perspective." Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes. 2013 Mar; 24(2): 293-298. doi:10.1016/S0716-8640(13)70161-5.

>>10479 Have you considered making a Geocities/HTML-host page? Perhaps with a zipped "press info" or package? Seems a little more efficient than only the kamikaze-imageposts. I don't currently have the bandwidth to interact much with DOI papers directly, and a site/bookmark is easy to file into my reading list and to archive. (archiveteam offers a free "download complete domain to archive.org" service, which I've used in the past.)

>>10479 >>10481 I over read the PDF attachment, but my point that a simple HTML site is more accessible stands. PDF has security weaknesses due to being complex to implement readers for. Browsers are much more hardened and with a plain HTML (no JS especially) site they aren't even necessary to read the page.

>>10481 > Have you considered making a Geocities/HTML-host page? I maintained a web site on a free host many years ago. I have no desire to do so again. The Medical Aspects Of Anal Sex 20080609: https://web.archive.org/web/20080609040506/http://damon4.bravehost.com/ (earliest version archived: 20080227) > Seems a little more efficient than only the kamikaze-imageposts. I disagree. When I post an image, I can provide a variant with a URL to a pastebin site containing the references compilation as plaintext. Of course, some people might think that makes me look like a spammer (even though I'm not affiliated with any pastebin site and gain nothing from referrals/views), which is why I provided the PDF instead at least here. > I don't currently have the bandwidth to interact much with DOI papers directly, I suggest supporting Sci-Hub (no affiliation). You can prefix a DOI with https://sci-hub.se/ and Sci-Hub may have the study (although sometimes it's a pre-publication manuscript). Note that there may be more than one top-level domain, and sometimes they disappear; the big publishers are not exactly supportive of Sci-Hub nor its founder. See for example these Hacker News links: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27939043 (Sci-Hub Twitter account suspended) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27781701 (How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27730843 (Is Alexandra Elbakyan [Sci-Hub's founder] in real trouble this time?)

I see pic related, OP. So I do not know what you are saying.

>>10486 >>10486 >I've experienced this tactic before elsewhere. Is a person called "space_" involved with lainchan in any way? No. It was probably moved due to the subject fitting more in /q/. We don't do that type of tactic here. We just delete and/or ban the person. We move things that we feel belong in a different board. For example, when you bring up questions/comments/concerns/etc. about a staff decision - it belongs in /q/. >anorectal Ok, thank you for letting me know.

>>10487 > No. Okay. I hope that that's true (and that the person I'm talking about isn't known by another name here). Blocking Tor posting on occasion as well as using block lists also remind me of that person's behavior. Of course, I do recognize that some people can be very bothersome and may use Tor among other methods to cause trouble, post spam, etc. Perhaps "space_" and others have good reason to be overzealous with some things, but it's a bother when I get caught up in their countermeasures and am viewed as an adversary. (I do acknowledge that I can be quite nasty sometimes though, especially after being treated as an adversary/spammer/etc. I'm merely a very, very fed-up person who's tired of being fed up for far too many years. I'm an agnostic atheist who has essentially been forced into nofap. But again, ultimately this is not about me; I can and do still talk about myself regardless.) > We don't do that type of tactic here. We just delete and/or ban the person. Yes, I've experienced many of my threads being deleted/censored: https://archive.is/https://lainchan.org/hum/* > We move things that we feel belong in a different board. For example, when you bring up questions/comments/concerns/etc. about a staff decision - it belongs in /q/. I'm not sure that doing so merits moving the entire thread to this board when it was merely an off-hand comment, but fine. I'll keep that in mind for the future. For now I'll stop trying so hard to post a thread on /hum/. Eventually though I do wish to have a thread about the topics I've covered on that board without it being deleted — unless someone can convince me that the matters about which I am posting do not belong there despite pertaining to humanity in general (good luck with that). > Ok, thank you for letting me know. You're welcome. I hope you can remove some other words as well that trigger the "spammer" response. It's a bit overzealous IMO (especially when I can't quote medical studies without modifying the text so as to not trigger that response).

