Tarte Gogo

Why bother talking to me in the first place? My stats are very clear. They started the convo, it is not as if I ever pester anyone, I am just answering their questions. Jeez.

Hmm, could be but seems unlikely that they all 3 would block rather than just stop answering.

But why does the chat history disappear? Does that happen when they block you?

I am new to Grindr, only used it abroad and in other languages, and briefly. Maybe you guys can enlighten me about what happens in English or when you are physically located in the US. 3 times in 2 days, a conversation with a guy disappeared completely from my list of conversations. We were getting along fine, so I am assuming that it is not because the guys on the other side blocked me. On the first one, I didn’t mention any “money” but it is possible the other guy did. He certainly had mentioned my “atm” emoji. The thread simply disappeared. No trace of it. On the second instance, with a different guy, I wrote the following sentence “if you don’t have a place I will get us a day hotel and don’t worry I’ll pay for it. “ immediately the convo thread disappeared. On the third guy he wrote “sugar daddy?” and I replied “I can be for a really cute guy, please send face pics” then we talked about where and when for a couple of sentences and the thread disappeared. It is possible, but I’ll never know, that the other guy wrote something about the amount he expected. I don’t even know how to contact these guys again, I don’t have a handle or anything. So question 1: are you guys aware of an auto-convo-delete system in grinder if there is suspicion? Semi-automated? Based on the words “pay” or “money” or “how much”? Question 2: does that also blocks 2 people from finding each other? Question 3 if 2 is ‘no’: how do I find a guy on grindr that I talked to before, but I don’t have his handle because the convo doesn’t appear anywhere. Thanks!

No that is not unusual to want to talk, but that is “on the clock”, by default.

Hey Gman, i am not sure if your area has decently priced hotels, but if you both can’t host, and are into each other, wouldn’t you pay for a room in a cheap hotel? I mean a hotel room is way cheaper than an escort, I definetly would pay it, for what looks like a really good fuck.

We also have colored text. (Here I assume no users are reading on a monochrome screen :-))

Yes verbal contracts exists. And they don’t include everyone’s name. Every time you buy a coffee at Starbucks you enter a sales contract of goods (coffee) and services (making it right for you). These rarely get disputed in court, because they are not important enough, but when they are disputed, they are still enforceable. It is not what lawyers recommend though, for obvious reasons. See here: https://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/business-contracts-forms/what-contracts-are-required-to-be-in-writing.html

Wow, the all caps was intense, I felt I was being shouted at the whole time. So in short the jury is allowed to claim that they read my mind. @quoththeraven is right the only solution is to resolve the underlying issue. Decriminalise or legalise or both, or move to a better country.

It is up to the client. And if it not written down, just a verbal agreement, you don’t have to give any more info than you do now.

He is with me, much more natural and less stiff than all the other ones. He can react like a real guy to almost anything. That does make him more likeable.

But you said harry was second tier, now he is tier 6? We need some consistency around here.

