rawTOP

One thing I think we can agree on is that we need term limits. But were you paying attention when nearly everyone Trump hired initially went to prison? How exactly has Trump drained the swamp if he's hiring criminals? And I find it ironic that a Republican is complaining about the size of government when the government typically gets biggest under Republican presidents. (Ditto for deficits). The way Trump has been reducing the size of government (hiring contractors rather than employees) leads to corruption and higher costs for government services. Here's a decent quick read on the issue… https://fcw.com/articles/2017/10/05/federal-workforce-volker-size.aspx

Off-topic question… Do you still see the banner ads on this site (they're "first party" ads, not part of any ad network). And which Javascripts are blocked on this site? (It would affect functionality – like you' wouldn't see how many people are in chat, etc.)

If you trust the proxy service, yes proxy services are a good idea. I've actually been meaning to start advertising a few. But a bad proxy service can put you in a worse position than no proxy service at all. And a corollary to that is there is no trustworthy "free" proxy service. They need to make money and they'll do it by selling your data. Man in The Middle (Transparent Forward) proxies fail completely when they encounter a site like this one. I have HSTS enabled on all my sites. If there's a transparent forward proxy you'll get an invalid certificate error warning you that the connection is not secure. It will look like this… I went through this the other day with a user who didn't want to believe he was being spied on by his ISP. So let me explain transparent forward proxies as well… Basically if you use a device owned by your company and their tech "set up the computer for you" with their "standard build" before giving it to you, then there's nothing you can do about it. Your computer has probably been configured to let the corporate firewall spy on you. And it's probably been locked down so you can't stop it from happening. Bottom line, buy your own computer and phone!! But if you use your own device (laptop, phone or tablet) and corporate IT hasn't touched it, then when your device hits their firewall (that acts as a transparent proxy) the firewall will attempt to "proxy" your request meaning you talk to the firewall, and the firewall talks to to the server. They can do this one of two ways – 1) present you with a fake encryption certificate for the site, or 2) force your browser to downgrade from HTTPS (encrypted connection) to HTTP (clear text connection). They'll then connect to the server on your behalf, request the page, examine it. If it passes their tests, they'll pass it onto you either in clear text or with a fake encryption certificate. If corporate IT has meddles with your device your browser can be taught to accept the fake certificate from the firewall as authentic. If they haven't meddled with your computer all they can do is downgrade you to clear text. The thing is the webmaster can configure their site in such a way that browsers know that the connection must be encrypted (the protocol to do this is called HSTS – HTTP Strict Transport Security). That means your browser won't allow the firewall to downgrade you to clear text. And if they try to present a fake encryption certificate your browser (because it hasn't been meddled with) will show you an "invalid certificate" error like the one above. The problem is that it's up to the webmaster to configure HSTS. There's no way (that I know of) for a user to configure their browser so it only does encrypted connections. The browsers will tell you when a site is insecure, but it's just an icon above the page. You may miss the fact that you were downgraded to clear text.

