Wow, this is a doomer post, and I understand why you, the OP might be worried about this.

But, I don't think a draft is going to happen, and I'll tell you several reasons why. With any hope, this might put your mind at ease. Also, apologies in advance but I don't think I can answer this thread without getting somewhat political.

I suppose it's easier for me to be calm about this, as I'm not at all in the target category - too old, not physically up to snuff, etc. But what I'll tell you, is similar to what my father told me back in '03. There was a rumor that Dubya wanted to institute a draft for the Iraq conflict, possibly to garner votes for John Kerry. Back then, like you, I was afraid there might be a draft and I might get caught up in it.

1) Most of those age 18-24 aren't eligible in the first place.

That link Munchies provided was certainly illuminating. I had expected the number to be 80-85%, or 15-20% eligible. I wasn't far off. I do notice those numbers are from '17, I wonder what they are now.

Years back, I remember hearing some crazy general who mentioned on live TV that something like 67% of those age 18-24 are too heavy to join even if they want to, and it's a national security concern. I think he was just being fat-phobic because this doesn't actually matter.

2) It would be political suicide. It hasn't been politically feasible since the late 60s/early 70s (Vietnam), and would be insanely unpopular.

I'm not just talking about today's young people, or if you want to go some years back, those who are now up to 40 years old. Ones who increasingly want nothing to do with the armed forces. They don't like or support the conflicts they end up in. They've heard too many horror stories of a recruiter performing bait-and-switch. They've seen how "well" the disabled veterans are taken care of. And who wants to fight, potentially even die for a system that seems to increasingly work against them and not want them to succeed?

Older folks sure as hell don't want their younger relatives to potentially be forced to fight either. It would be very, very deeply unpopular, I promise you this.

World War 2 was different - everyone understood the threat the Third Reich and Axis Powers presented. An Allied victory was the only acceptable outcome, whatever the cost might be.

But, recall that in Vietnam, thousands of American soldiers died and they didn't win; that's what the draft meant. Between that and the current geopolitical climate, I don't see folks forgetting that anytime soon.

3) Voluntary enrollment actually went up this year compared to last.

Some hardcore Trumpet MAGA type told me this, which at first I didn't believe. But I looked it up. It's true, the Army recruited more soldiers than they did the previous year.

Now, he seems to have bought the propaganda hook, line, and sinker. He said it was because would be soldiers didn't like the prior leadership, meaning Biden, et. al.

But, I'm really supposed to believe they feel better about Darth Bone-Spurs? Sorry but no, I don't believe that for a New York minute. Here's what's more likely happening.

Back in '09, there was a huge surplus of would be recruits. At one point the waiting list got to be a year long.

So if anything, it's younger people thinking they're out of options so they feel forced into it. Average person I know would rather work in an Amazon warehouse or even fast food, but they might find themselves not able to even do that. That's basically what happened back in '09.

This is actually the most disturbing of these points I've made. It's also known Army recruiters focus their efforts in depressed, low-income areas knowing those people have fewer options.

4) It's a lot easier to hire mercenary organizations.

Should be obvious.

5) In the armed forces themselves, the idea of a draft is also massively unpopular.

For some folks, the armed forces really are a calling, and more power to them. For these folks, they accept everything that service entails, and take it seriously. This is actually an advantage to volunteer/optional recruitment. If not forced to be there, just about everyone who's there, wants to be there. This in fact, can make the force far more effective.

Now that said, I've heard the modern military is facing some challenges, despite this.

But imagine how much worse it would be, if 1/2 or 2/3's of the soldiers don't want to be there. They'd basically have to keep cracking the whip. It's going to be a very ineffective force.

A long time ago, my father suggested I should join. I didn't trust the recruiters, so I asked other soldiers. Every single one of them said, if you don't 110% want to do it and be there, don't even think about it.

I almost want Trump to attempt this; the political fallout even in his own party would be truly bigly on a scale never before seen.

This reads more like a personals ad, which is okay but I'm moving it to the correct board.

I replied in a PM.

Why are you interested in a degree in mechanical engineering? What do you hope to get from it?

Is it because it's something you think will enjoy immensely?

Or is it because you believe it will leverage a skill or ability you have? It's likely very heavy on math as well as spatial awareness. Are you good at those mechanical puzzles? The kind of thing you might find in souvenir and knick-knack shops?

I get that you don't want to do the work you do forever, I doubt many really do.

However, office-politics and the business world has a way of sucking passion away from you.

Focus on what you're good at, even if you don't necessarily fully enjoy it (but hopefully don't hate either). This makes it easier to perform well to get those raises and promotions.

A job is a means to an end to get you money, so you can have a comfortable life and the ability to do the things you'd rather be doing, for fun and enjoyment, and money is what gets you there.

