Show Search Options
Blacklisted
(help)

jerdude002

Member
In response to blip #135945

Voltage-controlled said:
I was trying to wean off Sertraline (which I have been on since 2010) and it didn't go so well. I ended up back on the original dose and have been fine since. I just had to accept that I will be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life.

I just started taking that about a year ago after an incident. I feel you :( I'm glad you're doing better now. Belated welcome back!

  • View Responses
    •

    jerdude002

    Member
    In response to blip #135911

    coyotebear said:
    @kemonophonic I used to think you were such a nice boi

    girl

    person


    such a nice person, only interested in electronic sound modulation devices





    I want to win the lottery, and travel half way around the world to meet you in person,

    just to prove to myself that I am correct: you are a nice person



    and see the spiders that are larger than my head




    what even happened to him? he evidently crashed out for some reason.
    on another note, I find it interesting how it seems a good number of users who got positive records or even privileged rank end up deleting their accounts :|

  • View Responses
    •

    LeopardSpots

    Member
    In response to blip #135906

    hq2024 said:
    this site feels so big yet so small at the same time, its like a small town. I knows theirs more people but i just so happen to see the same people around so it feels small. idk I'm sure the like 6 people reading this understand :-p

    I've been on this site for a long while. Seeing people like Newbkitteh or afish in a comment section is like stumbling across an old friend even though we never interacted before. It's strange tbh.

    LeopardSpots

    Member

    Missed opportunity to call this entire month Subtember and just be submissive and breedable for a month straight.

    Bigol'Skitty

    Member

    There should be a system here on e6 to whitelist tags, primarily artists. If I want to search for a range of tags across a range of artists, there isn’t really a syntax (that I know of) to do so. I’ll admit I know nothing about web design, but I would guess it would be a similar process to making the blacklist, just inverted? It’d be really helpful for me personally and I know I can’t be the only one. If there’s already a system like this and I’m just brain dead someone please let me know.

  • View Responses
    •

    dba afish

    Member
    In response to blip #135917

    oh, no! rules!

    you weren't even dinged for _what_ you wrote. you got dinged because you kept saying the same thing in a different place every time you failed to get a reaction, and then you got dinged again because you deleted your account, created a new one, and then did the exact same thing again for some reason.

    user 2394181

    Member

    Your e621 is fucking disgusting and full of fucking rules. I've given them a hard time. You can ban me, but I have other sites where I can write something similar to what I wrote.

  • View Responses
    •

    Horny Mermaid

    Member

    does anyone know what goes into whether an image gets replaced or not??? over half the images I've post have been replaced and I'm really confused

  • View Responses
    •

    coyotebear

    Privileged
    In response to blip #135910

    @Voltage-controlled:

    @kemonophonic I used to think you were such a nice boi

    girl

    person


    such a nice person, only interested in electronic sound modulation devices





    I want to win the lottery, and travel half way around the world to meet you in person,

    just to prove to myself that I am correct: you are a nice person



    and see the spiders that are larger than my head




  • View Responses
    •

    Dragonlord2328

    Member
    In response to blip #135906

    hq2024 said:
    this site feels so big yet so small at the same time, its like a small town. I knows theirs more people but i just so happen to see the same people around so it feels small. idk I'm sure the like 6 people reading this understand :-p

    I understand that tbh i like the small community here

    hq2024

    Member

    this site feels so big yet so small at the same time, its like a small town. I knows theirs more people but i just so happen to see the same people around so it feels small. idk I'm sure the like 6 people reading this understand :-p

  • View Responses
    •

    dba afish

    Member
    In response to blip #135894

    pontiac90 said:
    Not really, Spongebob is made of sponge, but isn't an actual sponge (like the organism). Though Patrick Star would be since he's an actual seastar (same goes to Sandy, Mr. Krabs, Plankton, etc.) so they would be furries (unless I'm misreading the question, which I feel as though I am).

    he actually is a sea sponge in canon, he just looks like a kitchen sponge for some reason.

    pontiac90

    Member
    In response to blip #135885

    earth88 said:
    do you think spongebob counts as a furry

    Not really, Spongebob is made of sponge, but isn't an actual sponge (like the organism). Though Patrick Star would be since he's an actual seastar (same goes to Sandy, Mr. Krabs, Plankton, etc.) so they would be furries (unless I'm misreading the question, which I feel as though I am).

  • View Responses
    •

    KynikossDragonn

    Member
    In response to blip #135867

    W0LFB3AT5 said:
    For all you couples out there… the HIF (Heartbreak Insurance Fund) sounds like an interesting plan in my opinion from what I heard.

    If you ever should date, both of you should deposit ranging from $100-$150 dollars monthly into a joint account. And whoever gets cheated on, gets to walks away with the money.

    And what about polyamory?

  • View Responses
    •

    W0LFB3AT5

    Member
    In response to blip #135875

    SNPtheCat said:
    Let's say you leave the handling to a third party. How would one determine who is cheating, and what standard would one party have to reach in order to show that the other party has cheated? If you set the standard too high or too low, it either becomes ineffective or open to abuse, or both.

    The core principle would have to be that the couple themselves, not the third party, would define what constitutes cheating. The third party would simply be the impartial administrator of those pre-established rules.

    W0LFB3AT5

    Member
    In response to blip #135875

    SNPtheCat said:
    Let's say you leave the handling to a third party. How would one determine who is cheating, and what standard would one party have to reach in order to show that the other party has cheated? If you set the standard too high or too low, it either becomes ineffective or open to abuse, or both.

    Well the most professional approach would likely be a hybrid or a tiered system. For example, the agreement could specify that clear, provable physical infidelity (the "high" standard) triggers the full payout. Other, less provable forms of betrayal could be handled through a different mechanism, perhaps a mediated resolution or a partial dispersal of the funds.

    Basically, the act of having this conversation and reaching an agreement on what constitutes a breach of trust is one of the plan's most valuable, albeit challenging, features.

    SNPtheCat

    Member
    In response to blip #135874

    W0LFB3AT5 said:

    -For legal reasons, couples who’re married or considering it, a clause could be included in a prenuptial or post-nuptial agreement. For those who are not, a cohabitation or a simple contract could be drawn up. This would legally bind both parties to the terms of the fund and provide a clear process for enforcement.

    Let's say you leave the handling to a third party. How would one determine who is cheating, and what standard would one party have to reach in order to show that the other party has cheated? If you set the standard too high or too low, it either becomes ineffective or open to abuse, or both.

  • View Responses
    •

    W0LFB3AT5

    Member
    In response to blip #135868

    SNPtheCat said:
    Interesting idea; how is that enforceable? If it's based on trust, may I remind you that at least one side has cheated on the other

    It may not be a foolproof plan, but it can be structured in 2 ways.

    -For legal reasons, couples who’re married or considering it, a clause could be included in a prenuptial or post-nuptial agreement. For those who are not, a cohabitation or a simple contract could be drawn up. This would legally bind both parties to the terms of the fund and provide a clear process for enforcement.

    -As a financial deterrent, if it’s beyond legal enforceability, the plan is designed to make the act of cheating have a significant, immediate financial cost. The purpose isn't just to provide a safety net; it's to create a powerful disincentive. While it’s true that someone willing to cheat has already broken trust, the prospect of forfeiting a significant amount of their own money could make them reconsider.

  • View Responses
    •

    Original page: https://e621.net/blips?page=10