So some good news… The UK gave up on their porn filter because emerging technologies were being deployed that would make it impossible to enforce the law. Here's a basic run down of how things can be blocked now and how that's all changing… When you type in something like https://breeding.zone what happens is that your computer asks a DNS server for the IP address of the server. That request happens in clear text, so the DNS provider (probably your ISP) and everyone between your computer and the DNS provider know that you asked for the IP address for Breeding Zone. The DNS provider probably won't have the IP address, so they then have to ask my DNS server for the IP address. That's also done in clear text, but it's less of an issue since it's server-to-server. No one can tell that YOU made the initial request (unless you're dumb enough to run your own DNS server that only you use). OK, so next your browser has the IP address and it connects to BZ's server. You entered HTTPS at the beginning so it knows the connection needs to be encrypted. That sounds great, the problem is on the first, initial connection, it needs to send the domain name of the site in clear text because my server handles multiple sites on the IP address. Each one could possibly have a different encryption certificate, so the domain name has to be sent in clear text so it knows which site's certificate should be used. This is called "SNI" (Server Name Indication). Before there was SNI you could only have one encrypted site per IP address. So once again, everyone between you and my server knows you asked for a page from Breeding Zone. After that point everything is encrypted. The only thing anyone can tell is that you're talking to some site on a particular IP address. They can do a query and find out what sites are on that IP, but they can't tell which site you're on or what it is that you're viewing. So the British government decided that the way they were going to enforce their law is to block sites that violated the law at the DNS level. They'd force everyone in the UK to use a UK-based DNS server and then they'd require everyone running a DNS server to block sites that were in violation. That's how most firewalls restrict access to particular sites (say a corporation that doesn't want you looking at porn on company time). Then came encrypted DNS, which encrypts the DNS request so it's no longer sent in clear text (which is a VERY good thing). There are two leading contenders – DNS over TLS ("DoT") and DNS over HTPPS ("DoH"). Corporations and governments like DoT because the DNS requests are happening on their own port, so the corporation/governemtn can block people on a network from using anything but the approved DNS server. DoH however is a complete game changer because, to the network, the DNS request looks like a normal web request, not a DNS request. It uses the same port that you'd use to retrieve an encrypted web page. That means there is no way for the corporation or government to block you using DNS. That's what ended the idea of a porn block in the UK – DoH makes it impossible for them to block anyone. If you can't enforce the law, then there's no point going forward with it. But actually, they could still enforce they law – they'd just have to listen to the web request and block requests based on the domain name that's passed in clear text in the initial request. So that means SNI can be used against you. A number of people tried to close that loophole, but no one could figure out a way that would actually work. Then the guys at Cloudflare (one of the big cloud hosting companies) devised a plan. They're calling it ESNI (encrypted SNI). Basically when you make an encrypted DNS request instead of just getting the IP address you'll also get an encryption certificate. Once you have that, you can encrypt the domain name in the initial request. The issue is that governments and corporations could simply block anyone doing a request with ESNI, or they could block particular IP addresses that host the "problem" sites. That's where Cloudflare comes in. They're HUGE. They've committed to deploying DoH and ESNI for all their customers. And they plan on randomly hosting a variety of sites on any particular IP address. That means that any government that tries to block all requests that use ESNI or block any particular IP address will be blocking quite a few "legit" sites along with the problem ones. That means blocking will fail when granny can't get to her recipe site because the government blocked the IP. The big companies like Clouflare and Google aren't pushing this stuff to help porn. They're doing it for people like the Chinese who are behind the "Great Firewall of China" and don't have access to balanced news sources. It probably irks Google to no end that they have to censor their results for the Chinese. This will end that. Sure, Google.cn will have the censored results. But when DoT and ESNI are widely deployed the Chinese will be able to go to Google.com for uncensored results. And I should mention DoH is available now and easy to use. Simply use Firefox, go into preferences, search for "DNS" and turn it on. Hopefully soon Apple and Microsoft will make it an option so all requests done by your device are done via DoH, but for now it's just the requests done by Firefox. ESNI is still being tested, but will probably be ready for widespread deployment in the near future (~1-2 years).

Both questions hit on a common theme, so I'll answer both at the same time. New users will still be on a very short leash and it won't take much for them to get banned (same as it is now). The accommodation for them is to have it designed in a way to inadvertent mistakes are less likely. That leaves intentional sloppiness which sorta deserves a ban. I'll have to rethink the points system based on the new architecture. But, similar to how it is now, there won't be a ban for doing anything that doesn't have a lot of consequence. But doing something like putting restricted content in an unrestricted area will still probably get the person banned (as it does now). But again, mistakes will hopefully be far fewer. One thing I didn't mention is that right now there's banned and then there's restricted from posting. I'll continue that idea and refine it a bit. And I'll also make it so if a senior, trusted member contacts you, you can reply to him if you're restricted from posting. But you can't initiate a conversation. Stuff like that.

