Discussion in 'The Health and Well Being of UG' started by plazaman, Feb 3, 2001.
I won't tell you what to do, but I will suggest that turning off your firewall while hooked up to a constant online source [DSL/Cable] is not a good idea.
There are worms and virii that can search out unblocked ports [open because no hard or soft firewall is active], download themselves to your system, and install themselves all without any proactive participation on your part.
Tests have been conducted on active, clean, systems with no firewall or AV protection and the average from going online to the point where the system was found in a scan and infected was 29 seconds.
I recommend hardware firewall/router with software AV and firewall on each of the systems attached to the router.
Anyone who has asked for that has received it (and serveal have done so; i.e. sent an envelope with cash). In addition they have been given the alternative of an anonymous source thru Western Union.
ah, it doesn't matter anymore, nothing's going to change.
Whats that got to do with anything...
I could just as easily say that we tricks are the reason they come here..... I don't see them allowing us to dictate how they should run their business.
It's an endless circle... kind of like the chicken and the egg.... Yet you and your girlfriends here think the world of UG revolves around anyone with a pussy.
No of course not, but I think we have seen that it's a fine line UG has to walk, and I would certainly give those who are funding you through advertising some "policy" consideration.
BTW, They ARE why we are here and this board exists isn't it? providers?
I see no one but the providers agreeing with you.
We want the site to stay the way its thrived all these years and hopefully find ways to bring added income to the board without trashing every principal it was built on.
What are you trying to accomplish?
Turning this into a site where no one can question or disagree with an advertiser?
How about letting all providers here dictate policy and ban anyone who disagrees or writes a bad review of them.
They can start with me.
Between Wendys' buns?
(I can't tell you how long I've been waiting for someone to ask that)
note to JL: Wish I'd seen your unedited post.
Honest substantive coed public discussion board.
I don't think I'm wrong, and I think many others will agree. The board wants to make some money now, but it doesn't want to change. Oh sure we have superficial web page changes, less forbidden words, a "new" attitude, but where's the beef? I really don't understand WHAT you guys want in terms of a site. What are you trying to accomplish?
btw... I just checked since I hadn't been there in months... But *** does not have a private mens only forum.
And if you mean that joke ennergizerbunny started on a free bulletin board site... that's hardly a private board when anyone including myself can go and register and join under any name or as many names as you want.
Where have I ever said this board should go completely pay site? I've specifically said that would be the end of UG.
Know what your problem is... you don't read anyting I write.
I said a review section and or a private discussion forum.
And what are you talking about I want all for me...???????
Hey, it's not my fault that you're completely wrong about this.
so, go for it...try to privatize...but leave the rest of the board the way it is.
People can ask for the girls, do ISO and discuss them, BEFORE actually booking them, in public.
Then, once a poster have a review of her, it can be posted as an icon next to the title of the thread and if guys want to read the review they need to pay.
If you put ALL private...discussion and reviews, well, you will not have many takers because the same girls reviewed here are in other boards as well.
You need to give something to get something....you can not just want all for you.
And I do not contradict myself...my english is not that good and sometimes things come out twisted...
I thought you and I were getting along now?
If UG is ever to have a SUCCESFUL private review board I'd advise it doen't go the *** route and keep it completely private AND allow discussion onthe reviews as was originally planned years ago when I and several others beta tested Allens review format.
Betty I have to admit..
When we both posted here a lot, about 3 or 4 years ago, my biggest beef with you was that you didnt challenge the men here and fluffed them too much. I felt like you didnt participate in the deep conversations enough
Your last few posts have been excellent. I am proud of you. ( not that you need my validation)
Sure you care.. you made a pretty big stink in another thread as soon as I mentioned it.
So then why are you insisting that the prolific posters here pay when they are the ones with most of the bc ties and access to bc boards?
Why would I care how many are reading my posts? If anything I'd prefer only those who actually include themselves in conversation be allowed to view. But for the good of theboard I'm willing to allow them to pay their way in.
And since you mentioned my board a few says ago... there are no lurkers allowed there. So that kind of blows up your theory.
Well Bender is the only one who can speak of 'invisible' clicks here. I only mentioned posters since thats what *I* can see. For all we know *** has 10 million lurkers. And if there's 40,000 members here (for arguments sake, lets assume half that with multi names etc...) and one or two thousand are lurkers.... how can you say "all the numbers you have ARE FROM LURKERS!!!!"
But you just said you don't care about a private board and that *** and Bigdog have men only boards.... And they are provider and advertiser friendly...
You are constantly contradicting yourself.
That's good, 'cause I was thinking that you were either smoking something, or had just finished running up several flights of stairs.
Separate names with a comma.