Sure, money might not buy happiness by itself, but can sure as hell buy avoidance of sadness. No one really wants to constantly think about bills, engaging in mental gymnastics because of this (which can cause immense stress), or spend hours a week attempting to chase the cheapest or most economical deals and sales because that extra $1-10 means the difference between paying a bill, or wondering how you're paying for an car repair, or deciding whether to eat lunch this week or pay the power bill.

It might have been $12, once upon a time, but I can't remember when.

I also remember a time when there were three packages of $9.99/mo. each for either unlimited views of content premium or otherwise (the content package), unlimited messages in a social package, and there was a "dating package" that was similar. Or it was $19.99/mo. for everything.

The dating package didn't make sense so it was combined into the social package. So there was a time you could save 1 cent a month if you got both packages separately, because 2 x $9.99 = $19.98.

Now it's $8.25 for either unlimited messages, *or* unlimited content views, or $16.50/mo. for both.

I do agree it's a little frustrating, and at times I've wondered if the restrictions could be changed somehow. Now this is just high level spitballing, and I haven't really thought this through too much.

For example, unlimited message views, but replies and sending messages are still limited. This single change alone would solve a lot of complaints about short or worse, terrible messages and might encourage more thoughtful messages.

Another idea might be to allow free members to always send unlimited messages and replies to premium members. This change alone might motivate more subscriptions.

Now, I know some may wish there was no subscription at all, but that isn't economically feasible. Most free online services receive their funding through alternative means, such as advertising revenue and/or selling of data.

Being an adult-themed web site, FF is basically locked out of advertising revenue, since advertisers often don't want to be advertised in such places. I know, I know, perhaps in a parallel universe there would be ads about food that emphasize how many calories it has, and advertise weight gain potential. But that's not the world we live in.

Selling of data for any purpose, whether as aggregate marketing data or something more nefarious, is not something FF has ever done, even prior to the GDPR.

So, neither of these are options. I do remember when hiccupx basically offered this site totally for free, but it very quickly became time consuming, and I have no doubt the hosting bill increased substantially. It wasn't a realistic option to keep offering it for free; it had to start making some money.

I get it. I don't really talk about this much, but I run an online service free for users and no advertising. I'm about $70/mo. out of pocket every month and I've done this for more than a decade. But, it doesn't require massive amounts of time. If I had to spend hundreds of dollars or more, and/or spend 20+ hours a week every single week on administrative, maintenance, and development tasks for it, this simply wouldn't be feasible.

Given the overall situation, I think the owner has managed to strike a pretty good balance, and has done so for more than 20 years.

My vote is no body hair, on the belly or otherwise at all, whether on myself or anyone I'm with. Scalp, eyebrows, and eye lashes only.

Love love love how soft and smooth the feeling of chubby or plump along with hairless skin feels.

In my opinion, such a partial story would be a violation of rule #7.

Let's look at what it says, bold emphasis mine:

"7. Non-commercial use only

This website is for non-commercial use only unless you have prior written agreement from the website owner. Advertising of products, services, paysites and cash apps are strictly forbidden throughout the website in public and private areas, in text, images, videos and all other forms of media.

We recognize that some web models use their paysite names both professionally and socially, therefore you may use these as usernames."

I think a lot of people may not fathom the amount of effort it can take. Sometimes, it takes hours, at least due in part to how I don't want to be sloppy and check things out. I'm happy to continue engaging in the effort though, to give back to a community that has given me a lot.

Stopping the scammers who manage to register anyway, is a never ending game of whack-a-mole. And for the most part, it's volunteers who stop them.

There's no set schedule, it's whenever we have a free moment. We do have lives and obligations.

Given we have quite a large, diverse membership, it's pretty much guaranteed that not everyone will like everyone else. However, everyone is expected to get along with everyone else, at least in public. The simple fact of the matter is, there can be user disagreements that aren't covered by the rules. That's just life.

This is why blocks only prevent private messages from that person. However, one small change I may like to see is for the block to prevent comments on one's content (such as pictures) from the blocked person.

I saw one person reply to this thread about other users who are "not respecting boundaries." While it can sometimes be difficult to prove, this is unacceptable behavior under rule #3 (respect others). So please, report this behavior.

A single report is not guaranteed to result in bans, particularly since without evidence provided, it does turn into a "he said, she said" match, and because real users are typically given chances to not repeat this behavior. However, multiple repeated incidents can and do eventually result in bans of varying lengths.

One more thing... if the blocks are being used up because of scammers, please... don't do this.

Don't just block scammers and hope they go away. That just gives them more opportunities to scam others. Report them, and give as much information as you can. If you can provide a link of say, where stolen pictures came from, even better.

If we determine they are scammers, and we often do, rest assured, they will get banned. Scamming is an instant ban offense upon discovery.

However, it's not always feasible to check every single account, which means we rely a great deal on you, the users to point them out.