See, it went like this:
I posted one for fun and to help out a vendor who looked like they had some potential.
Vendor liked it
Members liked it
Girl liked it
So then I posted another one when my order came in to commemorate the occasion.
And then it just took off from there.
I will acknowledge it took the thread off topic and should have used better judgement.
You sir once again are a gentleman and a scholar... However if some members did say rude or uncanny things about your girl, that's not respectful. I missed it if they did. It was standard practice when a new vendor debut came about, and yes should be a tradition that remains. I'm your case Mark has feet pics which looked like he kicks bowling balls barefoot. The community as a whole received your offer well, and that's my point, how is something like this inappropriate if the masses agreed. I question the man who concerned themselves with this, as that same person is watching porn one of the greatest societal downfalls of the female beauty.
i still cant believe meatheads on a forum like this complain about tits in a thread. Sign of the impeding apocalypse?
I would offer this, I imagine many of these new members are also part of the misidentification of gender recognition. In a post I read, there was reading discernable the person was here using androgens because they want to be opposite of their assigned chromosomes.
Who does this sound like? Any takers?
A guy who recently stepped out quietly, also that person did use AI for everything. I often run those post and dropped them back in myself questioning the validity. The results were that...⁴the info was used in a manner to express a specific point not the whole truth. Yet seemingly this person was revered for knowledge grossly incorrect. Unfortunately nobody does research and it brings us back to the point where we should be able to tell these individuals they're wrong. Passing incorrect info at this point seems far more important.
Moderators,
All I’m saying respectfully is that more often than not lately, you’re getting this wrong.
Meso didn’t survive and earn its reputation because it was polite, sanitized, or overly moderated. It became what it was because it was brutal, honest, and at times rud, but always grounded in accountability.
When I first lurked here as a new member, that culture was obvious, misinformation was corrected quickly, nonsense wasn’t tolerated, and members themselves enforced a standard. That environment is exactly what allowed knowledgeable contributors to thrive and actually teach.
Ask yourselves why so many of those same high value contributors are now active on SST and elsewhere.
Meanwhile, someone like QSC Tracy, who likely still owes members significant damages, remains here without meaningful accountability. His thread is a running disaster, yet moderation energy seems disproportionately directed elsewhere. If the goal is member protection, how does that align with allowing unresolved issues of that magnitude to persist? Are you scared he'll call you names and tell you to F,off while calling you names? Cause everything you've said is contradictory to this alone. In practice, this isn’t damage control, it’s damage creation.
This forum runs because of its members. The “foot soldiers” the experienced contributors who answer questions, correct misinformation, and guide discussion, are doing the real work of maintaining standards. When those same people are restricted or silenced for tone rather than content, the end result isn’t civility, it’s ignorance being left unchallenged.
Feelings don’t determine whether information is accurate. And on an anonymous internet forum dedicated to pharmacology and performance enhancement, illocutionary force matters, is a post threatening, or is it bluntly corrective?
Those are not the same thing. Communication has a functional purpose, even when it’s delivered harshly.
Censoring corrective speech because someone’s feelings were hurt only cultivates a culture where misinformation can exist unchallenged.
And let’s be honest, very few threads stay on a single linear track. Discussions evolve, parallel conversations emerge, and new but related directions develop organically. That’s not derailment, that’s how real discourse works.
If the intent is to preserve what made this place valuable in the first place, then accountability needs to be applied consistently, not selectively, and tone alone shouldn’t outweigh substance. What is being done and can't be argued by anything you'll say is weakness. It's toxic and breeds far faster than standing tall and taking a verbal ass chewing.