>>10479 Not removing the filter, until you stop spamming the topic. Your repeated spamming of the topic , has not only broken Rule 3, Rule 4, and Rule 9. Always argue in good faith and avoid using personal attacks. You should always elaborate on your opinions rather than just spilling the soykaf. If you must post it, spoiler any NSFW content and make sure it's relevant to the discussion. In doing so, and trying to bypass post filters designed to prevent spamming as well as your repeated postings of nonsense quotes and death threads you have repeated violated rules Rule 3 and Rule 4. By posting pictures of anuses in some of your spam threads you have broken Rule 9 . You have also made the topic of but sex, ano-rectal violence, and associated misinformation and all related topics be classified as topic nongrata / unrelated content at Lainchan, e.g. you have made those topics Rule 7 violations. Do not spam or advertise unrelated content. You are being treated as a spammer, because you are spamming, if you wanted to have a serious conversation about the topic, then you shouldn't have spammed copypasta and should have made a /q/ thread earlier when your post was deleted making your case. I am fed up with your spamming, to the point were I will have to disable posting on all boards if it continues, all because you don't seem to respect our board culture and rules and just treat this platform like it is just another imageboard for you to spam your copypasta.

>>10492 > Not removing the filter, until you stop spamming the topic. As I stated: For now I'll stop trying so hard to post a thread on /hum/. Of course, I'm already having second thoughts about that after seeing your hostile response. > broken Rule 3, Rule 4, and Rule 9 Rule 3? Personal attacks often have been used against me. I try to refrain from using them against others, but I have been known to lose patience especially when dealing with someone who obvious seems to have a nefarious agenda and e.g. keeps on using logically-fallacious diversionary tactics I've covered (among other deceitful and manipulative tactics). Rule 4? My opinions should be abundantly clear from what I've posted. That said, once again I will reiterate that ultimately this is not about me. Rule 9? Okay, fine, I should have spoilered NSFW material. I'll keep that in mind for any future efforts. > trying to bypass post filters designed to prevent spamming Some of the verboten words shouldn't be forbidden. When I can't easily quote various medical studies, then the filtering is overzealous. > By posting pictures of anuses Oh, the horror! Considering how many threads of mine have (wrongly IMO) been censored, I felt that I might as well post what I like. Sure, those images should have been spoilered, but even so they were relevant. > misinformation In the OP I posted summaries and statements supported by many medical sources (including peer-reviewed studies and medical books) included at the end of the pastes in the PDF. I also posted summaries and statements supported by peer-reviewed studies and news articles relating to trends. If you feel that something I posted is misinformation that I did not present as such, then please elaborate. Merely making a vague claim is unhelpful and potentially malicious. Previously I posted examples of misinformation e.g. on Reddit /r/sex (among other places) to provide evidence of a problem that needs to be addressed (that is, rampant misinformation). I did not yet post any such examples in this thread. > Do not spam or advertise unrelated content. As I have pointed out numerous times before, what I post is not spam. I do not stand to gain money from this endeavor, nor have I ever stood to gain money from it at any time in the past. I am only advertising material that I believe needs much greater exposure, and what I post most certainly does not constitute "unrelated content" on a board pertaining to humanity. > I am fed up with your spamming, to the point were I will have to disable posting on all boards if it continues, all because you don't seem to respect our board culture and rules and just treat this platform like it is just another imageboard for you to spam your copypasta. Again, I am not spamming. Moreover, one* of my /hum/ threads in the past persisted for a while, leading me to wonder why I'm now encountering so much hostility and resistance. Sure, I made mistakes; I am willing to learn from them and try again without making them at some point in the future. * https://web.archive.org/web/202104/https://lainchan.org/hum/res/43628.html

>moving my thread to a low-activity board from a board where it was appropriate I've experienced this tactic before elsewhere. Is a person called "space_" involved with lainchan in any way? That would explain much since my experience here (censorship included) has been very similar to experiences on several other imageboards. >>10484 The verboten word is ano-rectal without the -. There are plenty of others as well it would seem.

