DCUM Weblog

In order to write these posts, I begin each day by checking which threads were most active and since today is Monday, that means the most active threads over the weekend. Some days the list makes me want to turn around and go back to bed. Today is one of those days. The most active thread over the weekend, by some measure, was titled, "Question for the smart girls who snag the good guys early in life" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. Yes, the thread is just as nauseating as the title suggests that it would be. The original poster laments that the "good guys with the potential to make good money" are all spoken for early in life and that, because she lacked the skills to identify such guys, she missed out on finding one. Now she wants to know how those who did grab such guys learned to do it. In what I envision as a perfect world, nobody would have replied to this poster. In a slightly less than perfect world, posters would have only replied to tell the original poster that her post was ridiculous. But, in the world in which we live, most posters actually took the thread seriously. The original poster was advised to skip the "frat boys" and concentrated on the nerdy guys, especially engineers. Some posters disclosed that their mothers had taught them what to look for in a guy. Others said they had established their own plans and goals and found partners that would help achieve them. Several posters described their personal experiences, not all of which led to happiness. It took until page 7, but finally a poster replied in a manner that wasn't completely discouraging, writing "This thread is so dated. Tell your daughters to snag a degree that will enable the life they want."

Today I'll look at the most active threads over the past week, but skip over any that I've already discussed. That leaves the most active thread being a thread in the "Schools and Education General Discussion" forum titled, "Why does no one acknowledge how overworked teachers are?" The original poster links to a video in which a teacher begins a monologue by responding to someone asking her about her day. She says that her day is not yet over because she has a stack of material to take home, that she couldn't deal with the papers during her planning period because a parent made an unannounced visit, and that she hadn't been able to eat lunch. She says that her job forces her to pit her students against her own children because she has to choose to either fall behind at work or take work home and neglect her kids. That's the most information you will find about the video unless you watch it yourself because I didn't see any indication that anyone that responded in the thread had bothered to watch the video. Instead, posters simply launched into screeds representing their previously-held views about teachers. Generally posters in the DCUM education forums hold very dim views of teachers and such opinions are well-represented in this thread. Teachers are portrayed as complainers who don't understand how good they have it. Posters claim that only unmotivated college students choose to become teachers. Some respond that teaching is an easy job and, hence, doesn't deserve better pay. There is a fixation on teachers having the summer off which apparently justifies any and all difficulties teachers face. In the midst of this negativity, a few teachers try to explain the hurdles they face. By almost all accounts, things have become significantly more challenging since the pandemic. Hence, teachers are stressed more than usual. Some of the teachers who respond have a somewhat less negative view of things and describe how they are able to manage their job successfully and don't feel overworked. In the end, this thread is simply another demonstration of what I think will coin as "The DCUM Paradox": teachers are lazy, incompetent, overpaid whiners with too much vacation and it is absolutely essential that they spend several hours a day teaching our children. To be clear, that is not my view, but it does appear to be the prevailing opinion among our posters.

When the Covid pandemic led to many people working from home, couples that were used to being apart for much of the day often found themselves together almost all of the time. This was not an easy adjustment for everyone. A thread titled, "DH WFH is a huge turn off" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum describes one such example. The original poster explains that she has always worked from home and, prior to the pandemic, her husband went to an office. Since the pandemic, he has worked from home which has led to him staying up later at night, waking up later, showering later, and putting on pajamas earlier in the day. All of this is a huge turn-off to the original poster who has been unsuccessful in convincing her husband to return to his office. Most of those responding are not very sympathetic to the original poster whom they admonish for wanting to work from home while not wanting her husband to have the same arrangement which he clearly enjoys. Some of those responding are supportive of the original poster, often being able to relate because they are in similar circumstances. Several posters offer advice for improving the situation such as ways to get some time apart from one another. Some posters have a hard time finding anything to criticize about the original poster's husband and, therefore, don't find the original poster's anger believable. This actually led to one poster creating a thread in the "Website Feedback" forum asking if the original poster was a troll. I didn't find any evidence of trolling, but I did find that the original poster had sock puppeted a single response. Looking at the thread again today, I see that subsequent to that, the original poster sock puppeted almost exclusively. I still don't think that she is simply trolling. I suspect that she did not appreciate the responses she received and, as such, decided to manufacturer replies that were more to her liking.

