SirBillybob

I have hired from ads less than 10 times in the past 25 years, yet hundreds of sessions, and have no pattern in terms of sched reliability to describe. In the examples above I lean to ‘team client’. However, there may be a parallel set of unique point-of-direct-interaction booking dynamics in strip clubs with private dances. I have had cases of dancers, as opposed to striking when the iron is hot in terms of my explicit interest in private dances with them, tell me they will circle back … usually the standard “give me 5-10 minutes”. This can be frustrating if they are very appealing and fixation-worthy. That 10 minutes may drag out much longer. I typically don’t experience much back-up option and the one I want is usually the one I must have. If he is my 10, I don’t want to risk taking up with an 8. But I am not an out of town visitor and I can return often. They will then case the joint for other introductions and to make acknowledgements with regular customers. At times I will witness the dancer reeling in dance cash and coming back to me much later or not at all. In fact, I may approach again and they seem to be enthusiastically up for it. I have no way of knowing if they struggle to track their contacts over 5 hours, whether they feel that they should not approach me after I have waited a while, or they are still hedging for a better offer that might come along. You can almost sense the abacus beads clicking around. Never ever ever do they allude to accommodation based on bidding. Not surprisingly, in rare cases where I have been a regular dance client, I tend to be accommodated at point of request. This weighing of variables must be as tiring for them as it is sometimes daunting for clients. I figure that in that setting the customer and dancer have mutual choice prerogative. Of course, the worst that occurs if one regularly lives nearby is that cash stays in one’s pocket for next time. On the up side, one would need to be delusional for the most part to imagine the dancer favours you outside of the pay cheque aspect.🤣 The transactional context keeps one grounded, most of the time.

More manipulation. Do you actually socialize in real life? I have not been privy to CV details, authentic or bogus, beyond any poster’s public message board extant representation of professional status and institutional context already submitted. I don’t socialize based on ‘hierarchical’ status. So now it was acceptable to talk shop with two Brazilian physicians that happened to be seated with me on two separate recent flights, one of which culminated in a family dinner with a view of 6-foot snowbanks, but the content of some 1,400 text exchanges with a fellow ‘sex tourist’ is restricted to trade playbook content? That is insane. Content and good will dynamics that would have made it easy early on to wiggle out of a misrepresentation and carry on friending? Moreover, it is not lost on me that casting me and my fellow queer sex tourists in such a restricted circumscribed way simply further calls into question and explains the inconstancy and apparent illegitimacy of their various impressions, as manipulatively described by you within your bonkers conceptualization of the intersect of trade interest and human interactional normalcy. These trite dust-ups can be as simple as squabbles about who is hot. 😂 What I am entitled to is the proclamation that you are a compete nut. What is in common among your tiny paltry dream team of evidentiary character witnesses is the notion that those sex tourists positioning selves as a cut above simply need to be cut down to size. I’ll discuss it over drinks with one next winter. —- Ripcord. Out. Pizza (well, not actually). As much as you are trying but failing to make my day with Succession out of the frame and Yellowjackets on hiatus. Date with recent recipient of USA passport and he is just as nice as my bio American cousins. Bye bye, toxicity. That includes bottomless SOTheB bargain basement butt-ins never seeing the light of day at auction, or … not never.

By the latter I take it you are referencing contrasts to self-appointed judges and non-bogus surgeons, both categories needing to puff themselves up and live in the board baseboards rather than attend to loftier tasks within either faux or genuine status. If you are reluctantly inducted (sarcasm, in the event the dim read this) into hall monitor and image-smearing, my guess is envy viz the former pro listing. The vigilante commitment is peculiarly commendable but puzzling.

