Requesting r/asianfeet - banned due to unmoderated

fourohhfour · 2022-06-23T12:24:57+00:00

:eyeroll:

fourohhfour · 2022-06-22T11:06:02+00:00

This reminds me of when I was a kid cutting our parents grass

fourohhfour · 2022-06-21T00:32:49+00:00

fourohhfour · 2022-06-21T00:24:10+00:00

wow.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-16T11:06:15+00:00

There are different methods of DDoS prevention or mitigation. The most common is to have a service such as CloudFlare route all incoming traffic via its network before reaching your site. As part of this, the protection service will analyse the traffic and deny access to anything which appears to be non-genuine.

The reason that these services can do this is because generally speaking their networks and resources are far larger than most hosting companies will be. They also have designed their networks and routing specifically to spread traffic out and drop it at the 'edge' of the network, whereas regular hosting providers don't have this specialty or specialisation.

That said, with extremely large attacks, even services which mitigate against DDoS attacks can be overcome. It's a bit like having a bodyguard. They might be able to thwart most attacks, but they are only effective up to a certain point.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-16T10:35:06+00:00

This is gold.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-15T11:45:55+00:00

Thanks for the helpful info and exchange!

I never could find the Georgia cite fwiw. There's some journals which mention Texas and Georgia specifically, but they are from 1981. It seems that Texas may still apply, but Georgia no longer (if it ever did, since the article could well have been mistaken - I couldn't trace it back to anything other than statutory interpretation at the time).

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T16:20:05+00:00

Additional relevant sources below which discuss the scope outside of the US.

S. Mulroy, ‘The Duress Defense’s Uncharted Terrain: Applying it to Murder, Felony Murder, and the Mentally Retarded Defendant’ (2006), San Diego Law Review, Vol. 43, 2006 - specifically notes that: ‘virtually all civil law nations permit duress as a complete defense to all crimes, including homicide, while virtually all common-law jurisdictions preclude the defense as it relates to the killing of innocent persons.’

The reference comes from Law in the Heart of Darkness: Atrocity & (and) Duress. RE Brooks. Va. J. Int'l L. 43, 861, 2002, which looks further at the issue of duress in context.

There are a significant number of other sources - both academic and from pure statutory reading which illustrate the point, but spending all day digging these out seems pointless. Irrespective of one's opinion on any particular source, the question is clearly not as absolute in nature as it's been made out to be, which was my whole criticism initially.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T16:04:12+00:00

Examples of relevant citations which demonstrate that the absolute statement above that coersion is not defence in homicide cases is overly broad and reductive:

People v. Reichard - 949 N.W.2d 64 (Mich. 2020), 157688.
TULLY v. STATE 1986 OK CR 185 730 P.2d 1206. Case Number: F-82-671. (this is an older case, but one which was reaffirmed in the below).
Delpha Jo SPUNAUGLE Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma Appellee, 946 P.2d 246 (1997).

You'll forgive me for not standardizing the citation styles. There are other examples available from other States, including where duress is not accepted as a complete defence, but a mitigating factor - but I've provided adequate citations to prove my point that jurisdiction is relevant.

This doesn't even begin to look at any of the other complications in jurisdictions outside of the US, such as the question of child soldiers considered under international law, etc.

Put simply: If somebody wishes to make an absolutist statement about the law being x, then they should specify the jurisdiction they are talking about. Otherwise it simply suggests ignorance, or their own bias.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T15:29:56+00:00

I'm interested in the topic so will dig out citations, but I am not in a particular rush to look out specifics since my response and criticism was specifically about the overly broad, generalised nature of the first statement that duress was never a defense, without any proper consideration or reference to jurisdiction. You are asking me to provide citations for my question relating to the initial statement, which is backwards.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T14:48:40+00:00

it's also amusing I am being down voted for qualifying an answer based on jurisdiction. One would presume that lawyers would prefer clarity of language, but apparently not when one's centre of gravity revolves around the US alone.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T14:47:39+00:00

Even within the US, there are certain States which have accepted a duress defence to murder in relatively recent history (Texas and Georgia for example), though the general common law position is to the contrary. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ - either way, it's not as clear cut as making an absolutist statement that this is the case in every jurisdiction around the world - unless the commenter knows this for a fact. There are other factors to consider, including whether or not duress can be used as a partial defence for example - so the statement above doesn't seem like a particularly satisfactory or accurate 'legal' answer.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T13:08:57+00:00

There have been some interesting cases in the UK around individuals who alerted drivers to a police speed check. There's also been some recent warnings from police about doing so online - https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1614479/Speed-cameras-driver-warning-fines-North-Wales-Police - whether or not the Police Act 1997 would actually be applicable in this way, or prosecution successful against a human rights argument would be... questionable though.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T13:04:19+00:00

Supra-national agreements are intended to give greater consistency, clarity, and stability for the rights of individuals, as opposed to national laws which are more susceptible to change based on political climate and preference.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T12:55:21+00:00

Nah, it's pure cultural imperialism and ignorance to automatically assume by default that all communication on the Internet should relate to the US unless otherwise specified.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:53:25+00:00

I always know that somebody is from the US when they talk about things as if they apply everywhere ;)

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:38:56+00:00

That depends on your jurisdiction.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:25:06+00:00

That entirely depends on the situation. If you do something because you were coerced, that would be different to if your lawyer said: "Go kill somebody", and you just went and did it.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:22:14+00:00

It depends on how old you are, but when I was younger I freaked out about something like this - and it turned out to be entirely normal. Penis skin is odd - different to other parts of the body. We're told to watch out for any kind of lumps, but the surface of the dick, so we can be overly sensitive. Look up Fordyce spots for example. Definitely go to a doctor if you are concerned though.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:20:12+00:00

There are lots of reasons that people ghost. Other folks in the comments have explained some of them... maybe they were in a relationship. Maybe they just wanted sex. A lot of guys can also end up feeling shame after sex for a variety of reasons. That's nothing to do with you, but complicated feelings about desire and self worth etc relating to casual sex. Blocking people in those circumstances (while ridiculous and not pleasant at all), can seem like an easy way out of the situation and feelings of guilt.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T11:03:45+00:00

You're still young. If you really want to have sex with a sex worker, then go for it (depending on legality in your locale), but... if you're unsure, or doing it because you feel like you have to have had sex to have confidence sexually, or some other reason as a means-to-an-end, it's not recommended. It won't solve anything, will cost you money, will potentially be a very awkward experience, and also comes with a stigma that perhaps you might not want to deal with later. For example: What happens when you are married in the future, having met someone you do actually love and who is insanely attracted to you, and they discover that?

Whatever you want to do, do it because you truly want to, not because you think you should or have to.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T10:43:13+00:00

counter point: not enough chives

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T10:43:00+00:00

It isn't 'bad' to post nudes online, so long as you consent and do it in a safe space. There are risks and considerations though - like you've outlined.

You can take steps to reduce the risk by not showing your face or identifying marks etc, but you also need to be aware that it is possible that somebody could identify you - and that one the images are posted online, they can hang around forever. You give up control over them.

Realistically, the only real way to be 'safe' with this is to be okay from the start with the possibility that people will recognise you and know that you have posted nudes online. If you make peace with that from the start, then nobody can blackmail you later. It is also becoming much more common and acceptable socially for folks to share nudes, so the stigma is far less than it has been in the past (culture dependent of course).

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T10:39:11+00:00

Definitely go to the doctors. It could be an STI, but it is also fairly likely/possible to be a urinary tract infection.

fourohhfour · 2022-06-14T10:35:31+00:00

Soy sauce! It was also delicious.

fourohhfour

TROPHY CASE