When it was announced early yesterday morning that WNBA basketball star Britney Griner had been exchanged for Russian arms merchant Viktor Bout, a poster quickly started a thread in the "Off-Topic" forum titled, "Brittney Griner Coming Home!". Undoubtedly, this thread would have been the most active of the day yesterday. However, the thread quickly turned political and, because there was an existing thread about Griner in the "Political Discussion" forum, I locked the new thread and directed posters to the older one. That thread, titled, "Britney Griner deal", gained enough new pages yesterday that it could have topped the most active list itself. The two threads combined easily eclipsed all other topics in activity for the day. Unfortunately, rather than celebrate the release of an American who had been unjustly imprisoned in Russia, many posters immediately focused on the fact that another American held in Russia, Paul Whalen, was not being released. Indeed, the entire text of the original post in the Off-Topic thread was "Paul Whalen staying in jail." The poster did not bother providing any details about Griner who was the subject of the thread. Criticism that Whalen had not been freed continued even after the Biden Administration explained that Russia refused to release Whalen in exchange for Bout. The criticism continued even after Whalen's family expressed support for the exchange. Whalen supporters almost exclusively referred to him as a "marine" or a "former marine" despite the fact that he had been dishonorably discharged from the Corps over a decade ago. Generally, this was a very disheartening rush to unfairly disparage the exchange and, coupled with attacks on Griner herself, present Griner as undeserving and not worth the value of Bout. To be sure, Griner had her supporters who expressed joy at her release and who sought to combat the misinformation being spread about her. Most upsetting were the posts, thankfully few in number, that were blatantly racist or homophobic. I removed such posts as soon as they came to my attention.

The first thread I'll discuss today was titled, "I’m currently at a nude beach in Miami. AMA" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. I'm not sure how long this thread will be able to remain on the site before Google flags it as "adult content" and I have to remove it. So, if this thread interests you, read it quickly. The original poster says that she is posting from a nude beach and welcomes any questions from DCUM users. She says that everyone on the beach, like her, is using their phones because the water is too cold to get in. There is considerable interest among those posting questions in how well-equipped the men are, as well as the state of said equipment. The original poster admits to having similar interests. I assume that the observations she provides are disappointing to those asking, if not entirely surprising. Many posters are interested in her motivation for visting the beach which she explains as being a sort of personal challenge that she wanted to accomplish while she was still relatively attractive. The original poster repeatedly comments that the crowd appears to consist predominantly of gay men, something about which she comes across as being disappointed because they lack interest in her. Several posters describe their assumption that most of the beachgoers are fat and unattractive. The original poster confirms that this is largely the case, though there are both male and female exceptions, Some posters' questions were much more mundane, for instance asking about the use of sun screen. The original poster said that both she and her husband were able to avoid sunburn. A pleasant surprise for the original poster was the peacefulness of the beach which she attributes to the absense of children and teens. Ultimately, the original poster appears happy to have had this experience, but says she is unsure that she would do it again.

I am going to make a small change to my style for these posts beginning today. I will no longer routinely report where a thread is in the order of number of views and replies. I may mention those numbers from time to time, but I don't think they are very interesting in most cases so I'll leave them out.

That said, the first thread I'll discuss did lead both in number of views and replies, and by some measure. Titled, "So people will be taxed on venmo and zelle transactions?" and posted in the "Money and Finances" forum, the thread discusses recent changes to Internal Revenue Service reporting requirements. The title of the thread is erroneous with multiple errors. Due to requirements in the American Rescue Plan Act, third party payment systems are required to send 1099-K to users who receive over $600 in payments during a year. However, contrary to what the title of the thread implies, Zelle is not affected by the changes. Moreover, it is also wrong to suggest, as the title does, that funds transfered through these systems will be taxed. As is explained thoroughly in replies within the thread, the rule changes are aimed at businesses that receive payments through payment systems such as Venmo or PayPal. Businesses should have been paying taxes on this income all along and, as such, the rule changes should have no impact on their taxable income. What concerns many posters in the thread is what this means for transactions that are not income, for instance, reimbursements for meals or event tickets. Posters who appear knowledgable on the topic explain that since these transactions are not income, they are not taxable. This may present a record-keeping challenge so that in the event of an audit you can document that these are reimbursements. However, since most people don't get audited, this will not be much of an issue. In addition, several posters pointed out that transactions labeled as "Friends and Family" are not included in the reporting requirement. Many posters asked how they could report to the IRS that money transfers were reimbursements and the answer appears to be that there is no need to report. This is a fairly informative thread which really gets into the weeds of the topic at some points.