This was the logic behind deregulation. It didn't work. Alan Greenspan (a disciple of Ayn Rand) actually apologized for believing too much that successful corporations could be trusted. He basically had to apologize after the financial collapse that happened on his watch… https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html I totally agree about participation trophies when we're talking about trivial levels of participation. That said, recognition of things like perfect attendance (over long periods of time) and "most improved" do have merit. Being there day in and day out consistently is one of the recipes for success (the turtle vs the hair). But welfare exists primarily to take care of the kids, not the parents. The kids didn't choose to be born into the environment you describe and it's cruel to blame them for the shitty motivations of their parents. So welfare programs are necessary. All you can do is structure them on evidence-based approaches in order to achieve the best possible outcome. When people cut the funding "because those people are lazy bums" it's not going to end well. But I think you're too hard on government. Governments educate people. Governments build roads. Governments can create jobs through good policies. Governments can provide stable environments for living and business (e.g. universal healthcare). By focusing on a small percentage of people becoming dependent you're throwing away the baby with the bath water.

One of the things people really dislike about this site is the infraction system. The most vocal critics seem to be spoiled brats who think they can do what they want, when and where they want. Honestly, I don't care about meeting the needs of spoiled brats. But I do recognize that the infraction system is imperfect. While we're running this forum software, we're stuck with what we've got. But as I build new software that can change. So give me your feedback on how you think a good infraction system should work. For starters it has to start with a design that minimizes unintentional mistakes. Right now a lot of infractions are given for posting in the wrong area. That's because people don't always think about where they are in the structure of the site before posting. So I'm envisioning a site with less structure. It will actually be tag based. So threads can show up in multiple places. So a thread like the one about LA banning the production of bareback porn could show up in LGBT Politics, and in the LA section, and in the bareback porn section. I'd have you pick the general theme that most matches the thread (bareback, cocksucking, fetish, etc.) and then everything else will be determined by tagging. There will also be reminders that in certain types of threads certain other types of discussion aren't allowed since HIV fetish, chem sex, and other sensitive topics will still only be allowed in certain areas. The person who starts the thread will determine what of the restricted topics are allowed and the thread will be placed accordingly. So first question for you guys – what are the other things I should think about that can reduce the number of inadvertent rule violations? Is there something you've gotten an infraction for that, if the site worked a different way, you might have avoided the infraction? Next, I'm envisioning an infraction system that's based on credits and debits. So when you do something good for the site, you get credit. When you violate the rules you get a debit. Bans will be based on your balance (credits - debits). So if you've done a lot of good for the site, you can make some mistakes and all it will do is deduct from your credits. Whereas if someone who's new to the site does the same thing they might be banned. If you're wondering, credits will be given for starting popular threads. Or making comments that get a lot of upvotes. Or reporting a problem that gets validated by a moderator. There will also be ways to earn points on my other sites – so on the porn sites stuff like cropping an image you like, or choosing a filter that makes the image look better would get you credits. On the hookup sites, uploading images that get a lot of likes and making them public will earn you points. Also, hooking up with a "trusted" member or attending certain sex parties will get you points. Some people will accumulate a lot of credits. So in those cases surplus credits will turn into things that have actual value. So big discounts (possibly free) branded gear (e.g. a t-shirt with #BBBH on it), or discounted (or free) entrance into certain sex parties. As I build out hookup site type features, the credits can be used to "advertise" yourself on the hookup site. All of those things are things that people will also be able to pay for (buy a t-shirt, pay an entrance fee for a sex party, or pay for better visibility on the hookup site). I can also envision letting users with surplus credits transfer them to friends so their friends don't have to go through the process of proving themselves like other new members. So there will still be an infraction system, but trusted senior members won't ever really feel the effects of it (other then a slap on a wrist and a reduction in credits). And they'll be able to give their friends the same experience by granting them some of their surplus credits. Basically saying "I trust this person, and the site should as well". The only problem I'm seeing here is that there may be so many ways to earn points that people rack up a crazy number of points. So I may limit the number of points a person can earn in a day. And I'm also thinking that once a credit is marked "surplus" it can't be used to pay a debit for an infraction. That means that a long-time user with lots of credits can't suddenly cause total chaos on the site and get away with it. And if a person has surplus credits and gets a large number of debits, then it will draw down a percentage of their surplus credits as well. (Small infractions won't draw down surplus credits, just major ones). So if you would… Think through your experiences with the current infraction system and tell me whether what I've laid out above resolves the problems of the current system.

