Peter Kraus - Bachelorette 13 - Discussion - #9

coolangel wrote:

GuardianAngel wrote:@coolangel Who's the refollow?

recent ex right before the show IMO refollowed him.

Seabear wrote:The way I read refollow post was that the refollow was from the former girlfriend not Peter. Maybe my interpretation is wrong but that is how a I read the post.
JMO

Haha I read it a few times and finally got it: imo, the alleged ex refollowed Peter and since she didn't sign up to get on tv and has a private account, she should remained unnamed.
Jmo.

So if this alleged x is the one who did the re-following / following and her Identity can't be revealed due to her account being private, why even track her activity? I fail to see how her following him is indicative of what he does. Peter has 540K followers at this point, all with varying reasons as to why they hit the follow button. Say they're back together though, does it put a little iffy taste in my mouth? yes. But as far as we know he's single and IMO doesn't seem to be planning on doing the bachelor

ETA: If someone's account is on private, their followers and who they follow are not visible to the public either so idk how revealing this information plays into forum rules.

I fail to understand why Peter fans continue to try to censor what others can post on his thread. Why track her activity? Because I can and we still live in a free world.

I wish people would familiarize themselves with the forum rules first when they post borderline condescending posts trying to censor other's actions and criticisms instead of reminding others of the rules. I have been a member long enough to know the rules very well and none of my posts or the information I shared is in violation of any forum rules.

Of my 2000+ posts, the only post I regret sharing till date was a pic of Peter and a girl doing the Titanic pose. It was no big deal and yet 5 mins later, the poor woman was being trashed for her looks. I regretted sharing it coz the poor woman had done nothing to deserve people criticizing her on a public forum without her knowledge. Public or private SM, I am not going to share any names ever again publicly. I have learnt my lesson.

I have my reasons for only sharing what I did. I will not be bullied or censored by anyone. If anything, it makes me want to dig up more dirt on Peter and post harsher criticisms which I wouldn't have done otherwise. The thread is about Peter, not whether members approve of what other members can say/sleuth about Peter.

All JMO

Asking a question does not equal censoring or bullying.   In any other thread on this forum, if someone posts something other than an opinion,  a source is required to back up the information that is being passed off as fact, and if not, more than likely said post would be deleted in minutes.  **edited**

Alanna wrote:Man oh man, I wonder what it is about Peter that gets folks so hot and bothered, I tend to think he's just a dude?

I agree with you, actually. Simply asking a question leads to being a "Peter crazy", for whatever reason. Some people are genuinely trying to look at information from all angles.

Unless Peter has another ex, Brittany H's IG is still public. It appears that she hasn't followed Peter unless someone sees him on the list and I missed it?

adf23 wrote:Asking a question does not equal censoring or bullying.   In any other thread on this forum, if someone posts something other than an opinion,  a source is required to back up the information that is being passed off as fact, and if not, more than likely said post would be deleted in minutes.  *edited*.  

We protect people's privacy, those that are not on the show are always protected as well as sources.

There's no need to snark back. The poster has every right to share the findings, and protect the source.

If someone's account is private then we can only share what we see. If the account is not private, then obviously everyone can see the activity. If this information was shared, then it isn't private and anyone can sleuth it out themselves. So for those who think this is another example of biased posting, it's not. The account is NOT private.

I totally disagree with asking a simple question leads to crazy fans. What it leads to IMHO is backlash like we've had the last two or so pages, asking for the information to be posted accusations that only certain posts are allowed to not have a source and so on, as well as snark inserted into the posts.

We sleuth on this forum. If we find a person refollowed, unfollowed, deleted their account, whatever the case, we will post it regardless of who the contestant is.

If Josh Murray followed Amanda, I'm pretty sure there would be pages of conversation to that end. Peter is no exception.

If an old ex refollowed him, then we are going to discuss it.

Here are our site rules for reference:
This is only a sampling. Please familiarize. Nothing is new.


Identity - We NEVER ASK for a posters identity nor do we ask who sources are or post source's username, personal name etc. Speculating on the identity of a poster is strictly prohibited. Members identity is strictly confidential. Any speculation warrants a 3 day ban. Should you see a post that contains speculation on the identity of a member please utilize the report post button. We value all information posted on our forum whether it is from sources family friends etc. Members have the option of believing or not believing such information.