>>10500 > the same copypasta multiple times a day for 3 weeks That's due to experiencing what I view as unwarranted censorship. As I wrote in >>10488: I do acknowledge that I can be quite nasty sometimes though, especially after being treated as an adversary/spammer/etc. > Rule 4 is a big deal in terms of determining quality discussion in this community. As I stated, ultimately this is not about me (nor, by extension, my opinions). Even so, I have elaborated upon my opinions in various posts (sometimes old ones I referenced). Perhaps I would have done more such elaboration, and spent time writing new material, had I not felt as if my thread might disappear at any time for each one I started lately. > Your linked pdfs and summaries were nonsensical and gibberish because they were just link dumped and not provided with any relevant discussion. I disagree. The points I made in my writings leave plenty of room for discussion, as do the words of others to which I've been trying to draw attention. > You are / were spamming If you define that as repeatedly posting the same material over and over again, then yes. > the quality of an opening post and then framework for beginning a discussion in this community is different to elsewhere. I'd be more inclined to try to fit within that framework if there were not annoying word filters in place. > You will instead invite discussion instead of demanding call to action. 1. Please do not dictate what I should or should not do outside of the confines of the rules. I shall try to be more accommodating; however, I've been at this for a very long time now. It may be very difficult to understand why I do what I do without experiencing what I have experienced. 2. Action is required, and the sooner the better since some matters are time-sensitive (e.g. violent people relocating before a government prosecutes them). There isn't much to discuss beyond what course(s) of action to take. Whether action is required at all is a settled matter in my eyes (it is needed, badly, and that's been the case for *decades*). > NSFW imagery supporting posts should always be spoilered and its relevance should be explicitly provided and not just left to the viewer to implicitly assume. Initially I did try to do that, posting one or more images of an anus approaching the anatomical ideal at rest with my text supported by Anatomy & Trauma. The word filtering got in my way, and I lost patience with trying to work around it.

More censorship, huh? So much for the idea of removing lainchan from my shiatlist.

I'm no longer watching this thread, nor any /q/ thread. Fsck you, censorship-happy mod(s)/admin(s). You had plenty of opportunities for dialog. You will be given no more opportunities from this point forward. I will do what I wish, and fsck what you or anyone else thinks. As I keep on pointing out, ultimately this is not about me. Perhaps I should practice at being as nasty as possible in preparation for slaughtering violent criminals who profited from harming others and inspired countless viewers in so doing, along with slaughtering people in governments worldwide who enabled those violent criminals for far too many years. Please assassinate Kamala Harris, Xavier Becerra, Gavin Newsom, and plenty of other politicians worldwide who failed to rein in an out-of-control pornography industry over which they had (and in Newsom's case, still have) jurisdiction. (Is my bark worse than my bite? Will I ever actually kill people who deserve to be killed? Only time will tell.)

>Will I ever actually kill people who deserve to be killed? You clearly haven't killed yourself yet, so, probably not. >I'm no longer watching this thread, nor any /q/ thread. Lol, I rate the chances of that as "slim". people like you are desperate for attention.

Can you filter anorectal and derivatives to brewing soykaf on meth? This man is tweaking.

>>10654 I think we have a ranting thread in >>>/hum/

idea on how to stop this guy: periodically do OCR on all images. When ones show up that have a significant amount of text similar to his, delete the thread. He'd have to start distorting the text to post them, which basically means he might as well be spamming us with random noise, and hopefully even his pea brain will realize how futile it is.

>>10667 I made a dump of the current crop with tesseract. The OCR of tesseract is good -- text has to be rotated significantly or rendered unreadable from color changes to not get picked up at least in part. It's also really fast, especially for small images with little text. Might be able to make an imagemagick script to try scanning images at many rotations but that's overkill to start with. You could probably just look for images containing a significant amount keywords. "anorectal" and "anoreceptive" are easy ones. I also sorted all the words (in lower case) in the OCR dumps by frequency.

>>10668 >>10667 that's probably more effort than it is worth, since OCR (especially public domain ones like tesseract) is relatively easy to fool. OTOH if you employ multiple OCR engines at the same time it might make it way harder for the enemy to create adversarial examples.

I wrote a python script using python-pytesseract that scans images for significant amounts of words in data_final.txt. It uses edit distance(copied from the edit-distance package) and also avoids the possibility of e.g. s.p.l.i.t.t.i.n.g words up like that by only considering the set of alphanumeric characters in the OCR string, so it's not very fast but it should be robust. It reliably detected his current images, including some that I distorted slightly or colored weirdly, while having 3 false positive among my image collection of ~500. Also for most images (those without tons of text, pretty much) it took a fraction of a second to run. The longest running ones I saw took about 40 seconds, it was for his images. I can try to help integrating it into lainchan if you need it, but I think the current devs would probably know better than me how to do that.

