SLP: No, no monastery; though, I have been travelling a bit.
LM206: awwwwww Thx
Oz:(and yes, the haters are legion)

But I really don't give a flyingrodentfawk about downvotes;
and in general the overall community / content doesn't actually suffer from downvotes. Upvotes outnumber downs by, what; 10-to-1? 30-to-1? Those who moan loudest against downvotage are totally just nursing their butthurt/perfectionism/bruised-optimism. fawk em. Skullfawk 'em all and their whiny pouting. The more they moaned, they more I always downvoted them actually. Bitching and moaning "is NOT a good answer". hehe

IMHO downvotes are like craigslist flagging: everyone's got their own reason for it (and to each, their reason is good) and if one thinks in logic terms; downvotage is just as good/valid/arbitrary as upvotage.

ok adios. My stagecoach is turning into a pumpkin. Back to the shadows with me. Merry xmas to all, and to all a good night.
*poof*

Ahhh thankfawkingbabyjeezus; finally!

Merry Xmas, fnarf! The crown's on you once more.
Enjoy your reign as Mushroom King!

http://www.thinkhigherthoughts.com/product/mushroom-king

http://www.creaturespot.com/main/2009/5/25/alice-finds-the-mushroom-king.html

Oh for fawks sake...

a shroom a month later? thxbutnothx

*sigh*
Well, that's my cue...

As fnarf said, folks who have limits tend not to put their fullnames/addresses out there. Others, you might notice, have links to their personal webpages when you click on their avatars. It's a mix.
Besides: As long as your Q is self-referential, your limit is going to be entirely up to your own comfort or tolerance.
It's a respectful community with only occasional flareups: You might notice that trolling and flaming aren't tolerated long here, (and spam isn't tolerated at all). IMO, it's the answers that really push limits: There have been some stark-naked and raw soul-barings here. See the "how do you feel about the first time you had sex?" Q for some great examples

Anon: As far as better off talking to a friend/therapist: sure, that's occasionally true. But I've found for years that the folks that need to talk the most (like homeless folks, and teenagers) are often the quiet ones who'll only talk if 'masked' - so this forum is near perfect for their purposes.

Could be that we're kind of grammar Nazis here...

Papers, please.

yup, they both sound like festering little sex addicts... Either they need an open marriage or they need to get in separate corners..of the nation.
Poor kids - I hope they aren't terribly young.

I pity this fool's kids.

No, no you don't. Please: no more dovetailing.

But
Yeah, IMO: PJ & pals, and by extension, RSCM, actually AIDED in helping a scumbag walk by being witnesses --yet not doing anything to get the guy charged/help/jailed-- - ANY other citizen would have helped the law get served by simply giving their name.
That's not exactly a welcome addition to the seattle crime/justice scene and the bottom line is:
I hope it can change.

p.s. with both RCSM and RLSH- These aren't "superheroes" at all - citizens patrols ala crimewatch (but with costumes) at best.
IMO: Qpatrol were bigger 'heroes' and Seattle's Conan the Barbarian was more 'super'.

It's closing time. It's been fun bouncing ideas back and forth - thanks. I'm turning off the tap now. Say goodnight Gracie.

BASICALLY?
Lying is lying, anon.
Saying I'm 'basically' the pope because we both stand up for good/know how to read a bible doesn't make me the pope.

I've been working the dark streets for years, and with no cape, no mask, just doing good work. 'Club membership arguments' are a stupid fool's waste of time - I hope both groups drop the posturing, stop the slander/lies, and just get back to rolling up their sleeves.
If they don't, then they aren't actually serious about the calling.

Oh,
And while it's not illegal, letting some scumbag walk because you can't put a name forward is pretty lame 'justice':

seattle-pi:
"Police responded to a harassment complaint and found Phoenix the Guardian of Seattle dressed in a "black colored Batman costume and a black ski mask," department spokesman Jeff Kappel said.

He was standing with four other men and one woman, all in costume with their faces covered by ski masks and bandanas. They were dealing a man making threatening statements and swinging a golf club.

Police took the golf club as evidence. The "costume-wearing complainants" refused to press charges because they didn't want to identify themselves to officers, Kappel said. So the suspect walked."

Nice...

after he gets his 'bulletproof suit' on, of course.