Category: Let's talk
I know I hadn't seen her on that much, so I checked her profile. And sure enough, it was disabled. I wondered how that happened?
I think she made more than one account.
Most of the time setting up more than one account is the reason users get disabled.
Why users continue to do that is beyond me. It achieves nothing.
Bob
I wondered that as well, though I'm sure the previous two posters are probably correct. Clearly she did something, though.
I never actually saw her on much anyway.
Given some of the stuff that goes on around here, one must have to do something pretty bad to get banned.
that's debatable.
Besides, I don't think she was telling the truth about anything anyway.
i never really talked to her that much. maybe once or twice.
Just follow the tos and you shouldn't get band. At least, that is the belief I cling to.
Well, there was that incident with Cruel and Tender Elhimina a few years ago. What a mess.
She forgot a password to another account, but I don't know if she got temperarely banned or perminintly banned. I saw that Soul Reaper's account was disabled yesterday, I don't know if it is today.
i think the fact she got band was quite riddles it doesn't sound like any communitie leaders had a talk with her to see what was going on before they band her and the account was found out by one user who's hardly ever on and lizzy she tolde the truth i really miss her and the zone hasn't been the same since she got band long live you jessy!!
Well, if you create multiple accounts, IMO, the CLs shouldn't have to discuss anything with you because you were the one who created the second account. I mean, it doesn't take a lot of sense to know that having multiple accounts isn't allowed. As for people being banned in general, I had a situation a few months ago where I was threatened; however, I could tell by the way the message was written that it was BS. Nevertheless, No one, and I do mean NO ONE, is going to threaten me and get away with it, so I reported it and poof. He's gone now, but from what I've heard from other people, this person had been threatening or saying inappropriate things to other people on here but nothing was done. I can't say for sure if that was true of course, but if that's happening, I encourage the one who is being threatened to say something. I know most of the people on here are blind people who honestly don't have much else to do but sit around on the computer, but you don't know who you're talking to or dealing with, and I'd rather be safe than sorry. People talk a lot of crap on here which is why I have publics turned off. As for the zone not being the same since RW has disappeared, I agree, however, I think a lot of what RW had to say was BS anyway. We get a lot of that on here.
if a user has multiple accounts there is nothing to discuss.
Not having multiple accounts is surely the most well-known of the TOS since it is the most common reason for users to be banned.
And Jessie had multiple accounts - not just one, hence why she has never and will never be allowed back.
Oh, trey's just mad cuz he lost one of his cyberers. Heheheheh.
How does banning work? is it by IP address?
In answer to the question "How does it work?" I might hazard a guess:
"It works very well, thank you."
extremely. ;)
LOL, Leo, and very true, Claire.
Yes, Jessie had duplicates, and didn't even try to hide that her last account was one such. Hence why she was disabled.
So, she forgot the password to another account. Is that why she decided to come back as a male on at least one of her accounts? I just feel like she knew what she was doing.
Of course she did. I mean, how can you create multiple accounts by mistake. LOL:) Oh well! I guess the dating and relationships board isn't getting so many hits, and the conversations are definitely not as over the top. LOL that's how you know all that is fake. I mean, I know there are people who don't mind sharing everything with everybody, but her posts were starting to become unbelievable.
I know her in person, and I know the real truth. Next year, she will go to my school.
I somehow got the idea she was in her twenties, but if you said she'll be attending your school, and you're 14 or so, that would make her a teenager unless 25 and 26 year olds are still going to school in Colorado. INTERESTING! Very interesting. So I suppose none of the nonsense she posted on the boards is true either. I'm not too surprised. Of course, I've said that before.
Now I'm wondering if all that stuff about her getting shot was true. Yes, she said she was in her twenties and had been out on her own and if not married, at least had several boyfriends, one of them being very abusive. She made it sound as if this abusive boyfriend was a thing of years past, so this does look really weird. I like what I knew of Jessie, but a lot of stuff isn't adding up.
The tos don't say you must always tell the truth so I doubt it matters. And I would guess banning works by ip address.
She just turned 16. She hasn't been shot, non of that stuff is even true, Jessie isn't her name.
LOL, I'm dying over here. I can just imagine all the horn dogs who are over 18. Oh all of you got fooled!!!! ROFL!! Too funny!
Even by Zone standards this is most strange and amusing.