I think it's important to understand the people who like Trump. This article boils it down to "Shit Life Syndrome". https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/03/shit-life-syndrome-trump-voters-and-clueless-dems/ In other words, if your life is shit and you see no way that's going to change, then suicide rates go up, drug use goes up, and you just want things to change – even if that change will ultimately hurt you. Basically if your life is shit with no chance of it getting better, then you want everyone else to feel the same pain you do. In that context, Trump's approach seems appealing… This is why I'd love to see Buttigieg win the nomination, or possibly Warren. Buttigieg is from a "flyover" state and turned around a city that people were talking about as one of the nation's biggest failures prior to him becoming mayor. He gets Shit Life Syndrome because that's what his city was suffering from. Warren is another possibility. Somehow, despite being a Harvard academic, she seems to have the ability to connect with people from Shit Life Syndrome areas. At the start of her campaign she went to West Virginia, into coal country, to tell them straight to their face why coal is dead and how that could actually change their lives for the better. And they listened and didn't think she was crazy. Before you vote, ask yourself if the candidate you're voting for can connect with Shit Life Syndrome voters. If s/he can't, then Trump could very well win again. [To be clear… I'm not saying all Trump voters are suffering from Shit Life Syndrome. I'm just saying a big part of his base is suffering from it so it explains much of his popularity.]

Well, then you have your answer. You need to stay off PrEP and only your dom gets to fuck you (unless he tells you otherwise). Have you told him your feelings about the possibility of him infecting you?

This is my understanding as well (having read a number of reputable sources on the topic). There's something about Truvada-resistance that means that people don't stay Truvada-resistant for long. My guess is that the mutation isn't stable and it mutates to something else that's not Truvada-resistant. Or it's a weaker strain that loses out to non-Truvada-resistant strains when it encounters them. The fact that Truvada-resistant strains are rare and/or weak is one of the reasons why Truvada was chosen for PrEP. Now, as to the question about are we on the brink of another apocalypse… IMHO, yes, in so many ways. But it's not a uniquely gay thing. I really think kids today will see millions of people die in their lifetimes from the effects of climate change. All the evidence points to something close to a mass extinction of humans in the next few hundred years. As far as something like another AIDS crisis – I don't think it will be because PrEP fails. Antibiotic-resistant STDs are the most likely candidate for the next big thing since there are already cases of it happening. But what made HIV/AIDS unique was HIV's long incubation period. In other words HIV had spread widely by the time anyone realized it was happening in 1981. That's not the case with antibiotic-resistant STDs. People know about them pretty quickly. They affect a few people and can generally be isolated. So I'm guessing the worst case is a sex party with hundreds of guys, and a big majority of them die, as well as a big majority of the people they had sex with the days after the party. That's horrible, but it's hundreds of people, not thousands or millions. That said, yes, something completely new could appear (like HIV did). But worrying about that is living your life in fear – which is generally a really bad idea.

IMHO this is about submission. Your dom doesn't want you on PrEP. So if you're a total sub you'll do as he says. Take the extreme case – what if he wanted you off PrEP so he could infect you – how would that make you feel? Would you feel betrayed and abused, or would you feel more connected to him? This is really about your limits of submission. If the possible consequences are OK with you, then do what your dom tells you to do.

Name a single country, ever, that's prospered with a leader like the one you describe above. "Brash" destroys diplomatic relationships and alliances on which we depend (in so many ways). It's one thing to not be a lawyer or politician, it's another one not to understand how laws are made or the value in enforcing them. Not being a lawyer or politician isn't a qualification for anything. If by "proletariat" you mean white racists, that's deplorable. If by the "Deep State" you mean people with decades of experience who know how to get things done, then you're an anarchist. And the "flushed down the toilet" comment confirms that you are indeed an anarchist. If you think that's OK, name one country, ever, that's prospered under anarchy. And you don't seem to understand "socialism". Socialism is Medicare. It's Social Security. It's getting treatment when you go to the hospital and don't have insurance. Socialism is the federal government subsidizing highways in West Virginia more than in Texas because it's a lot more expensive to build highways in mountains than on flat ground. Socialism is the National Park Service. Socialism is making sure your water is clean and your air won't cause asthma. Socialism is making sure your medications don't have impurities in them that can harm you. And on and on… And no country has ever prospered under nationalist leaders – at least not compared to the more cooperative countries that existed at the same time. For example Argentina used to have a GDP that was close to that of the US. Then they went nationalist, and now look at them… Oh, and your "Marxist" comment is hilarious given how you were saying it's so wonderful that the proletariat is rising up. And lastly, I find it deplorable that you'd come onto a gay site and side with someone who has seriously harmed the gay community. But you do express your views in a civil manner. As long as that stays that way, you're welcome to say what you want.

