New group for posting selfshot users and make friends

When you place a user on ignore can they see any board posts you make under your username or are these blocked from them? Got a couple of strange fucks I’ve put on ignore.

I know motherless isn't a attack site. I was puzzle why this showed up.. I clicked *this isn't a attack site* or something like that.

What is the current listing status for motherless.com?

Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.

Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 2 time(s) over the past 90 days.

What happened when Google visited this site?

Of the 3740 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 83 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2013-04-06, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2013-04-06.

Malicious software is hosted on 2 domain(s), including ceskeporno.tv/, mfporn.com/.

1 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including crakmedia.com/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS2914 (NTT).

Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

Over the past 90 days, motherless.com appeared to function as an intermediary for the infection of 1 site(s) including newcamgals.com/.

This place is no longer pushing boundaries, it is in fact, because of the goody goody self appointed censors, just like all the other 10 a penny, bog standard porn sites. You could stick a pin in the screen and find a thousand sites just like it ( not recommended for fellow Mac users but OK for those with a PC) Censorship kills controversy, exchange of views, intellectual debate, artistic expression and can lead to a low sperm count and impotence in teenage boys and a desire to help out around the house instead of spanking the monkey all day. So come on guys, get some fucking balls and get your depraved shit on here. This has been a post by the 'Centre for Unfulfilled Net Tossers' or CUNT for short.

news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law, CNET has learned.

Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns, according to three individuals who have been negotiating with Leahy's staff over the changes. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.
Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

CNET obtained a draft of the proposed amendments from one of the people involved in the negotiations with Leahy; it's embedded at the end of this post. The document describes the changes as "Amendments intended to be proposed by Mr. Leahy."

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys' Association and the National Sheriffs' Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to "reconsider acting" on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy's original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an "adverse impact" on criminal investigations.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans' data "undercuts" the purpose of Leahy's original proposal. "We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents," he said.

An aide to the Senate Judiciary committee told CNET that because discussions with interested parties are ongoing, it would be premature to comment on the legislation.

Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that in light of the revelations about how former CIA director David Petraeus' e-mail was perused by the FBI, "even the Department of Justice should concede that there's a need for more judicial oversight," not less.

Markham Erickson, a lawyer in Washington, D.C. who has followed the topic closely and said he was speaking for himself and not his corporate clients, expressed concerns about the alphabet soup of federal agencies that would be granted more power:

There is no good legal reason why federal regulatory agencies such as the NLRB, OSHA, SEC or FTC need to access customer information service providers with a mere subpoena. If those agencies feel they do not have the tools to do their jobs adequately, they should work with the appropriate authorizing committees to explore solutions. The Senate Judiciary committee is really not in a position to adequately make those determinations.

The list of agencies that would receive civil subpoena authority for the contents of electronic communications also includes the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, the Postal Regulatory Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Mine Enforcement Safety and Health Review Commission.

Leahy's modified bill retains some pro-privacy components, such as requiring police to secure a warrant in many cases. But the dramatic shift, especially the regulatory agency loophole and exemption for emergency account access, likely means it will be near-impossible for tech companies to support in its new form.

A bitter setback
This is a bitter setback for Internet companies and a liberal-conservative-libertarian coalition, which had hoped to convince Congress to update the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act to protect documents stored in the cloud. Leahy glued those changes onto an unrelated privacy-related bill supported by Netflix.

At the moment, Internet users enjoy more privacy rights if they store data on their hard drives or under their mattresses, a legal hiccup that the companies fear could slow the shift to cloud-based services unless the law is changed to be more privacy-protective.

Members of the so-called Digital Due Process coalition include Apple, Amazon.com, Americans for Tax Reform, AT&T, the Center for Democracy and Technology, eBay, Google, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, TechFreedom, and Twitter. (CNET was the first to report on the coalition's creation.)

Leahy, a former prosecutor, has a mixed record on privacy. He criticized the FBI's efforts to require Internet providers to build in backdoors for law enforcement access, and introduced a bill in the 1990s protecting Americans' right to use whatever encryption products they wanted.

But he also authored the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which is now looming over Web companies, as well as the reviled Protect IP Act. An article in The New Republic concluded Leahy's work on the Patriot Act "appears to have made the bill less protective of civil liberties." Leahy had introduced significant portions of the Patriot Act under the name Enhancement of Privacy and Public Safety in Cyberspace Act (PDF) a year earlier.

One obvious option for the Digital Due Process coalition is the simplest: if Leahy's committee proves to be an insurmountable roadblock in the Senate, try the courts instead.