>>10671 Lainchan weaponized autism, godspeed lainon.

>spend 6 hours getting a script to work to get this soykaf off the front page >see it on the front page 3 days later come on lainchan devs, I know you're competent enough for this.

Lainchan already has tesseract image scanning functionality, it doesn't generate the same result your script does, it is still being investigated as to why. Thanks for providing word list , improvements to tesseract configuration and additional wordlist filtering are being investigated.

Let's see whether the automated filtering is being applied on this board.

>>10763 That first quote of Logically-fallacious diversionary tactics was supposed to reference the OP post 10479, not post 10761. Anyway, I'm reminded very strongly of one or more people I encountered elsewhere, about whom I wrote this: "I've had my fill of going in circles and pointing out the same soykaf over and over for this episode (so I'll refrain from referencing old posts of mine ON THIS VERY SITE about a playbook, someone evidently trying to waste my time and wanting me to go in circles, ad nauseum)." Also, the text covering logically-fallacious diversionary tactics was updated recently. Below is the new version. Logically-fallacious diversionary tactics: • A red herring is a tangential topic introduced intentionally as a distraction or inadvertently. Trying to create an unrelated discussion about a messenger or claimant (e.g. by introducing alleged personal attributes or asking about unstated opinions) is one _very_ common example. • An ad hominem logical fallacy involves arguing or implying that some supposed attribute(s) of a messenger or source somehow affects the validity of one or more claims presented when any such characteristic is completely irrelevant — and this is nonsensical for cases in which information originates from others. (Sometimes such characteristics can be relevant: For example, it may be appropriate to question someone's honesty when she makes a claim about herself or her own experiences. However, a better idea may be to mention the anecdotal evidence logical fallacy, i.e. favoring some personal anecdote(s) over evidence based on science and logic.) • Misrepresentation—introducing a distorted version of something—is another means of creating a diversion. Attacking a fabrication in order to suggest refutal of what was actually presented constitutes a straw man logical fallacy. (A refutation featuring one or more vague, sweeping claims without proof may be related. The burden of proof rests on the claimant.) It is suggestive of a nefarious agenda and/or psychopathy to purposely and repeatedly try to draw attention away from anorectal anatomy and physiology, rampant anorectal violence, associated traumatic risks, and an epidemic of ignorance and misinformation. These topics, plus the voluminous amount of information from others, are far more important than anything about a lone person trying to raise awareness of them. It is very likely that pornography industries utilize psychopaths as deceitful and manipulative "psyop" agents when some pornography companies already make use of them for perpetration of violence against one or more others.

this guy probably thinks the garbage company is censoring the piles of rubbish he leaves in the streets.

>>11420 Hmm, or maybe it's one or more other terms. I'm trying to post a rather lengthy response to >>>/hum/64233 and the "go away, spammer" block is being triggered.

>>11421 The PDF contains the post I tried to make.

>crickets Nevermind. I worked around the blocking myself.

>>11419 > Uboachan's Seisatsu (board/site owner) wrote a rather ridiculous post in my thread there (23094) containing numerous misrepresentations and ignoring both what I wrote along with evidence from others. (S)he then locked my thread. I certainly don't expect sympathy from anyone here, but Seisatsu most definitely seems to be a psychopathic nutcase, or at the very least an extremely nasty and deceitful troll. I may as well document my more recent bad experiences in this thread. (It could certainly be argued that this does not belong here; I will not disagree. If this post and any potential replies to it are deleted while nothing else is done, then I will uncharacteristically refrain from reacting negatively. I will however attempt to archive this post at least.) (S)he autosaged my /ot/ thread around 11/24. When questioned about that on Uboachan's meta board /sugg/, Seisatsu responded in post 3887 https://web.archive.org/web/20221202213331/https://uboachan.net/sugg/res/3877.html#3887 and: 1. derezzed the IP address from which I had been posting regularly 2. made a blatant false equivalence claiming that discouraging anoreceptive activities entirely is "inherently homophobic." 3. again ignored both what I wrote along with evidence from others I provided to make at least one contrary claim while providing no evidence whatsoever 4. updated Uboachan's rules page (https://web.archive.org/web/20221203020938/https://uboachan.net/rules.php) with these changes: 1) Banning discussion of anorectal violence specifically, and 2) including a potential misrepresentation immediately beneath that: "Content which overtly attacks others' humanity or right to exist freely will generally be found to be rulebreaking." So far as I'm aware I did not attack anyone's humanity (although that actually is rather vague: does it include writing one or more negative things about someone?). I did argue that perpetrators of significant anorectal violence against one or more others, most especially those perpetrators whose acts serve as inspiration for countless viewers in public pornography, ought to face justice, perhaps by any means necessary. Do violent criminals have a right to exist freely outside of a prison during their term? Do such violent perpetrators have a right to exist freely when they have not been justly punished by any government, for decades in some cases, and may never be? Hmmm...