Correct. I'd only do what I spelled out above for the fiction sections.… General Bareback Fiction (8.4K threads) would go on BBBH.men Bug Chasing & Gift Giving Fiction (26K threads) would go on Poz Pigs Chem Sex Fiction (16K threads) would go on Puff Puff Cloud I'm not sure what I'm going to do with the trans fem and straight content on the site (including their fiction sections – 0.9K & 0.3K threads respectively). My experience with the straight section on here makes me reluctant to continue those sections. The sexual dynamics with fem content (straight and trans) are problematic, IMHO. As far as not wanting to see fiction at all… Just don't go there. And for those of you who've gotten infractions for posting in the wrong section on of the site, this is why we're so strict about that.

While you're all thinking about it, let me describe a scenario and tell me if this is the best way for stories to work… You want a sort option in story sections of the site that lets you sort the thread list by the last update of the original poster. Posts where the original poster quotes someone else, don't count as an update (since they're replying to a comment, not adding to the story). At the top of the thread page it would help to have a toggle button that would enable you to hide everything that's not a non-reply from the original poster – so all you see is story posts. To make #3 work, you'll need "endless scroll". Pagination doesn't make sense since a page may have no content if none of the posts on a page are non-replies by the original poster. Do I have that right? Is there anything you'd want added or changed to that scenario? What I can do (in a few months) is write a read-only version of the story sections. It would be set up on the sites where the content would eventually be moved. It would pull the data from the BZ database and display it in the manner outlined above. But to comment you'd have to come back to BZ. It's actually a nice phase one for moving the content (though the full move would be 2+ years off).

Blizzards and avalanches are made up of snowflakes. I've never seen the term as insulting.

Yes, I implemented that filter back when her name was in the news and it was amusing. I actually agree that the time for the joke has passed. If anyone wants to suggest new text for any of the filters, feel free to suggest what you think is better. The comments that referenced the devil that prompted the filter weren't just simple Satanism. They were comments by people who were clearly deeply disturbed. They were a group I didn't want on the site. The same goes for the people currently using pérv. The way they're using the term the implication is predatory sex with under age kids. They were frequently mentioning 'young', 'incest' and 'rape' along with përv and its variants. I just can't have that shit on the site. Hence the filters. Yeah, there are totally reasonable and acceptable ways to use those terms. If I could exempt senior members I would, but I can't.

This site does not promote drug use. Period. Read the guidelines in the "sex with enhancements" section. Promotion of drug use is prohibited. If you see it, please report it. What is allowed is for drug users to share experiences. The goal is a more supportive community where drug users don't feel isolated and where they may hear something in someone else's experience that might save their life. Whether we like it or not, a lot of guys in the bareback community do drugs. Unlike some of the sub-communities that I try to discourage through word filters, they are genuinely part of who we are, so they have a place here. It's a walled-off place, but there's a place. Which reminds me, please report any mention of drug use outside the designated areas.

I set the rules around here and I am not a snowflake, nor am I even part of the snowflake generation. As I just explained (we were both writing our responses at the same time), the filters exist to discourage illegal discussions and to keep the site true to its original mission. They aren't there because people are "triggered" by things. There's a lot that's allowed on this site that's not "PC". And yes, some of it triggers some people. I really don't give a shit if you're triggered by something. We get a fair number of reports for things like racial slurs that we do nothing about because the context was consensual race play or fantasy/fiction. However, if someone, in anger, said the same thing to another user, that would be censored, not because of the words, but because of the anger. Being polite to other members is really important. Words, not so much.

