@[New Guy in Town](/user/show/820450) The rules about age regression are clear: Regression of the mind has never been an issue on this site. A lot of stories have dumbing down and regression into a toddler-like state of mind. Where would you even draw a line? Where's the line between simple "dumbing down" and "age regression"? In a fantastic scenario, consent is of no concern, and the only *objective* reason to mind stories about sex with minors has *always* been the issue of consent (which cannot be given if the age gap is too big or if there's any kind of dependency between the people engaged). The sites' policy has always been that we're only banning stories describing pre-puberty, *physical* attributes, i.e., people who look like pre-puberty persons and if they are described with attributes along this line (children's voice pitch, testicles not dropped, dry orgasms, stuff like that). Age regression of the mind has never been and will never be an issue on this site.

@[New Guy in Town](/user/show/820450) Hi NGiT Sorry to hear this has you worried. When the Content Moderator reviewed this they took in the context of the stories the Author specified and it made sense that this Author is using the bimbo/himbo inspiration from a previous story. It did not rise a suspicion of anything against content rules. This site relies on trust on all levels: • The Content Moderators provide the Authors a good faith interpretation of the Author's intent and seek clarification when required. • The Authors trust that the CMs will review without bias and fairly. • The Authors trust that Readers will not read with bad faith against their intentions. • The Readers trust that CM will remove stories and users that dont meet our content rules and community rules. • The CMs trust that Readers feel comfortable communicating with them via the site email in case we've missed or overlooked anything and will use the tools provided on the site to filter the themes of content the Reader wants to consume. I understand that you want to be cautious and mindful of content. Unfortunately, opening up a conversation in the story's comments to discuss whether an Author has bad or evil intent behind their story is not a good faith show of trust or a kind or empathetic thing to place on an Author who is already taking a leap of faith sharing their expression of art and interests. In future, when a worry like this comes up we hope you can trust us and contact us directly via our email to re-review amongst the team and, in some situations, reach out to the Author for more information. This avoids accidentally casting unfounded or unintended dispersions on the Author's character and helps maintain the trust that keeps this community together and creates a safe space of expression. Sorry to all (you, the Author and other Readers) for the concern and worry. Wishing everyone an upcoming Happy New Year and please keep enjoying writing and consuming community content on our platform

@[New Guy in Town](/user/show/820450) An exquisite example that education does not equal intelligence. Quit your narcissistic diatribe and just enjoy the site for it's intended purposes

@Anonymous You've switched to a different IP address, and the first thing you do is write another personal attack? Well, have fun switching IP addresses. I'll block this one as well.

@[Profguy15](/user/show/920341) Oh he's in a tough spot 🤪 I just have to get around to writing the next chapter 😅 I might have gone on a side quest 😅

@[SleepyAsh](/user/show/10046846) Ooooooooo spill the beans what side quest? 😵‍💫

@Glennyboi something involving twinks, motorbikes, gear and brainwashing? :innocent:

@[SleepyAsh](/user/show/10046846) Ooooooo exciting 😵‍💫

@[MChicago](/user/show/10024403) Glad you liked it.

@[Norismo](/user/show/2849185) That actually was the point! Glad it worked.

@[John Coldiani](/user/show/10039834) :blush: