But the others, are from parts of the UK. So, again, why exactly do they read said journal and feel the need to leave a less than supportive comment on said "journal"?
"The internet is usually wrong" as Tom Hanks said the other night on Conan. There's probably a lot more truth to that than most would think.
But the internet is also littered with trolling judgemental faggots that the highlight of their lives is to think they got under someone's skin (but failed miserably).
edit:
lol, someone reported the pic of me from the newspaper when I was 3. A huge FUCK YOU to whoever did that. THAT PICTURE HAS ME IN IT. LAST TIME I CHECKED, THAT'S WHAT WAS REQUIRED.
I somehow suspect it was done by one of those trolls who stumbled upon that journal wrote. Of course there's no real explanation as to why it was specifically removed.
IMPORTANT: One of your Pictures has been removed.
Hi from OkCupid.
One of your photos was flagged by OkCupid users for being inappropriate. After being reviewed and voted on by our moderators the consensus was to remove the photo.
The most common reasons for picture removal are:
- 1. The picture doesn't have YOU in it.
- 2. Cropping that doesn't show your face
- 3. Copyrighted material
- 4. Extreme closeups
- 5. Non-photos or photos of pets, children, etc.
- 6. Celebrity/fake uploads
- 7. Disgusting stuff that scars us
- 8. Porn or nudity
As a rule of thumb, upload only photos of yourself
(your pets, children, and artwork belong elsewhere),
and make sure your face (not your tattoo or eyeball) is chosen
with the thumbnail selector.
Remember, OkCupid is free, so please obey good etiquette and try to positively impact the community.
If you repeatedly get items deleted via this process your account will be deleted as well. Recently you have had 0 items deleted.
"flagged by OKCupid Users" that makes me wonder if it was that flake. But given she would have had to have actually viewed or "visited" my profile again to flag it, I suspect it wasn't her but one of those fuckstick trolls. Well I re-uploaded it and wrote specifically about what the photo is and how it actually is me. None of those criteria above would explain why it would be removed. The only possible one would be the fact it's me, but when I was 3. That criteria does not say a damn thing about how old the photo has to be. And the fact is, it is me. I have dozens and dozens of people who could vouch for that.
Land of 10,000 Flakey Women
Today – 2:17pm
yes, I've encountered another. I sometimes think this site attracts them. I.e. you start instant messaging someone and they don't really add much to the conversation. One-word answers and not really bringing up conversation topics. And then you ask if they'd like to talk on the phone, they shoot you down "I don't think so." That's fucking flaky. Sorry, but it is. First off, if you're trying to get to know someone, instant-messaging only can last so-long before it becomes a waste of time. It hides wayyyy too much about someone's personality. Cut to mother-fucking chase already. Time is limited. Life is short. I don't take 1-week vacations, especially in-town without a ton of plans very often. Like maybe once every 5 years. If you are asked to talk on the phone, and you say "I don't think so" you're really just wasting yours and my own time.
well, she somehow saw this and took offense to it. Lol, okay, as I wrote there, YOU DON'T GET TO KNOW SOMEONE VIA INSTANT-MESSENGING. THAT'S WHY I ASKED TO CALL HER. Jeezus, but somehow that didn't register anything with her. And she takes offense to me writing in my "journal" about it. Frankly, I didn't mention her name or any details. And if it "really wasn't going anywhere" why the fuck did she feel the need to even send me another message?..I said nothing back to her after she said "I don't think so." Nothing needed to be said directly to her. Writing in my "journal" should be perfectly find and understandable. Jeezus..hell, maybe it'll do her some good knowing that if someone asks you to talk on the phone given the lack of chemistry via instant-messaging, maybe she'll think twice about saying "I don't think so."
Granted, she could have said nothing and that would have been worse. But it's these blue-faced unexplainable explanations that make these women so fucking flaky. Flake Flake Flake. I mean why the fuck did she even accept the messages from me in the 1st place? Flaky, false lead-ons. Sorry, but I didn't do anything wrong here by asking to call her. She could have at least said "not now" or "I'm not sure if I know you well enough" or something..which still would be flaky, but less so.
The only non-flaky women I've ever encountered on that site were the one's who approached me. Granted, this is an "Ice breaker." I think I should mention the whole thing about wanting to talk on the phone. I had that on my profile for awhile, and removed it, as it seemed forward. But ya know at least if it was there, all the beating-around-the-bush would be avoided. Hell, I think it I may just mention something to that affect in those IceBreakers. That way, there's no bullshit about how fast contact is made and what not.
Did I want to meet this girl soon? maybe. But I sure as hell have spent far too many times bullshitting on im's. Most the women I talk to NEVER FEED THE CONVERSATION. So they are either totally bored by me (or distracted), or really fucking boring people themselves, which I frankly would have no business trying to get to know. But, at least if I got them on the phone, I'd have a better idea. Most of the chats on the phone have gone far better than im's. I almost would like to put down I'm not interested in ever talking on im. Thus it's either a few messages and then phone or meeting, or nothing. Much more efficient.