To view? No there isn't. It's more of a filter than a ban. You don't get in trouble for using the banned word. But you will get in trouble if you try to circumvent the filter since it shows intention and disrespect for the rules of our community. The issue is that certain types of discussions are problematic and I simply don't want them on the site. Those discussions use specific words that are rarely ever used in other types of discussions. Filtering those words disrupts the problematic discussions and encourages them to find another web site for their discussions. Often these are illegal or borderline illegal discussions (e.g. drug use, sex with minors, etc.) – For legal reasons I simply can't have those discussions on this site – even if I don't really see a problem with the discussion. For example, I don't personally have a problem with someone having sex with a minor IF the minor initiated the interaction and feels empowered to stop the interaction at any time. But that's a scenario that's almost impossible to legislate, so "sex with minors is illegal". Period. But there are also discussions that are centered on "fringe communities" that are far outside of the mainstream (to put it politely). I don't necessarily have a problem with those communities, but those communities aren't what this site is about, so I filter the words they use to discourage them from using the site in order to keep this site true to it's original mission – to promote bareback sex and give a place where people can talk freely about their sex lives.

I understand what people want. But the software that runs this site wasn't built for stories. It was built for discussions. Eventually I'll get to coding a replacement for this site. At that point I can give you guys what you want. But that will be at least a couple years off into the future.

I moved your post because it has nothing to do with this site (hence doesn't belong in the help section for this site). But to answer your question, you're probably using a VPN (a Virtual Private Network). Or at least BBRT thinks you are. They probably have a list of IP addresses that have been known to be used by VPNs and they're blocking those IPs. If your IP had been used by a VPN service in the past that might be enough to get you blocked (assuming you're not using a VPN). VPNs obscure where a person is coming from. That can be problematic for site owners. Hackers love to look like they're coming from somewhere else. It's also possible that you turned on a VPN and have since forgotten you had it turned on. To run a test to see what BBRT might be seeing, go here: https://www.maxmind.com/en/locate-my-ip-address That will tell you a bunch of stuff (you'll need to scroll sideways to see everything). Is your location close to where you are? If not, then you're on a VPN. Is the ISP listed your ISP? If not, you're on a VPN. If you're still sure you're not on a VPN after looking at that information, then I suggest you try to get a different IP address. Assuming you're on some sort of home network, unplug your router before you go to bed, then plug it in when you get up in the morning and you'll probably have a different IP address. (Write it down before you go to bed – the link above will tell you what it is).

There’s no penalty for using a banned word. Don’t worry about it. But also don’t try to circumvent it when you see it’s banned. That I might give a penalty for because it shows intention.

Yup. Certain words were generating too much discussion that was borderline illegal. Because of that the words are banned.

It's not about being "PC". There's A LOT on this site that isn't PC. It's about staying within the limits of the law. I've said it before and I'll say it again (over and over)… Who you vote for makes a difference in your sexual freedoms. Who your friends and family vote for makes a difference in your sexual freedoms. Don't think you can ignore politics and then come on a board like this and complain that your freedoms are being limited. You, your friends, and your family members limited those freedoms when you voted the wrong lawmakers into office. Oh, and it's just going to get worse. About a week ago 4 Senators asked Attorney General Barr to do more obscenity prosecutions (conservative source, liberal source). Obscenity isn't just about images – text can be "obscene" as well. Barr was a big proponent of obscenity prosecutions when he worked in the Justice Department in the Bush (Sr) administration. If Trump gets a second term we're likely to go back to those rather dark days. And it's not just a problem in the US. Britain is trying to regulate porn (though it's temporarily failed), Australia wants to regulate porn, etc. The rules on this site are there to keep things legal and to keep the site off the radar of aggressive conservative groups. This is why the moderation of this site is "somewhat aggressive" and why that will continue to be the case with the sites I'm building. I don't need problems. If you become a problem, then you're no longer welcome here. This is a private site, there is no right to free speech. Free speech means you can start your own site and possibly face lawsuits and jail if you don't police it properly.

This site runs on 3rd party software. I don't really know what the software developer plans to do. Plus, I'm slowly redeveloping my sites. Eventually the content here will get migrated to other sites. Albums will work completely differently. They will not be migrated as-is from this site. Instead you'll have to migrate your images and then you can use them in albums on the new sites. I was about to go into detail about it, but there's no point since it's just speculative at this point other than the fact that they won't work the same way.