Judges already have been wrestling with how to apply the Fourth Amendment to an always-on, always-connected society. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police needed a search warrant for GPS tracking of vehicles. Some courts have ruled that warrantless tracking of Americans' cell phones, another coalition concern, is unconstitutional.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies already must obtain warrants for e-mail in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, thanks to a ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010.

The night I fingered a crackhead and why I remember it fondly. 

A used to assist a friend in throwing some epic parties 15ish years ago. One night, after a few too many, I fucked a short portly blonde. She wasn't ugly by any stretch of the imagination, but she wasn't a stunner. She sat firmly in the 6-7 range. You know? Attractive enough to fuck sober, but you worry they'd get clingy and want to be a thing. Even now, at 37, chatGPT rates me an 8.5 for conventional attractiveness, even after I told it to be harsh, so you know... I've got that goin' for me. BUT, to my shock, she pulled a switcharoo and didn't want people to know she fucked me. ME!? 

Fast forward 12 years, and we reconnect on FB. Her husband just died, I just got a divorce, and it was nice to have someone to talk to. Her condition was evident in the photos that she was a user, but we weren't "talking" like that, so it was whatever. We hung out once, and it was a buddy hang, not a fuck buddy hang. 

Months go by, and I start receiving texts. The government took her sex trophies and she was homeless. Not like this was an ongoing situation, this had all happened within the last 5 hours. She had a ride somewhere later that night, but was spending some downtime at a casino. I thought, "Well, damn...I could bring her food and toss her 50 bucks, seeing as how she's broke and probably hasn't eaten all day." I get there, and after a while we decide to head to my car to continue our very lengthy conversation. It's, like, 2:30AM.

It was here that she started to fall asleep while I rubbed her boney shoulders. No exaggeration, she is 4'11 (jail records confirm this) and at the time MAYBE 85lbs. She coils into my lap, so I slide my hand towards her hips and continue rubbing. I'm a stand up guy. A saint, really. So, I ask permission to slide into her panties and I get the okay! I'm using both hands to grip her hip bone, and I might as well have been gripping a prop skeleton. I slide my hands in and started to rub her pussy. She lets out this raspy crackhead moan... You know the one. She honestly sounded like she was on death's door, which is actually why I'm telling this story, as it occured to me today that I should Google whether or not she was still alive. This went on for about 15 minutes. 

The pros, and why I remember it fondly: No ass cheeks. Everything was easy access. No thighs to move out of the way... it was just pussy and bird legs. Her little body curled up in my lap next to my hard dick made me feel massive! 

The cons: Dehydration. She couldn't get wet and her pussy was a walking swiftly into "don't touch it" territory smell-wise. These crackheads just don't care for themselves the way they should. 

The end. 

Uploading fails. Last night I couldn't get anything uploaded. This afternoon at least I get four images uploaded before I get "System Errors" message. How can this be a user contributed site if users can't contribute?

Typical motherless user? IDK still funny as fuck though

Anyone have the link to a video. Saw it a while back and can’t find it. It’s by a woman or user named queen snake. And she has this blonde woman laying above thumbtacks on the floor. And she is whipping the shit out of her pussy. I think there’s a short clip like 90 seconds of it but I’m looking for the full video that’s like 20-30 min.

True story, last week my wife took off with her family to the east coast for her cousins graduation. So I planned to have some friends over for a little party that Saturday. Like planned couple of buddies and my cousin and his girl came bye . There was liquor, weed, pills and all sorts of party goods. I knew my cousin and his girl were meth users on occasion. It was like 2 am when people started leaving and I passed out in my bed. I woke up around 315 to get a drink and I see my cousin and his girl in the couch watching porn and playing with each other. My cousin asked if I wanted to try some meth. I said fuck it why not. So we smoked some bowls and say with them watching her jerk my cousin off while he fingered her. I got so horny my cousin's girl asked if I have ever been with a guy. I told her that I never had but I was open for anything being all spun out at the time. She then began to tell me that my cousin was bi and if I would like to join them in a threesome. I was surprised but I knew my cousin was a little feminine. I smoked another bowl and agreed to it. She came and sat bye me and unzipped my pants and began to jerk my cock. She kneeled between my legs and began to suck my cock. My cousin got closer to me and bend over with his girl and took my cock in his mouth. At first I felt a little weird but he was sucking my dick like no one ever had. We fucked till 4pm the next day. It was the hottest sex I have ever had.

at least 4 galleries submitted and none have appeared.this is a so-called user contributed site but if we are not treated with some respect after all the effort we put in and you in admin cant even be bothered ,oh i cant be bothered any more