Now this would be the problem.

As the Nazis called it, Jewish impudence and arrogance. They misunderstood the source, of course. The utterly Luciferic tendency to think "I am all there is and what I understand is all that could be understood and this bowl of China really is a rock for me to throw" has absolutely nothing to do with Jews per se. It's entirely and positively the characteristic of poor people, and the very substance of their subhumanity. They share the trait with all the monkeys, which similarily never stop to think that "hey, maybe it's not my place to carry on in this manner before my betters", and of all the other inferior animals.

In the historic perspective, it could be called a pity some of the northern primitives survived ; yet the Spanish did much better of a job erasing the guarani & assorted tupis from the South than the French did in the North, and still to this day the South's inhabited by intolerable subhumans. It's almost as if inheritance from the mother is the dominant part anyway, or something.

As always, the problems of the world come back again and again and again to the costs of hallucinated freedom.

Exactly in the manner the previous set of

subhumans, vaguely known as "Indians", traded

theirs to the actually human if not very humane

colonizers.
...actually, they weren't trading their

daughters maidenheads - those were already taken

by either the father, grandfather, uncle,

brother or some "teepee crawler" in the middle

of the night. Incest and statutory rape are

still considered "normal" behaviors by, at

least, Canada's Indians. (Oh yeah, they like

to call themselves 'First Nations' these days,

and also blame "residential schools" for their

incestuous (and other criminal) behaviors

In the first place "to restrict to just WoT" is not merely a label, but a substance. It means, quite specifically, to abandon "rationality" as pedestrianly represented by the pedestrians, and embrace "well tempered irrationality". What this means can't be put in finite form, but as an example : it means accepting that some jobs ~can't~ be given, for instance ; and more broadly it means adjusting the job to the doer as well.

In the second place, if one were to apply the wot restriction correctly, one can no longer explain the difference between this supposed job board and the forum itself. In which case, what sense does it make to have "a site" (in whichever manner defined, mind, website or trilema category or any other kind of specified locus).

I wouldn't in the slightest mind to be shown wrong on this score ; but best I can see at the moment, the notion of a job locus is entirely caused by psychogenic noise, and has no counterparty in actual reality.

If 'employer' has an "open to all" job advertised he runs into both dollar-auction problem as well as mounting costs to enforce "old contracts" vs "gpg contracts" (as he'd be dealing with potential randos, aka non-wot entities).

And if 'employer' restricts job advertised to just his wot, it still doesn't really solve dollar-auction problem. 'When is spec truly satisfied'?

Seems like the best way to get shit done is still to either a) 'do it yourself' or b) pick someone you trust and work out the details. Sorta like how Birdman commisioned mike_c to build that poker-hand-something-script: http://btcbase.org/log/2017-08-18#1700030