I just wanted to say that while this may be true of some young women in their 20s, this is not the case for me. Yes, I have never sent an email to a much older man saying how much I love his profile. But if I did, I would mean it.

Sorry that you have had to deal with so many dishonest people on this site.

The person will have to accept it? I hope we do not have to accept IMs now, LOL. But, seriously, I do not like ignoring people when they IM me. When I "ignore" someone in that way, it is usually because I am busy talking with someone else.

I wouldn't say that it's his lack of message board posts. I mean, I don't post much but have talked to a lot of people through messages. It's rather the fact that he only joined this site on 12/17/08...and probably his approach.

That said, my advice, like yours, is for him to give it more time. Not with the same women, of course, but to find ones here who will be interested in him.

LOL. No, you're okay.

And, s1owhand, I know what you mean, of course. I have no problem with fun pictures like you and others in this thread described/display.

To everyone else who complimented my post, thank you. All of you seem like great people. Maybe I will start to post more often, at the suggestion of one in this thread.

Take care, everyone.

~Forbes~

I care, as well as a lot of other people. This is to everyone: If it's a picture of a car or some other non-offensive object, creature or famous person, that's fine. But posting a fake (human, of course) picture of yourself, trying to pass that picture off as you is completely shady and dishonest. As much as personality matters, so does physical attraction. I'm not going to fault anyone for meeting someone in person and then running the other way when it turns out that that person looks nothing like their picture.

It's not just the physical aspect of it, but the honesty aspect. Letting someone think you look one way just to get that person to date you and then say, "Hey, I guess you never really cared about me if you are going to let a little thing like what I look like break us up" when that person wants to back out is hardly any different than a woman trying to trap a man by saying she's pregnant when she's really not. If it's as simple as not caring about looks, then that person would not have presented a fake picture in the first place and would have trusted his or her personality to see them through.

Talking with someone over the Internet is not that much different than talking with someone in person. Imagine that in-person person suddenly having a different face the next day. It would be an extremely weird and difficult situation. You would feel as though you are talking with a stranger, no matter how much in common that person has with you as did "the previous person." When I think of my loved ones, the first thing I think of is their faces. I'm pretty sure all people do. We do not simply love the personality but the package the personality comes in as well -- the face.

To the poster of this thread, if you mean any of this, I completely see where you are coming from.

Back at you, DarkSpartan.

It was great reading what you had to say.

DrakSpartan, whoa, I wasn't truly comparing this to a bank robbery. I
was more so giving an example of how there is extreme danger with a bank
robbery, and they do threaten to kill people a lot of the times, and
people have died from bank robberies, and people often contemplate on
tackling the person during that bank robbery.

I didn't say that I find your post sad. Goodness, you definitely mean
another poster there.

However, yes, I stated that it is NOT new that people won't charge at
someone spraying bullets, and this guy was spraying bullets, there is no
Hollywood image in my head about what was going on there. I mean, I am
quite familar with guns, and the people there said that this kid seemed
like a pro at reloading and handling his guns. That surely caused even
more fear with everyone. From reports, it sounds like the guy was in the
hall, where nobody was to tackle him anyway, and in the other
classrooms...students were already fleeing (as they should have been),
not contemplating a plan to "Wait, let's turn around and go back and
face the shooter". Furthermore, with the bank robbery exmaple, I was
more so talking about how people are held hostage. Sure, in a bank
robbety, more people may be bound to survive than die, but the threat of
death is still highly there, and the people go through the same fear as
these young people went through with this shooter, except elevated for
these young people. With a mass murder...the people are held hostage
there while the murderer tries to kill them or does kill them, just like
that Amish Masscare.

I respect your thoughts. But mine are still skeptical of people running
at someone with a gun while that person is shooting. A person has to
compose a plan as a group to strike when you get a good chance to, if
you're truly going to strike as a group. To just say "Oh, let's all
charge at him while he's shooting. It doesn't matter if a few, or all of
us die" when the person and the ones with him or her have a chance to
just save each other by leaving out the windows, and alerting others to
do the same is unrealistic. Sure, no extensive plan needs to be composed
when you decide to tackle the person on your own, but one person having
tackled this guy...it sounds like there wasn't a good chance to do so,
without him or her having died on the spot, just as was already
mentioned by another poster that it was heard that someone did try that.

Anyway, I've mainly already stated my thoughts on this subject.

~Forbes~

As I stated before, and someone else stated, anyone who would have tried
to tackle him wouldn't have had the chance to succeed in that tackle
while he's spraying bullets everywhere.

A poster above me mentioned that he thought that he heard of people who
did try and tackle this guy, but that they got shot down.

Furthermore, concerning the idea that a group should have tackled
him...I'm just not sure how realistic it is that a group of young people
(or even a group of middle-aged people, or old people) would all run at
the guy while he's shooting everywhere. I get the notion that "Oh, they
could have charged at him from behind"...but we're not certain that they
had a good chance to do that.

It isn't new in school shootings, and bank robberies, or any instance
where a person or people that are being held hostage to not all form a
group and rush at a deadly person sporting a gun, no matter what part of
the world something like that happens in. This has been an interesting
thread though. Thanks for the discussion, MikeMontana.


~Forbes~

Didn't he mail the letter after his first attack, before he killed
plenty of people? I mean, if that was the case, then he had time to mail
the letter because that was before he went on his deadlier rampage.

As for the subject of people needing to stop him, people helped each
other out, but that guy was spraying bullets, he could have easily
killed a lot of people either way as of someone trying to take him down.

I'm just not sure that anyone can say that as many lives were taken
wouldn't have happened had someone tackled him. But like another poster
suggested, someone else might have tried to tackle him.

I'm certain that if the opportunity had presented itself, a person would
have lunged at him in a means to knock him to the floor, and get the
guns out of his hands. But while the guy is spraying bullets is not a
good opportunity to do so. Hmm, when he was reloding? Maybe fear, seeing
him reload his guns so fast kept that option closed as well.

~Forbes~