Not too funny actually. She is underage, and this is the sort of thing, fellows, that could cost you 15+ years in prison plus a permanent sex offenders' record requiring you to self-register every place you went after that.
I was equally fooled: thinking she was an adult, if perhaps a very unstable and perhaps mentally challenged one.
Based on her content, I thought she probably came from a southern poor white environment. For all we know, in real life, she could be an Asian kid in the suburbs.
As to the getting shot, recently I've heard there are a lot of falsified injuries online, which in its own way could be seen as preying upon the sympathies of other people. Basically, on a site like this where few of us see each other in offline life, one can never truly know. Gotta take everything with a grain of salt, and expect to be doubted yourself. But seriously, the fact is, if she is underage, the amount of male attention she got on here could wind a few slots at the local six-by-niner hotel gettin filled by some of the membership on here.
Might be this experience may render some people more discreet and watchful of their surroundings.
I agree Leo. I know I laugh about it, but honestly, something could've gotten serious and went really wrong and people would've been in trouble. It's a good reminder to all of us that people aren't always what they seem especially online. Who knows if the people that say they know her are telling the truth. I've been on this site for 7 years, and I've seen a lot of people come and go, and I learned pretty quickly that most people are just talk and most of it is a lie.
I can totally see why people would go by a false name online to protect their true identity, and maybe even a false location, but beyond that, there is no reason to lie. As for me personally, I'd rather give a very vague version of the truth than lie, but, hey, that's just me.
I don't even get why someone would give a false name. I do understand not giving away your location though. Most people on here who know me know my name. To me, that's my name. Maybe I'm weird, but giving out another name to me would be lying because it's not me. LOL, That probably doesn't make sense to a lot of people. You may or may not ever learn much else about me, but Meaghan has been my name for 24 years, and I will always be Meaghan on or offline.
Oh wow, and all that public cyber sex she was having on here, yikes!
Obviously she was quite disturbed. As far as the lies about getting shot, well for all we know it could have happened. I think few people know the real me, after all.
I think it is a stark reminder to everyone that you never know who you're talking to online, and that if you're going to engage in discussions of a sexual nature, to be mindful of the fact that the individual you're talking to may well be under age (as appears to have been the case here), and that in the eyes of the law, not knowing someone is under age doesn't let you off.
Definitely. To be honest though, I don't think the zone is a place where tons of people would get to know the "real me." Not that I lie about who I am, but again, this is online. I approach things differently online than I do if I were speaking with you in person. PS, I'm really glad I have publics turned off. I will definitely keep them that way.
Just saying, What if they give their consent? this is online, after all, and conversations can be logged. You don't know who you're typing to online
and people wonder why I'm so standoffish online; this is one reason why.
Well, I guess this goes to show, if you don't know a person in real life, you can never really be sure who you are talking to online, they can tell you anything you want to hear, and you would never know the difference. Besides, we have a tendancy to fill in the blanks with who we think the person is, or who we want the person to be, which can be a world apart from reality.
I guess it's time for me to make a confession. My name is really Ginger and I just turned 21. I have long red hair and green eyes. I'm 5 feet four inches tall and weigh 105 pounds. My bra size is 34 C and... if you want to know more, just send me a private quicknote. <grin> oh, I've recently discovered that I'm a lesbian. I didn't know that I was in to women until a couple of weeks ago when my friend Sharlotte and I got drunk and... Oh, I'm so embarrassed. I can't post this here, but feel free to write to me and I'll tell you all about it. Have a nice day.
Oh... ginger, you were so brave to do that, my sweety pumpkin! Now I think I ought to confess:
My name is really sharlotte. I'm 36 years old. I have pink hair, and green eyes. My bra size is 64c. I have been feeling soooooooooooooooo soooooooooooooooooooooo loanly the last couple of years, but then, eventually, my grapy Ginger came along. Oh my god, she's the love of my life, and I love her to bladepoint! Like, honestly, I'd never let anything happen to her... if anybody were to touch her, I'd burst into tears and beg them for mercy. As you can tell, I'm a very sensative woman, so pleas guys do not break my heart. I want to date somebody else too. I don't want anyone to hurt me in anyway, but I don't care if I hurt them.
I enjoy fundling puppys down there too. So, if anybody who was a puppy wants to date me, we can all have a threesome... but I don't want to talk to much about my sexlife, it's a bit imbarracing, because of the naughty freeky stuff I get up to. So, if you want to know more about me, pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease send me a pm, i would love to hear from you! i love you so so much!
