This Weekend's Most Active Threads

Today I'll look at the most active threads over the weekend. The leader in number of replies and second in number of views was a thread titled, "Unique situation if we separate" that was posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. It seems like almost every day the relationship forum has one of the most active threads and it also seems like that thread has some connection to divorce. This thread is no different. The original poster explains that her family moved to the District of Columbia for her job. She makes significantly more than her husband who is underemployed, very unhappy living here, and eager to move back to the Midwest. She wants to know what will happen if they divorce, particularly with their three kids. Would her husband be forced to stay here or would one parent have to give up custody? The thread is 24 pages long and I have only read a few posts. But, from what I've seen this thread is more or less just like every other thread on similar topics. Some posters instinctively support the woman, others react by supporting the man, and some simply try to dig for salacious details. Intermixed among all of that are some posts attempting to actually be helpful. The only thing out of the ordinary that I noticed in this thread was a troll jumping into impersonate the original poster and stir the pot a bit more. I removed the troll post and follow-ups to it.

Leading in number of views over the weekend and second in number of replies was a thread in the "College and University Discussion" forum titled, "In tears about my daughter". The original poster of this thread says she and her husband had agreed to pay for their daughter's college as long as she studied in one of three fields, However her daughter, who it later turns out is a freshmen at Princeton University, has just told her that she plans to study English, which is not one of the stipulated fields. In response to the original poster's threat to withdraw financial support, the daughter said that she would switch to a community college. The original poster is distraught because having her daughter attend an Ivy League school is very important, but the original poster does not consider an English degree to have much value in terms of future employment opportunties. Posters immediately started calling this poster a troll and I probably received a half-dozen or more reports asking me if the poster was a troll. My immediate instinct was that the poster was a troll because there have been a number of threads that were similar but from the daughter's point of view. However, I couldn't find sufficient data to conclude that the poster was trolling and, while I can't prove a negative, the poster didn't appear to be the poster I had suspected she might be. Beyond the troll-calling, responses were in almost total agreement that the original poster is a terrible parent whose daughter will end up hating her. For her part, the original poster did not back down one iota, instead arguing in defense of her position and, in at least one case, sock puppeting a response to support herself. The original poster's replies only strengthened some readers' convictions that the original poster was trolling. Conversely, to me the original poster's replies reflected exactly the sort of stubborn, uncompromising, single-minded attitude that would lead to the type of ultimatum and withdrawal of support described in the thread. So, troll or not, if you are interested in 19 pages of original poster-bashing, this is the thread for you.

A thread in the "Political Discussion" forum titled, "LISTEN: This is what’s at stake on Tuesday, people!" was third in number of replies and fifth in number of views for the weekend. The original poster links to a tweet by Bill Maher suggesting that we should enjoy democracy while it is here because it may not be around for long depending on the election results. I am sure there are a number of DCUM users who can't wait for tomorrow's election so that the slew of election-related threads will ease. Unfortunately, everything points to this election being a drawn out affair so, if anything, we can probably expect quite a few more election threads this week. I've only skimmed this thread but I can't say that it offers anything that hasn't already been said 1,000 times in other threads. A problem for the country that is certainly reflected in this forum is the two realities in which individuals now live. I've written about this in the "Website Feedback" forum for years, but people can't agree on simple facts anymore. It makes moderating very challenging and so-called "objective" moderating impossible. For the record, I have never claimed to be objective, but — as Elon Musk is now learning — that can't really be done even if you want to do it. At one time it was believed that you could support your argument with facts and someone with a contrary belief could support their's with facts and whoever had the best case won. Now, whatever facts you offer are ignored or disputed. And, just to be clear, while both sides often stumble over what they consider factual, there is one side that is much more guilty of this behavior than the other. Trying to "both sides" this problem actually contributes to making things worse.

The final thread at which I'll look is in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum and titled "Sexiest celebrity guys purely based on their looks". This thread was third in number of replies and fourth in number of views. As you would expect from the title, the purpose of the thread is to list the sexiest male celebrities and the thread is full of suggestions, often accompanied by photos. This thread may well get in trouble with the ad networks so, if it interests you, enjoy it while you can. My favorite part of threads like this is the straight (allegedly) male posters who get offended and either report the thread or try to start competing threads. Yes, it's possible to make all sorts of serious objections — even grounding them in feminism — to the objectification of these men. But none of the detractors ever really do that. For example, one reply in the thread says that the thread is "cringey". As much as I hate to admit it, without "cringey" threads, DCUM would have very few posts. Surely the thread's detractors can come up with something better than that? The main thing that offended me about the thread was someone including Pete Davidson. I have very few opinions about the sexiness of males, but the few that I have don't include Pete Davidson. However, at least this justifies calling the thread "cringey".