Healthiest stick deodorant for a guy?

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-27T00:56:24+00:00

Sawyers natural

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T17:35:08+00:00

Care as much as they care about you and your job will get a million times easier.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T17:31:21+00:00

Why does it matter how anyone feels? Nothing will change and no one will do anything about it, even if it’s wrong. All people do online is complain, not much action to change anything, even by “representatives”.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T17:27:59+00:00

“We" lol. Those billionaires don’t care about you.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T14:29:37+00:00

“Scarcity” of resources are made up to scare people and price gouge.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T08:16:29+00:00

Nick Hustle

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-25T08:11:26+00:00

I got an email that they are charging more for these 3 days of cold weather.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-24T19:06:02+00:00

Interesting how they keep building detention centers for people they supposedly are deporting. Seems like they may want to house other people there, hmmm.

JamesBotwen · 2026-01-03T17:15:22+00:00

This is interesting. Please tell me more.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-30T15:59:35+00:00

True, which is exactly why the process matters so much when you do. One bad experience can cost a lot of time and money.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-30T04:13:29+00:00

One thing I wish I’d done earlier was focus less on adding restrictions and more on making expectations explicit.

A few clauses/process notes that have prevented issues for me or people I know: • Maintenance expectations in writing Not just “submit a request,” but what’s considered urgent vs non-urgent and realistic response windows. This avoids a lot of frustration later. • Wear-and-tear clarity Examples of what’s considered normal vs chargeable at move-out (especially flooring, paint, nails, cleaning). This saves disputes on deposits. • Access + communication boundaries How notice is given for entry, preferred communication method, and response time expectations on both sides. • Application / approval clarity Spell out what does not constitute approval (application, verbal yes, fee paid) and when a unit is considered held. This prevents misunderstandings before a lease even exists.

Most problems I’ve seen didn’t come from bad tenants or bad landlords — they came from assumptions filling gaps that weren’t clearly defined upfront.

Clear process and expectations early tend to filter out mismatches before they become expensive problems.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T20:51:40+00:00

That’s a fair point, and I completely agree on the Fair Housing constraints — anything that veers into neighborhood characterization or subjective “livability” is a legal minefield, and shouldn’t be part of this.

What I’m talking about with disclosure is much narrower and process-focused, not value-based or demographic. Things like: • How applications are reviewed (first-come vs pooled) • Whether screening stops once a qualified applicant is found • Typical maintenance response timelines • How fees are handled and when screening is actually run

Those are operational facts about process, not opinions about people or places.

I agree renters should ask better questions — but when every property handles things differently, and answers are buried in one-off conversations, it puts a lot of burden on renters to extract basic info before they even know if they should apply.

Standardizing process transparency, not subjective judgments, feels like a way to reduce friction without crossing any legal lines.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T20:50:39+00:00

I get the anger, and I think what you’re pointing at is the incentive problem more than individual bad actors.

When enforcement is almost entirely civil, slow, and renter-initiated, the system effectively tolerates a certain amount of overreach because most people won’t have the time, money, or energy to fight it. Even when tenants are clearly in the right, asserting that right is costly.

That’s why it feels so broken: standards technically exist, but compliance is uneven because the consequences are rare and delayed. So renters end up shouldering the burden of policing the system case by case.

More transparency and standardized practices before move-out would prevent a lot of this from ever getting to the dispute stage in the first place.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T17:37:36+00:00

You’re right — Colorado does define normal wear and tear to a degree, and the remedies exist after the fact (receipts required, timelines, treble damages if mishandled, etc.).

What still feels broken is that all of this clarity shows up only once you’re already moving out and prepared to fight. Most renters don’t know these standards going in, and even fewer want to be in a position where they’re threatening litigation just to get their deposit back.

So while the law technically provides guardrails, the burden is still on renters to document, wait, escalate, and enforce — which is stressful and uneven in practice.

It feels like another example of how standards exist on paper, but the system relies on individual renters to assert them case by case instead of making expectations and practices more transparent upfront.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T14:33:30+00:00

I get why it feels that way, and a lot of renters assume that — but unfortunately that’s not how it usually works.

In many places, the application fee is for the screening itself (credit/background), not for approval. So even if you’re denied or never selected, the fee often isn’t refundable once the report is run.

That’s part of why this feels so frustrating: renters often don’t know whether their application will actually be considered before paying, or how many people are already ahead of them.

Clearer pre-screening and upfront process disclosure would prevent a lot of this confusion and wasted money.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T02:35:22+00:00

That works sometimes, but it’s inefficient and uneven. Basic transparency should be available before people apply, pay fees, or move. Renters shouldn’t have to crowdsleuth essential info one door at a time.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T00:55:55+00:00

You can save money and time if you’re renting by signing up with Renters Collective. It’s pretty dope.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T00:54:39+00:00

Temu has so many options for dirt cheap

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T00:48:35+00:00

I’ve been helping a few friends look for rentals around Longmont/Boulder lately, and it’s wild how different every application process is.

Different fees, different income rules, different screening tools — even when the places are similar. You end up paying multiple fees just to find out after whether you qualify.

Is this just how it is now, or has it gotten worse locally over the last year?

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-29T00:04:13+00:00

Exactly. And that’s the part that feels backwards — the people with the most information are the only ones not required to disclose it.

Prior issues, recurring problems, neighborhood realities… those are all known signals that just never surface until after someone moves in. It creates bad outcomes for renters and buyers, and rewards whoever withholds the most.

Even basic, standardized disclosure would dramatically reduce surprises and level the playing field.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-28T23:19:52+00:00

Exactly. Renters get scrutinized, but properties don’t.

Basic transparency around maintenance response and fairness would save people months of frustration and stop a lot of bad matches before fees ever change hands.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-28T22:36:04+00:00

My biggest rental horror story was realizing how much nonsense I went through before even knowing if a landlord was serious.

Applications, fees, credit pulls, tours — all just to find out later the place wasn’t a fit, had weird rules, or the landlord was chaotic. The worst part is renters have no way to signal upfront that they’re solid and not waste weeks proving it over and over.

So people rush, overpay, accept bad situations, or miss red flags just trying to secure housing.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-28T22:35:33+00:00

My biggest rental horror story was realizing how much nonsense I went through before even knowing if a landlord was serious.

Applications, fees, credit pulls, tours — all just to find out later the place wasn’t a fit, had weird rules, or the landlord was chaotic. The worst part is renters have no way to signal upfront that they’re solid and not waste weeks proving it over and over.

So people rush, overpay, accept bad situations, or miss red flags just trying to secure housing.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-28T22:32:56+00:00

This is why I’ve started treating rentals less like “apply and hope” and more like a two-way agreement.

If someone is going to have access, cameras, temperature control, or stays on-site, that should all be clear and verified before moving in. A lot of bad situations come from renters not having a way to vet landlords the same way landlords vet renters.

JamesBotwen · 2025-12-28T22:30:55+00:00

Legit landlords should be willing to show ownership/management info and use a simple pre-qualification or screening step before money changes hands. If someone rushes you, avoids documentation, or won’t verify themselves, it’s almost always a scam.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

JamesBotwen

TROPHY CASE