I've honestly seen zoners like that. LOL, they want to act like they're private and stand-offish, but it's just not true. LOL, the last 2 posts were too funny. LOL:) OK, so the puppy part was disturbing, but the rest of it was funny. However, I don't doubt that there are people on here who like puppies.
This place gets more and more fucked with each passing day.
@Razeem / Post 38:
They cannot give their consent as a minor, even if they stand in front of you, tell you till they're blue in the face, and sign it in blood. That is the law in a majority of postindustrial nations, in particular western nations. The basic reasoning goes something like: they do not have sufficient faculties to make informed consent with an adult in a sexual situation.
Right, thanks for confirming lio
I am really an alien from outer space. lol
"Just saying, What if they give their consent?" If they're under age then they can't consent, so the words are meaningless.
right
that's why people under 18 really shouldn't be on here anyway, too much adult content. If the zone ever gets dragged in to a law suit or criminal case cause of some parent this place will disappear.
Agreed, so that said, should this place be 18 or over. I really don't think so. I think it is up to the people to read the profile befor they go cybor-humping each others brains out.
But as we've just seen, profiles don't have to be truthful.
That's the point. And even if the site did switc to an 18 or over place it would be easy for someone underage to lie about that. It happens on MySpace all the time. Well it did before Myspace sucked and everybody switched over to Facebook.
Probably an unpopular viewpoint, but nobody under 18 should be having sex anyway.
I can't believe Rebelwoman would lie! Say it ain't so!
It's entirely possible, especially since the Zone probably can't screen members.
How would they be able to? Behind a keyboard in kalamazoo somewhere, a person can say or do anything without anyone from zimbobway knowing.
On one hand I sort of agree about the zone being a place for people who are only over 18, but yet I know that will never happen. The thing is though, there aren't that many people who regularly come on here. If my calculations are correct, it's definitely less than 100 people. I know a lot of people think the zone is the end all be all, but statistically speaking, it's barely a blip on the radar. However, it only takes 1 incident for that to change. Take the wrong person with the right amount of money and a very good story and someone is headed for some trouble. Of course, one would hope that the managers of this site have some kind of legal protection.
Here's an idea. How about not using the zone as a place for siber sex? ...hahaha, right. Like that would ever be a reality. Seriously, though, how should the zone itself be held accountable for this? Would Skype be in any legal trouble if someone underage had Skype sex? Would your internet provider be held responsible if you were using their services to look up child porn? Should the burden not fall on whomever the legal adult is? and if both people are underage, shouldn't it fall on the older of the two? I'm not saying this is currently the case as far as the law is concerned; I'm just asking in terms of morality.
I have long held the view that the site should be considered suitable for eighteen and over only, by virtue of some of the topics here e.g. the sex addicts board on grafiti for example.
Of course making the site eighteen and over wouldn't necessarily mean that people wouldn't lie about their age to get on, but it might make it more difficult. If as a parent you have decent parental controls on the computer that is being accessed by your children, then it's a lot easier to get sites blocked if their specifically eighteen and over, less easy if they're not.
But in truth that's not the topic being discussed here really is it? the issue here is that a user whom others thought was over eighteen turned out to in fact be under sixteen and as such under the age of consent, and yet said user was fairly vocal in terms of her sexually explicit discussions both on the boards and it would seem in private quicknote exchanges with other users.
Jess makes a valid point in fact when she said that perhaps users here need to think before engaging in ciber sex with other users via quicknotes etc, or in fact via skype and other media. Because really, is there any need?
And what users need to consider is that if you're having ciber sex with someone who turns out to be under age and their family decide to take action, it is you personally that will be accountable. If there were public exchanges and a family took action the site could well be held to account (although I am unclear on the laws surrounding accountability for what is posted on websites) but a private exchange definitely comes back to the individual user. And if you are found to be involved in sexually explicit conversations with a minor you could find yourself in a lot of trouble, in terms of legally, in terms of time on the sex offenders register, in terms of your future career prospects etc. It is not something to be taken lightly.
And do think about this:
Those who had sexually explicit discussions with rebelwoman, how do you feel knowing you were having such discussions with a fifteen year old?
How would anyone on here feel if they found out the person they were talking to was in fact only fifteen, or younger?