Why do some boards only have 5 pages?

>>11461 > Actually, "Content which overtly attacks others' humanity or right to exist freely will generally be found to be rulebreaking." has been in the rules page for a very long time. It doesn't appear to have been in the rules all that long. I looked at an archive snapshot from December 2019 in which it was not present: https://web.archive.org/web/20191226065919/https://uboachan.net/rules.php ... I did however miss that it was present as of September 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20200914185222/https://uboachan.net/rules.php >>11470 > You're right, it was ineffective. Your arguments were long and sprawling and difficult to digest, and your choice of words often risked and ultimately accomplished alienating your intended audience. Maybe I shall work on making the messages shorter and more comprehensible by those who may be less literate, or at least impatient / short on attention. However, doing so risks leaving out or diluting potentially-significant points. > now that you are no longer a two-dimensional character and source of irritation to me, and have revealed your driving force Something about which I have written and pointed out exhaustively is precisely what you seem to be doing: that is, judging the message based on the messenger. Far too many people seem unable, or at least highly unwilling, to separate the message from the messenger. > myself and my partners are very conscious of each other's safety In the context of anorectal eroticism? Perhaps that is so, but it is isolated anecdotal evidence, and there is an abundance of evidence to the contrary (i.e., many people are provably being nowhere near careful enough). Furthermore, you seem unwilling to acknowledge points I made repeatedly, including these: There are quite delicate tissues not far inside that also lack somatic innervation, meaning that damage to them does not elicit pain sensations. Consequently, a receptive person can be injured quite easily and significantly with no pain whatsoever. Oddly, though, it is quite common for people to give advice along the lines of "stop if there is any pain," with the implication that significant damage will not occur in the absence of pain. > I hope that you find love and happiness one day As I posted about a month ago on Sushigirl (another site of yours?): Thank you, I appreciate the kind thought. However, I don't see myself finding happiness any time soon, especially when it's tied to people addressing issues I've covered thanks to my admittedly-weird and seemingly-very-unusual strongest fetish. (https://web.archive.org/web/20221215104200/https://sushigirl.us/lounge/res/6173.html#14668) > my board is open to you as long as your crusade doesn't come with you. Don't you have more than one site? Regardless, I will never feel welcome on a site that forbids discussion of one or more topics that are important not only to myself but also to humanity in general (even if many among them incorrectly believe otherwise).

>>11467 You're doing it for faps? lmao. Honestly, I always saw reason in your basic idea: that hard anal harms the anus and that can be bad. The way in which you chose to express this, however, is characteristic of schizo posting, which does not help your case. I understand most users express themselves this way. Why? Beats me, maybe I'm the one who's odd.

I finally decided to post a new thread on /hum/. Unfortunately I saw this eerily familiar message: "Go away, spammer." Is "anorectal" and/or some other term I commonly use being flagged as "spam" again?

>>11896 Forget it. It is spam, I am a spammer, and I made buku bucks from spamming people for over 15 years!!! Yay!!! </sarcasm> I'm eagerly awaiting the bloodbaths of justice. Nothing else will fix things at this point.

>>11898 On multiple boards I've thrown vitriol at you because I find your posts annoying. But honestly man, I don't know what I'd do with myself if my PTSD was tied into my sexuality and I had no outlet for it but imageboards. Not saying your past manifests as PTSD, mine does, thankfully my trauma isn't sexually related. In any case, I hope you can find some peace in the world with all this. In your case it might be better for you to redirect your sexual desires towards something else. Anytime sexuality makes a person feel negative emotions or develop negative habits it's time to redirect the feelings elsewhere. First step is removing emotional triggers from the environment, then whenever urges arise just do something else, anything, play a video game go for a walk. It gets better with time even though it doesn't fully go away.

