Request to Wetset...

[Dusty Harold]

My Thoughts

Nikki ,

I share in Vic's interest in the '' pic of the Day '' being both diapers , pantie / knicker wetting along with open [ nude] peeing at times . Which to me covers all the bases of what I'm interested in on here . Whenever I come to visit Wet Set Message Boards . Plus I also have bought various issues of Wet Set Magazine . Including the last 2 issues to enjoy reading them from cover to cover

Though I have some interest in Adult Baby Girls and diapers too at times . Though my main arousal comes from watching , reading and looking at pantie wetters / women peeing nude

I'm glad of the changes that have been made . Since I started coming or better yet cumming while here { Pun intended } ! !

Nikki , You are so appreciated for all the hard work you have done ! !
Keep it going , Girl , You're dog Great ! !

Thank You , so much ! !

Dusty Harold

[Peevert]

That's pretty insulting Manchineel if your trying to say what I think your trying to say. Would you like to expand on how you 'prefer to have sexual thoughts about adults', and how this would be any different for a diaper lover?

Very well said, Nikki.

We've seen that kind of hateful bullshit posted here from time to time over the years. It's one thing to say you're not into diapers. Fine, we all have different taste. It's quite another thing to imply that those who are into diapers are also child molesters. And that's exactly what the implication was, although I have a feeling that we're about to hear some lying about that as Manchineel tries to squirm his way out of this one.

Personally, I'd like to see people who make comments like that banned. This is a pee sex site. That includes pants and panty wetting, golden showers, diapers, bed wetting, naughty peeing, and more. If you can't accept that fact, you don't belong here.

[moosehead68]

shocking peevert, another hateful post by you. It is you that should be banned. I think many of us echo the earlier sentiments..and no, I don't think the other poster was accusing anyone of being a child molester.

[Peevert]

I don't think the other poster was accusing anyone of being a child molester.

Then explain his comments. Explain "prefer to have sexual thoughts about adults."

[bwetfan]

Then explain his comments. Explain "prefer to have sexual thoughts about adults."

I'm sort of curious why you revived this thread after over a month. You usually know better than that.

[Peevert]

I didn't look at the date on the thread, I never look at that. I'm really not sure what that has to do with anything.

[Dusty Harold]

I'm sort of curious why you revived this thread after over a month. You usually know better than that.

my Question is ; Why not revive a thread , if you have an interesting comment to add to it ?
Instead of some one else tellng you not to / telling you there was a thread already made . That you could have added your comment to it . Instead of starting a who;e new thread . Because you didn't know of it . In the first place . It's not logical ! Unless you want to start trouble with some one . Take it to the ADMIN if you have a problem with some one reviving an old thread on here .........................

[Nikki]

I didn't find Peeverts comment hateful in the least. We both knew what this guy was implying (and likely almost everyone else who read it did also).

[Peevert]

Thank you, Nikki.

[bwetfan]

I didn't look at the date on the thread, I never look at that. I'm really not sure what that has to do with anything.

My point is that if it were an inflammatory remark made over a year in the past, it is quite likely the person making the remark is no longer around. At any rate, it's pretty much dragging up an old argument.

When Fade222 posted, it updated a thread that had been dead a year. In general, there is nothing wrong with that, but arguing with somebody's year old comment seems a bit, well, pointless. I don't think you or Harold noticed that the comments were over a year old, naturally.

[Dusty Harold]

My point is that if it were an inflammatory remark made over a year in the past, it is quite likely the person making the remark is no longer around. At any rate, it's pretty much dragging up an old argument.

When Fade222 posted, it updated a thread that had been dead a year. In general, there is nothing wrong with that, but arguing with somebody's year old comment seems a bit, well, pointless. I don't think you or Harold noticed that the comments were over a year old, naturally.

I Really don't see the issue here , in respect to the year / month a thread was first published on here . If some one has something to update this thread with . Which might prove an interest to me or others here . The person should go ahead and post on it regardless of its age !
That iy should be a problem to you is mostly your own opinion of a thread . You might not like . Though others here . might have an interest to what this person wishes to comment on in regtards to this particular thread .
End of Line

Dusty Harold

[Nikki]

Everyone has now said their bit and made their point

Thread closed