It is definitely worth bearing in mind before you start engaging on that level, and it's worth bearing in mind that this will be your life that's ffected if it all comes to a head, not the fifteen year old's. He/she is under the age of consent, and legally not accountable. However wrong that might seem, that's how it is, in law.
It's all a very interesting social experiment. So much mindless depravity and deep meaningful conversation all in one place.
I tend to agree with you Ocean Dream. I really do, but I know a lot of people don't. Sugarbaby also brought up some really good points as well. I know I don't have publics turned on, but I've heard from those that do that there are sometimes public "activities" (If you will), going on.
this is a big part of the reason I keep mine off. I'm just not interested in that sort of conversation, and especially not publicly. And here's the confirmation.
That's exactly why I turned public quicknotes off pretty much right after I joined the Zone.
Just to play devil's advocate here for a moment, you all do realize that you are assuming she's fifteen and in high school, based on the testimony of one person. you have no more evidence for her being fifteen, than the people who cybered with her did of her being 25 or whatever. I went through this entire board, and the only place it ever says categorically that she is fifteen, is when one person said it and presented it as fact. It just happened that that fact fit your assumption and what you wanted the evidence to say, so you jumped at it. So really, are you any better?
I agree with Cody. no one knows if that person is telling the truth about Jessie being a teenager. for all we know, it could be someone trying to spite her. what's done is done, though. if nothing else, hopefully people learn to be careful.
@Jessica / OceanDream:
From what I understand, and I'm not a legal professional just a hired geek in the mass machinery of the software industry: A site wouldn't be held responsible, much less liable for damages. What could be done, however, is subpoena, which means turning over all content from the site to the courts. The ACLU will try and fight it, of course: that has happened to Craigslist. My experience in a past situation (nonsexual) was that both sides make it a pain in the ass for the developer / admins of a site, database or other online system where the courts want to do mass data mining / aggregation. Their legal words for it differ but the same goes.
Neither this site nor Craigslist can be ordered to shut down, as far as I know, but Craigslist and other places have been subpoenaed to deliver data on specific users. The site is just the vehicle for the activity, and the data is just evidence for the courts to piddle with in doing their analysis, or whatever the legal terminology is.
As to the age restriction, I believe the laws are 13? Claire's got some valid points and is absolutely right as it pertains to the flagging used by parent control systems. I should think Claire's questions would be quite sobering in this case.
At this point there is no proof one way or the other that Rebelwoman was 15 or in her 20's, but just the fact that this has been called into question should be a wake up call for us all. You never know when you might be talking to someone who is under age, and as Sugarbaby said, if that turns out to be the case there could be some serious consequences. And it is no secret that Rebelwoman was engaging in public cyber sex with some of the members on here on a regular basis. I think we Zoners have fallen into a false sense of security because public Quicknotes can only be viewed by logged in members. But what if anyone who logs into the site could view public Quicknotes? I think people would behave differently if they knew their friends, parents, or co workers could be watching. What if public Quicknotes were truly public? Of course people could still cyber privately, but at least minor's wouldn't be exposed to it in publics.
Here is something to think about, this was in our local news paper today.
Beaver Falls man pleads guilty in Facebook incidents
BEAVER — A Beaver Falls man who used Facebook to solicit teenage girls, and at least one 12-year-old girl, has pleaded guilty to multiple charges in Beaver County Court, according to the district attorney's office. the suspect, 22, pleaded guilty to seven counts of unlawful contact with a minor and one count of corruption of a minor, according to prosecutors. He will be sentenced after a 90-day Megan's Law evaluation. he was charged by Beaver County detectives and multiple police departments with contacting girls in Beaver Falls, White Township, Freedom, Conway, Ambridge, and Center Township and New Sewickley Township between August 2010 and February 2011, and then again in October 2011, according to court documents.
But see? We've already solved the problem. Turn off your quicknotes if you don't like that sort of "activity." As far as the people having thoughs...um...conversations with rebelwoman I say the following:
What's done is done. Learn from it.
Well, it has nothing to do with whether I like that sort of activity or not. And the what's done is done is a nice thought, but apparently the judge in this case did not subscribe to the what's done is done philosophy.
Again, just to play devil's advocate, that article never specifies what he did. All it said was he contacted young girls. You assume he contacted them and had cyber sex with them, but I highly doubt that. It seems more likely he was trying to solicit sex from them. He probably said, "hey, lets meet over at this restaurant and I'll show you a good time". IN order to even begin to press charges against anyone on this site, they would first have to disentangle the different ages of consent in each state and country.