That is not the point. What would have worked? What is bizarre is anybody that makes links without consent and paints lack of capitulation with further character critique. It brought you out of your hole with intel and that was the main exigency. I did not link you with another similar board. That was your prerogative. Anybody with a modicum of class won’t impute pseudonym links between, say, two Queerty handles that represent the same argumentative overly opinionated poster. Those iterations are one’s autonomous choice. At the end of the day, I am up against a few posters that serve the epitome of obnoxiousness. As far as personal significance goes, that you would self-appoint as arbiter simply further underlines grandiosity. Class: 0 stars. Intelligence: 4

Well finally a confirmation. And a whittling down to sources of YOUR questionable spin-doctoring. I am aware of my history of interpersonal transactions. I have also received, and maintained, written unsolicited correspondence warning me to keep my distance from, ahem, certain ‘angry’ members. You may be surprised about the source and how backchannel gossip plays out with oddly mutating alliances. You may be also surprised about recent correspondence with I presume to be the aforementioned seasoned members you prevail on for your flimsy case. Why would you in particular require a heads up about me? This just smacks of self-aggrandizing reputation spin-doctoring and buttresses my impressions made in the first place. Of course accountability is a governing heuristic, as is taking with grains of salt the number of stars allocated to anybody anything anywhere. Are you going to keep referencing entitled Americans? A very few are my bane, but I would not extrapolate from a sample size of 2 or 3. I might situate it based on proportional representation of nationality but that would be a gross distortion.

Not a defense if a distortion, a false claim of knowledge of ethnicity, and embedded among a series of put downs. So, what we call up here disingenuous stank.

I take it they don’t literally finish on the first stage but keep some in reserve?😏

Your obvious sad self-imposed penance is assiduously splitting hairs ‘til the cows come home.

There’s no complete predicting of systemic equifinality, assistant to the assistant to the assistant AG, but with a bit of insight and trust the chips may land in decent interpretable order. But do keep regaling us about your apparent entrapment in your own annoyances. Signed: First Nations truth and reconciliation expert witness.

If that’s the topic my posts here are on the mark. My few bad experiences have been with fellow travellers that are clearly not well. One is best advised to roll with it.

Interesting. Wonder where they get it from.

Writes the game-playing guy that derails his own topic merely hours ago in cahoots with a self-defined big-dick court jester, projects, and doth protest too much. And since when is a SabBRATical from a middling board, for some, inadvertently collateral damage and not a favour to the majority, for others not a fair trade-off for core truth revelation. Do you really think somebody was centring out another for shits and giggles, not for stimulating the trickling in of puzzle pieces, even today, for an RCMP report on missing national and provincial government documentation ostensibly lifted during a toilet break during lunch with a co-member imposter while at his lodgings, a sociopathic misanthrope recently allegedly defaulting on payday loans, the consequence of said pilfering requiring cash payment of Metro return home fare on March 5th, 2020? Is it really such a mystery that a DM would be sent exclusively to an apparent arch-nemesis shortly thereafter, aiming for empathic attunement from the absolute least likely candidate, from somebody notoriously known for blind overreactivity and emotional volatility, but not for the chance of subsequent arch-nemesis posted subtext for the relevantly involved to tune into? You know, over-confidence is a few strokes away from putty, from well-deserved quicksand. It can always be discussed with like-minded cronies, or your bestie that’s off his clanging trolley. My advice to anybody banned, wear it, own it. If a 2nd such exile, as I believe to be the case, all the more reason for learning from it. Interestingly, I have received reports that the other guy I think is often referenced is tracked as logging in, so life as he knew it is neither hardly over nor ever particularly bereft had the board not existed. For my part, I don’t care where people have post privileges. Maligning me is not a privilege and a robust ‘what for’ will be the response. Mine is not a twisted end-game, more an end-game with twists, would that I could say with thrills chills spills as opposed to endless stifled yawns, yet minimally otherwise tarnishing the delights of tourism.

Wheeee! Another member with crippled fingers angling for the imperative of an eventual Ophthalmology consult.

How can you comment on three-dimensional directionality in a delusional multiverse of your own fabrication?

I’m the topic you are clearly pathologically obsessed with, so the suggestion that I could be accused of veering off topic is an asinine non-starter.

From the mouth of a drama meme. You two are back to picking out the fur nits?

Well she would be tailoring, not panning, no? That her expressivity skills would outpace those of a particular blog would not be such a stretch.

No. You do comprehend and you grasp the nuances but pretend not to in the interests of contrarianism, close kissing cousin of … well, you get the drift … just as I understand you at the required analytical threshold to handle, following a mere single-digit quantity of exchanges. Why would I bother to debate with the thing that would be a legend of divine omniscience in his own mind.

