LogFAQs > #979595363

Jerry_Hellyeah posted...

Did you look at his responses? I could be wrong but I do NOT think that was what he was saying. That was not the point being made, keeping ID on record. He talked about the frequency of it. You two have some mental link if that's right.

Id definitely say keeping ID on record is a valid concern, but I also don't know why that would be required. When I scan in tour guests, we pull first name and DOB automatically into the system from any of the 50 states' ID. I dunno. Seems simple but again, I'm not being a pompous ass when I respond indignantly to people throwing absolute nonsense at the wall. I've asked for explanation several times and gotten shitty replies every time. I've been dismissive of dismissive language, sure, but I'm definitely approaching this in a more adult manner than the hyenas playing around, yes. I can and will address some people differently, yes.

Regardless, fellas, this is a strictly good thing given the amount of votes its going to flip blue. Could be the beginning of a huge mindset change. I know the Trumpers I work with arent crying about Biden nowadays. I think a surprising amount of THOSE types are gonna cave and stop playing pretend politics once a real effect of their votes comes their way.

And you are wrong. That is what shes saying. My noting the poor reasoning ability isnt meant to be dismissive. Its a very observable fact from your posts and Im telling you it on the very slim chance you actually try to look past your own perceived victimization and actually listen to the logic to what people are giving to you so you can understand why youre not getting it. Everyone else got what she (asherlee is female) was saying. Youre the only one who didnt.

ID scans in authorized physical stores are much safer than faceless websites. You yourself are aware of this which is why you said youre against this for other sites.
Youve got it the other way around again. Several users were responding to you civilly and only got sarcastic in response to you being dismissive and stubbornly doubling down on points already addressed.

If youre saying this is a good thing because this will help people flip blue then thats basically admitting these bills are bad. Outlawing gay or interracial marriage would also flip a lot more people blue. The bills would still be horrible and attacked.

Jerry_Hellyeah posted...

Porn sites, like many websites, absolutely generate ad revenue from underage visitors, yes, they do. This is the dishonesty I am talking about. You are calling this right-wing propaganda, which is again, being completely dishonest.

These people are literally saying they are trolling and you're shooting me some nonsense about adult conversation. Total posturing over imagined political affiliations.

Again, reasoning skills. Saying they profit from exposing minors to sexual content implies thats their main purpose and that minors are their target audience, not that some minors will still consume it. If you meant it as face value thats ridiculous and obviously applies to any age restricted product. Rated R movies and shows have profited from exposing minors to sexual content. Rated M games profited from exposing minors to sexual content. Explicit literature, erotica and songs have profited from exposing minors to sexual content.
Claiming porn sites intentionally targets children is right wing propaganda and theres zero evidence to support that.
I would call what youre posting dishonesty if the simple lack of reasoning ability isnt a simpler and more generous possibility. Hanlons razor.