I'd say the only way anyone could bring legal action against anyone who sibered with Rebel Woman would be if first of all, someone in her family complained, and secondly, if they could prove that said usernames belonged to the people involved in the complaint. The first is possible, I suppose, if the information about her being underage is true, but the second one would be difficult to prove, especially if her name wasn't really Jessie.
The point still remains that we all need to be careful. Another thing, we've heard at least 2 or 3 people say she's a teenager. One person she'll be going to her school next year. Someone else said she was 16 which would back up the "She's going to my school next year" story. Honestly, I don't care either way whether she was or wasn't under age. Just the possibility of it has stirred some much-needed conversation about being careful about who you talk to and what kinds of conversations you have. I'll say it again, it was much-needed. As for the article on the man who was charged, I agree that the article didn't specify what he did, but any kind of contact with under aged minors is very very serious. In the cases of children, and if you are under age, you're considered a child, the adult is considered guilty until proven innocent. That's the law. Adult to adult crimes are one thing, but when we think children are being targeted, it gets very serious. What I'm trying to say is this guy may have said "Let's meet for a good time." He may not have known that these girls were under age, but in the eyes of the law, it does not matter. It's kind of crappy actually in a way because the minor gets off with nothing while the adult person's life will never be the same.
I'm not saying this case exactly mirrors the situation here, just giving an example, and I am not assuming this was simply cyber sex. That was most likely how it started, but I believe he tried to make arrangements to meet the girls in person for sex. Problem is these days you don't have to be charged with anything to have your life ruined, all it takes is an accusation. That happened to a friend of mine, not only was his life practically ruined, but it cost him thousands of dollars in attorney's fees to defend something he never did. Luckily in his case, not only was he innocent, but it was proven that the incident never happened with anyone else either. She was coached by her grandmother to make the accusation against him, because she didn't like him. The laws are so strict when it comes to this kind of stuff, if a minor takes a naked picture of him or herself on a cell phone and sends it to someone, they can be charged with distributing child pornography even though they are a minor themselves. I'm not sure what the laws are regarding cyber sex with minors is, I'm just saying, why temp fate, it's not worth the risk, and cyber sex in publics is so risky.
The fact is, it is so easy to be labeled a sex offender it isn't even funny.
Technically cyber sex with a minor is not illegal, mutual masterbation with a minor isn't technically illegal either. However, it can be called coruption of a minor, or coruption of morals. I'll give an example from what I read on it.
If I were talking to a girl who was thirteen, (I'm 22), and I were to say that I believed clothes are not necessary, that's fine. The girl can make many different conclusions from that. If I were to then tell the girl, "I wonder what you look like naked", I've now crossed a moral line. That in itself can make the action illegal, however it doesn't usually stick.
The sex offender's list, I agree, is idiotic. There are people as young as ten on that list, which is laughable to the point of disgusting. I really don't think it should exist at all, or at the very least should be far more restrictive.
If you were to go to the site where the sex offender's list is documented, and you were to see that your neighbor was a registered sex offender, you would not know whether he had raped a four year old, or peed on a sidewalk; both get you listed. If the list is going to be useful, it needs to be more detailed.
In this case, that of rebel woman, I doubt anyone is going to be facing any charges. While I agree that people should not be talking about sex to people under a certain age, I don't think that age is eighteen. Basically, use your judgement, but don't be so worried about getting in trouble that you forget how to have conversations.
Yes, there are people on the sex offenders list who did something stupid like take a naked picture of themselves at the age of thirteen, and yes some people do pretend to be younger than they are. However, those people are not as common as the media would like you to believe. so relax, your probably not going to be put on the sex offenders list unless you deserve it.
Oh I myself am not worried about getting put on a sex offenders list. What I meant was people just need to be careful about what they say in public conversations. Of course, on here, people rarely meet, but you don't know who you are talking to on here. Not saying you should be scared to talk to people. Just be mindful and aware.
Cody's right: such lists are so fruitless now I as a parent have not consulted one in many years for the neighborhoods we have lived in. Like biohazardous chemicals, sex offenders are generally sought to be avoided.
However, the current sex offenders list, were it a hazmat (biohazards) list, would contain such nontoxic - if unpleasant - chemicals compounds as vinegar, chlorine tablets, and the like.
They have made a mockery of public safety with what they will put on such a list.