Yesterday's most active thread led the day in number of replies and was third in number of views. Posted in the "Family Relationships" forum, the thread was titled, "I never want to plan to see my SIL again". At its root, the topic of this thread is pretty simple. The original poster has a sister-in-law (her husband's brother's wife) who lives 1,000 miles away. Both families have young children who are a year apart in age, but the two have never met. The original poster finds it difficult to coordinate get-togethers with her sister-in-law, apparently because the sister-in-law is not much of a planner. As a result, the original poster wants to stop attempting to plan visits and only see her in-laws if they coincidentally cross paths at her husband's parents home. Understanding that this means that the two cousins may never have a relationship, the original poster asks if this is realistic. What complicates this topic is that the original poster didn't keep things this simple in her original post. Instead, she started off complaining that her sister-in-law constantly tries to one-up her and that she — the original poster — cuts off friends who do that. The original poster doesn't give any examples or further explanation of this "one-upping". As such, many of those responding ask for further details and a lot of discussion gets devoted to this issue with is really extraneous to the basic point that the original poster and her sister-in-law are simply unable to coordinate trips. Some posters suggest that the original poster should just leave any planning to her husband and his brother, but apparently they don't get along either. A few posters do express sympathy for the original poster, but several also target the original poster for criticism. I received at least one report asking if the original poster was a troll and there are a couple of troll accusations within the thread. I don't belive the original poster is trolling, but she certainly made the thread a lot more dramatic than was necessary.

Today I'll look at the most active threads over the weekend. A thread titled, "Can we talk Covid? What we did right and wrong" that was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum was first in number of views and second in number of replies for the weekend. I have only read a few posts in this thread and I have no interest in reading more of it. In fact, I've just locked it. Covid threads are frustrating because they all end up simply repeating what countless other threads have said and posters don't discuss so much as divert the thread to their own parochial obsessions. These threads remind me of the parable of the blind men and an elephant. If you are not familiar with this, a group of blind men encounter an elephant for the first time and attempt to describe it to each other. One, who feels the trunk believes that elephants are like snakes, one who touches the ear describes elephants as being like fans, a third who examines a leg believes that elephants are shaped like trees. This is how I see Covid discussions. For instance, those who had young children in school are often fixated on school closures and repeatedly stress any negative outcomes of the closures. While those without children who struggled during the closures are more willing to excuse or justify the action. It's like one group finding the elephant's trunk and the other its leg. Both versions of Covid are equally correct and equally wrong. On top of this, there are posters whose reactions are formed less by their experience with Covid, but more by prior political or other partisan biases. Anti-vax posters obsess over real or invented (mostly invented) negative effects of the Covid vaccine. Anti-immigration posters blame immigration. Pro-Trump posters credit him with the vaccine's rapid development, but warn that the vaccine will kill you. Everyone misuses statistics to prove whatever point they wish to confirm. I am convinced that the only way a constructive Covid discussion could be held is if it were heavily structured and closely moderated. The exact opposite of the wild west DCUM environment.

Today I'll look at the most active threads during the past week, but skip any that were covered in the daily posts. The thread with the most replies and the second highest number of views was a bit of a repeat. Titled, "Daughter ruining career prospects" and posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum, the original poster begins the post by saying that she had previously posted a similar thread in the College forum. Indeed she did, and that thread was the most active over the weekend not long ago. The original poster explains that while she and her husband advised their daughter to study economics, math, or statistics, the daughter chose to major in history instead. The parents then stressed the importance of internships, but their daughter is now planning to work as a summer camp counselor despite having corporate internship opportunities. The original poster asks for advice to convince her daughter to change her mind. If this all sounds vaguely familiar, it is likely because you remember the thread titled, "In tears about my daughter" that I wrote about almost a month ago. However, in that thread, the original poster's daughter chose to study English instead of history. As I mentioned in my summary of the "tears" thread, I received many reports asking if the original poster was a troll. At the time of my writing, I had not come to such a conclusion, but subsequently locked the thread because that turned out to be the case. I did not receive reports about this thread, but early this morning someone started a thread in the "Website Feedback" forum asking that I assure them that the poster was a troll. In this thread, the original poster engaged in considerable sock puppeting, often authoring posts in the guise of a third party and then replying to them identifying herself as the original poster. I am not sure what the original poster gets out of these threads, but she has now accounted for 60 pages of posts between the two. There are a lot of strange people out there, and a good number of them find their way to DCUM. I can't say that this poster is as bad as the poster who is obsessed with people's feet, but I also can't say that she is any better.

I prepare to write these posts by reviewing lists of the threads with the most views and the most replies. When I did that this morning, many of the top spots in both lists were held by topics that were sexual in nature. I've had a long-running issue with Google flagging posts as "Adult: Sexual content" even when there is nothing explicit in the thread. Too many such warnings can lead to our advertising being cut off, so I am obligated to remove these threads even though I disagree with the categorization most of the time. Therefore, this morning I decided to check which threads Google had flagged overnight and remove them before writing this post. Sure enough, this resulted in my deleting several of the most active threads. This is disappointing and frustrating because I didn't think any of the threads were inappropriate. So, while I will describe the threads I discuss as being the most active, that is not entirely true.