>>10494 > Personal attacks often have been used against me. I try to refrain from using them against others, but I have been known to lose patience especially when dealing with someone who obvious seems to have a nefarious agenda and e.g. keeps on using logically-fallacious diversionary tactics I've covered (among other deceitful and manipulative tactics). > My opinions should be abundantly clear from what I've posted. That said, once again I will reiterate that ultimately this is not about me. > As I have pointed out numerous times before, what I post is not spam. I do not stand to gain money from this endeavor, nor have I ever stood to gain money from it at any time in the past. I am only advertising material that I believe needs much greater exposure, and what I post most certainly does not constitute "unrelated content" on a board pertaining to humanity. >>10768 > Going in circles? Check. > Again, ultimately this is not about me. There are much greater matters to which I've been trying to draw attention with this effort. >>11467 > At the end of the day I'm only a heterosexual biological male with an aesthetic anus fetish. I may just double down on that and forget about the rest (although they're rather intertwined, are they not?). It's rather interesting that I seem to have such power to make things worse simply by crusading over rampant anus mutilation in an attempt to secure more fap material and prospects. The cynic in me finds this all highly amusing, and the misanthrope somewhat gratifying, when I'm merely a lonely NEET heterosexual* virgin who's only growing older and lonelier as time inexorably marches on. I may neck myself sooner or later. > * Homosexual molestation. Maybe that contributed to my weird fetish and/or crusade? Who knows. I'm not repressing anything at least: I remember what happened, and I'm over it. As I noted before, I am not opposed to homosexuality in and of itself; I fap to "lesbian" material myself sometimes. (Ultimately this is not about me, huh? Then why did I write so much about myself? Maybe even I don't listen to what I've written! Ha!)

>>11910 > I don't know what I'd do with myself if my PTSD was tied into my sexuality Bearing in mind what I quoted in the previous post, there is much more to it than that. People who have seen my hit list may know what I mean by that. 2008 was an awful year for me personally (the obscenity prosecution initiated against Evil Angel gave me major cognitive dissonance: injustice against injustice, and that contributed to my idiocy and rage on AdultDVDTalk at the time that ended with me being permanently derezzed, further fueling the fire of rage). Bush Jr. was a fuarrrking terrible U.S. president, and his administration was likewise despicable. Of course, the blame can't be placed squarely at the feet of his administration: Kamala Harris was California's Attorney General for many years, and it appears that she did absolutely nothing to rein in at least one out-of-control pornography industry when she was in a position to do so. The same can be said for Xavier Becerra, another former California AG who is now part of the Biden administration as well — in healthcare, with no professional background in that area whatsoever. Politically speaking, problems (referring to specific people) exist on both sides of the aisle — two sides of the same coin, some have said. Anyway, back in 2008 there was a lawyer involved in all of this named Michael "pornlaw" Fattorosi. I haven't added him to my hit list, but I most certainly should. He was for a time fighting the same "crusade" as I (after—unbeknownst to me at the time—silently watching me post on the FreeOnes board where I registered in October 2007), but it appears he was willingly bought off with a pornstar named Vanessa Blue. My admitted idiocy on the AdultDVDTalk board as "Blink" probably played a role in that, but it should not have. As I have to continually point out it seems, there are much greater matters here that people ought to be concerned about than ANYTHING pertaining to one lone (current and/or former) idiot. So, yeah, that's fuarrrking PTSD. It makes me want to kill as many nasty people (including corrupt politicians) as I possibly can, because governments worldwide sure aren't dispensing justice for these matters I've covered. And thanks to how much time has passed they probably never will in most cases, leaving true justice exclusively up to those willing to slaughter others (fighting fire with fire, yes).

I was going to post a rant here, but I'll refrain for now. It probably will be posted at some point though. I need to rage. Hard.