I think it's safe to say this topic has not so much been about the individual in question, as the potential for what can happen. And while sex has all the taboo and titilating attention, the same goes for a wide array of topics - who minors give out personal information to, etc. And yes, there are many incidents of undercover law enforcement posing as youth, or fences, or other types of bait online for would-be offenders.
Yes I agree, the term sex offender makes people think of an adult molesting a child, or somebody being a rapist. But it is such a broad term now it could be as a result of just about anything. And as I have said before, you don't even have to be charged with a crime to have your life ruined, and if somebody makes a false accusation, and later it is proven to be false, the dammage is already done, you cannot un ring a bell. The legal side of it could be the least of your worries.
Well, here is something I found regarding the legal issue.
Exposing a child to anything sexual in nature is illegal, in person or over the internet.
Here is Wisconsin's law... I'm sure other states have something similar
948.11 Exposing a child to harmful material or harmful descriptions or narrations, Class I Felony.
948.11(1)(ag)
(ag) "Harmful description or narrative account" means any explicit and detailed description or narrative account of sexual excitement, sexually explicit conduct, sadomasochistic abuse, physical torture or brutality that, taken as a whole, is harmful to children.
the point is that nobody can be certain that the person you're talking to online is who they say they are.
This particular individual may be 22 or she may be fifteen - we have no way of knowing.
And the thing with the internet is that it's not about unravelling the states - if you are having sexually explicit conversations with someone where they are under the age of consent in their state or country, then you can be held legally accountable in their state or country.
A couple of years ago (I'll find the link later) there was a case in the UK where an eleven year old befriended a US marine who was, I think, in his 30's. But she told him that she was eighteen.
They had many explicit conversations, they talked, and eventually they met up.
He's now serving a prison sentence in the UK having been extradited from the US.
The internet does not have boundaries in the same way. The reason why all users here have to be thirteen to join is because the site is hosted in the US where the law says they have to be thirteen. It doesn't matter that such a law does not exist in the UK or other countries where we have users - they have to abide by the laws where the site is registered. And in the same way if you break a law wrt a user in another country you can be held accountable according to the laws in that country.
Grooming of minors is considered a very serious offense because it is unfortunately not that uncommon.
Ok, my question is, legal issues aside, what is the Zones policy regarding cyber sex between adults and minors?
The zone says "if it's illegal off the zone, then it's illegal on the zone."
That's not the exact wording but the terms of service spells out pretty clearly.
Bob
If her profile says she is 18 or over, it is just as if she signed a contract. What does this mean? It means that as far as we are all concerned she is that age. Now let's say someone got on teamtalk or zbp and it came to be found out that said person was 12. Now that would make the profile (contract) null and void. No, I am not a loyyer.
Works in contract law, would never stand up in court in a child sex abuse case. In a majority of cases of online activity, the victim had posed herself as over age. But because in real life she is under age, she is decidedly not able to consent.
In contract law, even, if a minor poses as over age and then signs a contract, if she is then found to be under age, her responsibilities are withdrawn and the company can no longer seek remedy.
yes leo has it right.
It doesn't matter whether that person says they were eighteen or twenty or whatever age that is over the age of consent, because sexual interactions with a minor are illegal they were not able to give consent even if they lied, and the one having the sexual conversations is the one who is culpable.
You could compare it to a shop selling alcohol or cigarettes to someone who is under age but who presents with a fake ID - it doesn't matter that they lied, the shop is still liable and would be prosecuted.
tim21, it's as bob says - if it's illegal off board then it's illegal here. We operate a policy of freedom of speech but that excludes discussion of or involvement in illegal activities.
Often ciber sex with a minor is more difficult to prove because it usually happens in pqn's and then often moves away from the site to other modes of communication, but if we were certain that it was happening then action would definitely be taken from our end..
Well, falasifying is not cool.
I am what I am.
People know me.
I don't hide the truth about myself.
And another thing, why would you want to lie about yourself to get attention? I knew someone like that, and that wasn't cool. Once you lie, you lie over and over again. Nothing can be told of the truth from a liar.
And by a liar I mean someone who fakes where they are from, how old they are etc.
Constantly doing so won't get you a good reputation.
Of course, but that doesn't seem to matter to some people. Some like the thrill, others like to pretend to escape their reality, and others will stretch the truth so long as they have a compelling reason to do so.
Trying to analyze all the whys doesn't change it.
Kate