EllmoM8
Member
- Dec 8, 2022
- 12
Jumping has been my plan for a while now. I have a great location for it
We wanted to share a quick update with the community.
Our public expense ledger is now live, allowing anyone to see how donations are used to support the ongoing operation of the site.
👉 View the ledger here
Over the past year, increased regulatory pressure in multiple regions like UK OFCOM and Australia's eSafety has led to higher operational costs, including infrastructure, security, and the need to work with more specialized service providers to keep the site online and stable.
If you value the community and would like to help support its continued operation, donations are greatly appreciated. If you wish to donate via Bank Transfer or other options, please open a ticket.
Donate via cryptocurrency:
It is a method I would not choose but everyone has a different opinion on that. If you jump make sure you don't jump in the water and that your jump is at least 30m high.Jumping has been my plan for a while now. I have a great location for it
me tooJumping has been my plan for a while now. I have a great location for it
Water is possible but you would have to go way higher so you can reach your terminal velocity.Actually I think oevr 200 feet and into water, like the golden gate bridge, has worked 99% of the time- the impaact kills most and drowning kills most of the rest. Of course it's almost impossible at the golden gate bridge due to heavy patrols of people who think they are helping, and they actually do help some people, but for many people leaving really is their best option.
The golden gate bridge, 220 feet over water, has a 99% success rate, one key reasn is the drowning as a backup plan. BUt security there has been intense for years and that's not a feasible location except for a very small number of people each year, likely locals who can really check things out, and soon the nets will end this. But other bridges have this same situation. ACtually jumping is more terrifying than people think and it seems like most people can't jump after they look down.Water is possible but you would have to go way higher so you can reach your terminal velocity.
Yes but in this situation the person would have to look for a higher place to jump if he or she wants to jump in water.The golden gate bridge, 220 feet over water, has a 99% success rate, one key reasn is the drowning as a backup plan. BUt security there has been intense for years and that's not a feasible location except for a very small number of people each year, likely locals who can really check things out, and soon the nets will end this. But other bridges have this same situation. ACtually jumping is more terrifying than people think and it seems like most people can't jump after they look down.
Id just be trying my best not to shit myself on the way down!What are peoples thoughts on jumping?
1) The higher, the better
2) The harder the material you land on, the better
3) You should yell something cool on the way down![]()
![]()
I second that. Definitely not for me unless really, really, really desperate and nothing else available.Id just be trying my best not to shit myself on the way down!![]()
On its own, it's not reliable. There is a great chance you won't die and end up with some very serious injuires.Jumping has been my plan for a while now. I have a great location for it
Yes, but its' a;lready such a scary method to do that this would make it even more scary, plus you might turn around in the air and not know how you'd land. Sometimes people plan on this method and they get there and it's too scary and they can't jump- others can, you never know.Do you think jumping head first can improve your chances of dying as opposed to feet first?
I think any method that doesn't obliterate my consciousness instantly is a bad method. It may work, but it sounds like a terrible time in the process no matter how short it could be.