On the road to executioner, one first must take on the roles of judge and jury. That being the case, it is long past time to stop equivocating. Violent criminals are, and for far too many years have been, having a field day with anorectal violence. Generations of people have been, and continue to be, inspired by blatant violent crime; some go on to emulate it, or at least make the attempt. Here is a recent example of a thread with such material: 4chan /gif/ anal slamming 08/26/23(Sat)10:48:56 No.25760379 https://boards.4chan.org/gif/thread/25760379/anal-slamming | https://archived.moe/gif/thread/25760379 I posted my "Anal Avenger" material for many years on /gif/ and /hc/, and it was treated as "spam" there as well. Did anyone really learn anything from it? Apparently not, since nobody in that thread so far mentioned the traumatic risks to a receptive person, anorectal fragility, lack of somatic sensation merely a few centimeters inside, potential for lethality, possible—and objectively justifiable—criminal implications, etc. Again I stress that the bloodbaths of justice can not begin soon enough. Let them start with the assassinations of Biden, Harris, Becerra, Gavin Newsom (current California governor and presidential hopeful), and Jerry Brown (former California governor). -- Come at me, feds: You're partly responsible for worsening/perpetuating this situation with your 2008 obscenity prosecution idiocy at the behest of Bush Jr's administration. I'm beginning to wonder at this point just how compromised the U.S. government is by pro-pornography and/or Hollywood [in both cases Californian] interests; official promotion of the trans delusion, plus homosexuality/bisexuality along with anal insanity as a side effect, may lend some credence to that notion — it's also an effective means of corrupting the medical establishment...

>>11957 Dude you are seriously unhinged. You need to go spend some weeks, months, years even at a Bhuddist temple or something. I'm not joking, engaging with this thread, anything related to it, the negative thoughts that clearly plague you and your own fetish that feeds into them will only drive you mad even further. Break out of the chains of your mind, leave your past where it is and embrace a better present for yourself. It's all easier said than done, but trying has to beat posting on completely unrelated forums obsessively like a lunatic about a topic that no one cares about only for your thoughts to echo around your mind enraging you constantly.

>>11984 Posting your own words in response to you and pointing out that you're a spammer which everyone except you agrees upon is not sociopathy. If you had a therapist you'd probably call the therapist a sociopath for challenging your behavioral patterns. > At the end of the day I'm only a heterosexual biological male with an aesthetic anus fetish. This right here, you have an anal fetish and constantly complain about anal online. It couldn't be any more clear that this decade long crusade of yours is about you. Instead of growing up and moving on the only way you can live with yourself is to complain online obsessively. If you were genuine about your nofap claims you'd delete everything related to the topic, all your spam porn materials, all your copypastas, everything. You'd go outside and move on. But you aren't genuine, you're trolling yourself and everyone else.

>>11988 > Posting your own words in response to you and pointing out that you're a spammer which everyone except you agrees upon is not sociopathy. 1. You are putting words into my mouth: I wrote about misrepresentation in the paste covering logically-fallacious diversionary tactics. 2. Deceit and manipulation are characteristics of a psychopath. Some people in this thread most certainly have demonstrated those. > you're a spammer That depends on one's definition of "spammer." From 11973: Hostility on the part of a site's administration may be returned with the same (i.e., hostility), which some might see as "spamming." From 10502: That's due to experiencing what I view as unwarranted censorship. As I wrote in >>10488: I do acknowledge that I can be quite nasty sometimes though, especially after being treated as an adversary/spammer/etc. > this decade long crusade of yours is about you. Yet again: Ultimately this is not about me. There are much greater matters here that people ought to be concerned about than _ANYTHING_ about one lone and insignificant person. > you have an anal fetish No. That commonly refers to people who are interested in anal insertions and anal intercourse. From the OP PDF: A (strong) sexual fetish must be satisfied for sexual arousal, and a fetishist with partialism obsesses usually over a non-sexual body part[1]. A human anus resembling the anatomical ideal at rest has symmetrical features; symmetry is one aspect that humans consider when evaluating beauty[2]. Partly due to common prejudices against and denigration of the anus along with rampant, anus-mutilating erotic anorectal violence, developing an aesthetic anus fetish is highly unusual; and _accepting_ it, even moreso. This fetish does indeed seem to be very rare: otherwise that violence would have strong opposition. Some malicious people (such as sexual sadists and sadistic psychopaths) pretend to have such a fetish—and will even praise a clearly damaged diseased anus typically without being challenged—because doing so facilitates and perpetuates anorectal violence.

>>11997 >I'm done with this thread. lol this is the third or fourth time you've said something to this effect. You'll come back for more attention one of these days. Luckily your spam is mostly controlled now.