Ok, so let's dissect this because it is seriously bugging me: Realistic scenario: I am a hot young 25 yo guy who loves to have sex with older men and then talk about it. I live in the US. I have sex with literally thousands of older men in many years. Statement 1: Having sex with many, many older men is not illegal, as long as I am 18 and regardless of their age. Statement 2: I am protected by the first amendment to talk about each encounter as long as I don't lie. The number of "outings" I am allowed to make is not restricted by law. Statement 3: Each of these men is legally allowed to buy my silence individually, if and only if they want to. No extortion, they don't have to buy my silence. But if they don't buy my silence, I am allowed to speak to anyone who will listen about it. Are any of the statements here above wrong? Now, please assume we are dealing with a rational and logical, highly competent judge that just tries to apply the law to the facts brought to him by the police. All the police brings is that A) I had sex many, many times, and each time I received some money. B) All my clients (who are rational beings and not stupid) explain that they paid me to keep quiet, not to have sex. The prosecutor is accusing me of both extortion and prostitution, in case one fails, then he hope to get me for the other one. Our lawyers are competent and do not screw this up. Question 1: What if it is not the older guy that brings up the "buying my silence" part, but it was me instead, after the sex. Is that extortion in any/all US jurisdictions? Question 2: What if I bring up the hush agreement before the sex? Does that change anything? I feel it shouldn't, because bringing it up afterwards is more dishonest than bringing it up beforehand. Beforehand means at least the older guy can back out. Question 3: Does writing the hush agreement down changes anything for our rational and logical judge? Question 4: Would a rational and logical judge accept the claim from the prosecutor that all these people were "thinking" of doing prostitution, even though we all claim the opposite, we verbally agreed on the payment for the hush agreement only, and there was no witness to prove that we said anything of the contrary? Basically, what is the criteria in criminal court for knowing what someone was thinking when there are 2 possibilities? Do the police need to provide material evidence, or it is ok for the judge to claim to be a mind reader? I am not from the US, and I don't claim to know the law, but I do claim to be able to reason.

Ah, that does make sense, so Apple not only care about the developer-created content, but they impose the app makers to control the user-created content strictly, to allow their app in the store. Maybe apple needs an "explicit" label on apps, just like they do for podcasts on iTunes, but with a filter for children iPhone users. Then we could finally talk freely about our tallywackers's size. Actually you MUST be right, because Planet Romeo has an app, that does not allow you to see explicit pictures, but you can see them on theit website. That must also be because the app is regulated by the store's rules, but the website isn't.

Does anyone know the logic for grindr to forbid explicit language? It is a hookup site, and one of the choices is “right now”, which cleary is intended to mean sex, so surely words relating to sex are necessary for guys to communicate. Are there laws that forbids those words in countries where Grindr is most popular? I mean, are they trying to become legal in Muslim countries, now?

That is fine, the contract does not protect me (just like the "for my time only clause"?), but there is no extortion, that is the point I was making in the post you quoted.

I didn’t know there were tiers? Does it work like this? First tier: I am going to the Monarch one day, or the spouse of the Monarch Second tier: I could be the Monarch if a plane crach happens and a whole family dies Third tier: I am a royal, but will never be the Monarch, chances are far too small. Fourth tier: I don’t even have a title (Zara Tindall)

I never said I ever did anything illegal and I am not planning to, all I do is having sex, which is legal, and insinuating otherwise will wake up my lawyer, so don’t.

I respectfully disagree, it is completely legal for me to tell the world who I had sex with, as long as I am not lying. And so asking for money in exchange for not doing something that I am absolutely in my right to do, is not extortion. It is just a contract between 2 consenting parties.

This is so right. There are so many far more risky things that we do all the time.

But they don’t crack up when you agree to pay them “for their time only”? It is just as silly. Yet that is the only way they legally advertise, if you are in the US.

Yeah, that would the be the agreement! We sign a contract where, I, as a hookup person #1, agree completely voluntarily to pay my hookup person #2 at the end of a session of sex, not to tell anyone about what just happened. And frankly, it is already an implicit part of what is happening: If you are an escort and the client doesn’t pay (“sorry, no, that was just a hookup, I am not giving you any money”), wouldn’t you feel your obligation for discretion simply doesn’t apply? So we are already paying for discretion as part of the service. So let’s say just the right words that make it the only reason for any payment. Then it is legal unless the police can prove otherwise.

Then don’t tell them that. I don’t think you understand what Avalon is proposing. He is just saying that we both , the client and the escort, claim that the money is for keeping quiet, because it is apparently not illegal to pay someone to keep quiet about sex. We all know why we are paying escorts. Don’t you?

Ah, he still denies to have had sex with her, I forgot about that. Well, it could still work for us, no?

Why would the escort change what he is doing right now? If he is dishonest, he can be dishonest right now! I don’t understand what you are saying.