I think this is self explanatory. Unfortunately, it is discussed very often, so it needs mentioning.
Members from day one have been free to disbelieve or believe sources. No one is forced either way.

Opinions - The purpose of this Forum is to discuss contestants, share pictures, and share opinions. If you do not agree with someone’s opinions, feel free to respond in a manner which abides by the rules in a mature and civil manner without a direct insult to a user's opinion or the opinions in general of all posters. Replies which do not abide by the rules will be deleted without notice. Should you read a post you do not think is appropriate, please use the “Report Post” button located in the post. The use of IMO in my opinion, JMO just my opinion, IMHO in my humble opinion, or words such as I think, I wonder must be used at all times. Signatures with all just my opinion, IMO, etc. does not mean you are now exempt from including JMO/IMO somewhere in your actual post. When your post is quoted, your signature does not go with it and will no longer be seen.  When opinions are stated like facts, it causes mass confusion. Posts can be taken out of context, misinterpreted and discussions become quickly heated and side tracked all with the incorrect information.

What Can I Post - This forum is designed for the discussion of Reality TV and the contestants who participates in them. Personal opinions, whether positive or negative about contestants, may be posted in the appropriate threads which are General Discussion threads, sleuthing threads, Non Spoiler threads.  Discussion is to always remain on topic. Comparison to other contestants is limited. For example in a sleuthing thread to compare past leads, or former contestants, is accepted. In all cases, it is against the forum rules to discuss another contestant that is NOT in the topic title,  in a positive or negative manner to show favouritism. All members of this forum are encouraged to post their opinions, in the appropriate threads without fear of possible accusations.

First, yes I'm a peter fan (don't think I hide it well ) but asking a question does not mean I'm trying to censor anyone, if anything I try to look at other opinions cause I have a peter blind spot . I'm sorry if anyone feels bullied but I don't believe that was anyone's intention, at least not mine. IMO people were asking for clarification cause peter's account didn't show any of what the original post claimed and I can see how that could cause confusion. But then it become that the info was about the alleged ex, whose account happens to be private so her info can't be shared. My question about "why even track her activity?" wasn't meant to indicate that people are not free to do with their lives what they please. what I meant was, if her info can't be shared, why include it?

And honest maybe I don't actually understand this "if private don't share rule" but if who the allaged ex follows is private and can't be viewed by the public how is that me trying to censor info about peter?

Once again the account is NOT private.

GuardianAngel wrote:

adf23 wrote:Asking a question does not equal censoring or bullying.   In any other thread on this forum, if someone posts something other than an opinion,  a source is required to back up the information that is being passed off as fact, and if not, more than likely said post would be deleted in minutes.  *edited*.  

We protect people's privacy, those that are not on the show are always protected as well as sources.

There's no need to snark back. The poster has every right to share the findings, and protect the source.

If someone's account is private then we can only share what we see. If the account is not private, then obviously everyone can see the activity. If this information was shared, then it isn't private and anyone can sleuth it out themselves. So for those who think this is another example of biased posting, it's not. The account is NOT private.

I totally disagree with asking a simple question leads to crazy fans. What it leads to IMHO is backlash like we've had the last two or so pages, asking for the information to be posted accusations that only certain posts are allowed to not have a source and so on, as well as snark inserted into the posts.

We sleuth on this forum. If we find a person refollowed, unfollowed, deleted their account, whatever the case, we will post it regardless of who the contestant is.

If Josh Murray followed Amanda, I'm pretty sure there would be pages of conversation to that end. Peter is no exception.

If an old ex refollowed him, then we are going to discuss it.

GA- My post was not intended as a snark. Frustration, but not snark. It just seems that if anyone questions anything in this thread, they are censored in some way.

Kashathediva wrote:The person I think it is has a private IG. So no sense in naming a name. It's a recent ex. I'm not positive if it's a recent re-follow or if he simply never unfollowed this account and I missed it.

I think there's just conflicting information and that's why everyone is confused IMO