Hai is SLLotD on hiatus? Or dead? Responsible intern went off to a music festival?

Mtn. Beaver, I agree with your comment above. Scrotum is an ugly word. I never use it, sounds infectious. ‘ oh, he’s come down with scrotum, bed rest is needed..’ it doesn’t disgust me. Disgust is about emotion.
Yes. Re this letter staying up all week. Think it’s Dan saying, ‘if you wanna complain about the re runs put up when I’m off doing other stuff, gigs round the place, then cop this.

@102 Dan's mourning their dog, Stinker, who had to be put down this week. A reasonable response, to me.

@104 KCFrance
1.
I'm sorry you lost your friend, Dan.
2.
Dan has told us repeatedly and very clearly that he doesn't like dogs.

curious2 @105 - Perhaps Terry is a dog lover, asked Dan to try having a dog, and Dan discovers that he loves that dog. You know, kind of how Dan explains how some people get into BDSM.

@106 BeeDeetee
My memory is less certain on this, but I think they already had had a dog the last time Dan mentioned not liking dogs. So I've imagined that possibly Dan's being there for the heartbreak of family members.
And, now that I think about it, there's nothing incongruous with one being in pain from the loss of a being in one's life that one didn't like. I can imagine some being in my daily world that I even couldn't stand, and being surprised by my feelings for them upon their demise. Everything is complicated.

I'm finding the question of whether LW holds active contempt or just didn't think things through a bit of a distinction without a difference. Even if she did realize the unintended insult and cleaned up her act a bit, would anyone still want one's favourite OS brother or male cousin to date her?

@108 vennominon
"would anyone still want one's favourite OS brother or male cousin to date her?"

I thought so @55 ("maybe the perfect match for OMG is a guy who is happy with shitty treatment"), but I agree, while she might a match for some guy who gets off on abuse and humiliation, with her it would be genuine, so no I wouldn't /want/ anyone to date her.

Honestly, I think the length of the email would have turned me off more than anything else. You couldn't take the time to do more than copy and paste an email that you're sending to 20 other dudes, but you expect me to take the time to read it and indulge your nonsense? However, I predict that your tactic will work because it's unlikely that more than 1 guy in 20 will actually respond.

Being human, nothing human is foreign to me, so’s I’ve heard a couple of the porn stars who were going for the Biggest GangBang record, on the Howard Stern show. Yes, yes, I know that’s not what she’s suggesting here but -
The one thing that came clearly through, hearing these women talking about the guys who were showing up to stand in line and do their business, was their seething contempt for those guys. ‘Losers who came all this way just to get laid,’ ‘nobodies,’ and don’t ask me what the chicks got out of it, except I guess a paycheck and bragging rights in some circles, but their thoughts about the men who showed up for the cattle call were decidedly uncharitable (and more than a little hypocritical, but that’s another issue.)
I doubt we’ll know, because it likely won’t happen, but in kind of reverse-Groucho, I don’t think anyone who wants to get into OMG’s club (that way) she’d want as a member.

@108: "I'm finding the question of whether LW holds active contempt or just didn't think things through a bit of a distinction without a difference."

100% agreed. There's a consensus these days that what counts is the effect of your actions (on another person), not the intentions behind them. So I don't see how it matters whether the LW lacks empathy, or believes her past experiences entitle her to be completely mercenary, or is just clueless.

Either way, the result would be the same for the men on the receiving end: they'll sense, correctly, that they're just objects to her.

Counterproductive idea - a group date is going to select more heavily for people who don't want monogamy (because people who do want monogamy are primarily interested in a mutual exchange of attention with ONE other person, ergo will favor one-on-one dates) and the kind of men who favor competing with other men for women('s attention) as a prize (i.e. toxic), so men LW specifically doesn't want and men nobody should want.

Plenty of dates, on some of which you find out right away the person isn't compatible and with some people who decide they're not into you sexually* once you have sex, sounds like successful dating to me. At least from where I'm sitting in the land of 100% of people I've ever arranged dates with online ghosting me BEFORE the date. That hasn't meant I've dated nobody, I've just met everyone I've ever dated in person. And the pattern sounds like all dating until you meet someone with whom you're especially compatible, so not much of a problem beyond that which dating itself is addressing.

LW could use the demisexual method and date friends she finds attractive; that way she'll know they aren't partnered or Nazis or whatever. Absent that, follow Dan's advice. And one other thing to which ypu might want to look: do you have any initial screening criteria that are not serving you well? For example, I've seen LOTS of people who won't consider dating someone without college degrees, which excludes 80% of the adult population in the US. I think it's intended as a class/subculture screening, but given how many people from my upper-middle-class/upper-class suburb went into the trades or combined side hustles (and the number of people with degrees who are working jobs that have nothing to do with them), it's not an especially useful proxy as a selection criteria. And if we assume most similarly situated peiple are using that criterion, presumably most people in that category who are interested in dating people somewhat like you AND WHO ARE GOOD (prospective) PARTNERS, are going to be in relationships already (some may want to be in relationships with multiple people or cheat, hence the prevalence of people who are laeeady partnered going on dates with LW). So look to your selection criteria and see if any are based on petty bigotries more than functional effect; since bigotries are common, by eliminating any you exhibit, you're more likely to meet people who are being excluded as potential partners by others for bad reasons rather than good reasons who were overlooked by others for bad reasons.

*FYI, for everyone and forever, someone having sex with you and bailing after that most likely didn't like having sex with you, and that's it, not some massive gendered dysfunction or conspiracy

@62: Yeah, but approximately 100% of women who are actively dating don't share that opinion. They'd rather hire a nanny than date/marry one - which isn't unreasonable, since the gender dynamics are skewed heavily against men (on average) doing equitable, or any, housework, even when their girlfriends/wives work the same or longer hours outside the house.

@88: Your strategy is a sound way to save time, and you're doing nothing wrong. The guy who stalked you - "The last time I did this, even though they were two separate locations, the first guy showed up while I was with the second guy and called me out over text" - did something wrong, and he has every reason to be embarassed, while you do not.

This is, sadly, not what LW proposes.