Wednesday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "I said something really stupid/insensitive to gf and now she’s given me an ultimatum" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. I am not going to bother describing the topic of the thread because the poster was likely trolling and definitely sock puppeted throughout the thread. I had actually meant to check this thread yesterday because it came to by attention for some reason, but I didn't get around to it until this morning. Fairly quickly in the thread posters believed that they recognized the writing style of the poster and began linking to other threads that they suspected were from the same poster. The original poster denied being the author of the other threads and even challenged posters to ask me so that I could disprove the allegation. I think that there are significant elements in common between this thread and many of those believed by others to be from the same poster. But, it would take more effort than I am prepared to commit to confirm they are all from the same poster. The sock puppeting in this thread alone is enough to put the thread's authenticity in doubt. For instance, in one post, the original poster writes, "OP is a jerk" and in a subsequent post writes, "OP was already a jerk to begin with." This poster seems to be suffering from both identity and self-esteem issues. For whatever reason, the relationship forum has attracted a lot of drama seekers. The result is thread after thread of likely imaginary relationship conflict. Trolling the forum is a strange pastime if you ask me. I have to admit some amazement with the posters who are able to remember threads from, in some cases, years ago and match them to the poster of a current thread. Trolling an anonymous forum may seem like the easiest thing ever, but be warned. These posters will catch you. I don't know how they do it, but they do it.

Yesterday's second most active thread was originally posted in the "Off-Topic" forum but I moved it to the "Environment, Weather, and Green Living" forum. Titled, "Can Smell the Smoke", the original poster comments that the air quality was only "Code Yellow" but seems surprised that she can smell smoke. I didn't have time to read this entire thread, but I did note that, like so many other issues, it has become unnecessarily contentious. In a rational world, scientists could test the air quality, come to a determination of the quality, and advise about the harmful effects, if any, of that quality. Furthermore, they might provide information about how best to address the quality, if necessary. But, in today's world, rationality has essentially been discarded. Now, we must question everything. This thread gets quickly diverted by a poster comparing wildfires to backyard bonfires. But, don't most people spend most of their time around a bonfire trying to avoid the smoke coming toward them? When the entire city is engulfed in smoke, you just can't move a little bit one way or the other. On the other end of the spectrum are posters who are so concerned that they believe we should be receiving text messages about the air quality. Many posters in this thread who live in the local area didn't share the original poster's experience with poor air quality and commented that they didn't find it that bad. But posters from outside the area described experiencing much worse conditions. At any rate, in the DC area, today is supposed to have worse air quality than yesterday so I suppose this thread will have increased activity.

The next two most active threads yesterday were ones that I have already discussed. The thread after those was titled, "DH pursuing new jobs with harder logistics for family" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster explains that she and her husband both work, but while she mostly works in the office and has a fairly long commute, her husband mostly works at home and has a short commute when he does need to go into the office. This has worked out well with regard to logistics for getting their two children to and from school and daycare. The original poster's husband earns less than the original poster and is unhappy in his job. He has been pursing a new job and is in the final stages of interviewing for one that would be a professional step up. However, the job would require more time in the office and have less flexibility, destroying their current logistical arrangment. This frustrates the original poster. Posters respond with a range of advice, mostly recommending different childcare arrangements. Posters are divided between those who side with the original poster and those who believe that she should be more supportive of her husband. All of this gets wrapped up in debates about the assumed gender roles of men and women which conventionally dictate that the woman's career should be sacrificed for children. As such, some posters advise the original poster to scale back her work commitment to spend more time caring for their children. But, this is seen as misogynistic by other posters. The tables are somewhat turned in this case because the original poster earns more than her husband. This causes some posters to become even more adamant that the original poster is correct to prioritize logistics over her husband's professional growth and to not make career compromises. Some poster reframe the discussion. Rather than being a conflict between the husband's interests and the original poster's interests, they see it as the husband putting his interests above those of their children.

The next most active thread was the thread about homophobia in the "Website Feedback" forum that I covered some time ago. So, I am getting pretty far down the list of active threads today. That leaves me with a thread posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum titled, "So many essays !!! Wtf?". The original poster complains that in addition to the Common App essay, her child must submit between 2-4 additional essays for college applications. The original poster goes on to make a number of questionable allegations such as claiming that rich kids have the essays written for them and implying that girls are better writers than boys. The original poster does not get much sympathy from those who respond and several posters challenge the assumption about girls. Others question the allegation about rich kids. Most posters claim that the essay requirement is nothing new and is something for which the child should have planned. Some posters describe stratagies they used such as preparing essays during the summer before the senior year of high school. Other advice was to apply to fewer schools or apply to those without such essay requirements. Eventually the thread devolved to arguments about cheating or unfair practices used by others to prepare college essays. DCUM posters are highly sensitive the possibility that someone other than themselves might be gaming the system. The mere hint that someone might be cheating on their essays was enough for several posters to decide that essays should be eliminated from the application process.