Apart from the DC car detailing, terms such as “treated different”, and “real entitled” for that matter, seem to reflect Americanisms. Not to criticize the shortcut use of substitutions within speech patterns, eh, just to offer that one would likely not witness this so much elsewhere, certainly not the UK. At one of a post-pandemic thumbless handful of 202 checkouts, I briefly stalled the process to scrutinize the onscreen itemization. This typically takes a few seconds. One other customer, African American within the younger percentile of typical clientele age and quite good-looking, was the sole customer in queue behind me. He said “I’ve got you”, to which I quickly replied it was unnecessary, but thanks. I don’t think he could actually view my total. He quickly paid, as another attendant with another device had stepped up, and bolted down the stairs. It was an uninspiring and blue-balls night there so maybe he wanted to hightail it to 117 before closing. 🤣I don’t recall if it was a Monday; I think not. For anybody offering what he did, irrespective of background and situational context, I would typically think one part impatience, one part sensitivity in picking up on a potential [sic] awkward dynamic at point of pay, one part gracious generosity. But I would not calculate it as zero sum and the net take and response, giving him the benefit of the doubt and his props, is “Bless his heart”, as opposed to “Stereotype me? How very daaaare you?!” 😌 —— Contrary to Gueirra’s POV about management not feigning to speak to “Blacks” feigning protest, it appears that Barbosa is quite open to having a particular kind of word with them. 😏

More scrapping within the Dream Team I overlooked earlier? Figures.

This reindeer games post arguably puts you in the realm of somebody serving a caricature of himself. Take a break and enjoy your annual family/roots pilgrimage. It can be a challenge to unplug. The bored will still be here.

You are more an interloper here regarding fact and truth checking, and bitter at apparently having been called out. In systems parlance, this is often conceptualized as court jester role acquisition. A convenient distraction for a number of players central to the story that love a smoke-screen. And people in general, queens or otherwise, are generally reluctant, often driven by cowardice, to reverse course and admit the errors of their ways. However, this reminds me of the account of a message board poster, a clinician-researcher and med school faculty member, that met another board member posing explicitly as a high profile physician, a text penpal sitch a few months prior to meeting, platonic. When it was obvious in the face-to-face that the faux doctor had been fabricating his image and status all along, while the one being bamboozled didn’t much care other than preferring reality grounding, things went south as the impersonator clung futilely to his narrative at a deranged-grade level, including when they joined up with a few other fellows with whom the faux physician incomprehensibly persisted in identifying himself with a far-fetched range of medical specialties, culminating in much awkwardness between them. Including faux doctor having a public wailing breakdown, pre-empting the type of rational adult reckoning that would otherwise have been in order. Word to the wise: Don’t yank others down your rabbit-hole without a successful fully informed visa application. Some of us don’t suffer fools, imposters, posers any more than they do pederasts. This, it subsequently came to light, cascaded to faux MD apparently maligning the formerly hoodwinked but wizened board member, casting him as socially inept and fickle in relation, in contrast, to their previous seemingly positive connection. And brazenly manipulatively trash-talking with other board members within regional report commonality, presumably also represented among recent posts. A few other outrageous details have been referenced elsewhere. Would that example land in the category of delusional and vicious? And sadly, pathetically funny to boot, as I wind my single braid with cord, and get ready to be wound up for the next boring round? Cue the next bozo clown’s cloud of narrative distortion, as the thread careens all over the place. Discerning fact from fiction is, after all, the topic’s theme, inn’t Vicky? And … match. FullSizeRender.MOV

Or with bachelor’ette’ douches travelling in packs, club-wide and platform-wide alike. Signed: ultra taciturn ‘lone wolf’ infrequent hooguy club attendee.

I read you. Settle down. It was a compliment, part of the discussion. I actually previously mentioned it would be the purview of the venue owner. If you wanted a focused discussion why did you get suckered into colluding with another poster’s tangential obsessive boilerplate hounding? Your OP was objective and did not crawl out from under the baseboards. Subjective vendettas just cancel out the impression of objectivity. Nobody put you behind enemy lines as far as opinions about your potential role in mitigating the negative 202 review. Admittedly, I don’t see all contributors posts. Who relates to the topic? Moi.

Anybody can say or write anything. Take for example the introduction of this thread. A mirrored parallel of distortion. The thing is, can a story be backed up or is it just backed up? What reports are you referring to that are not a dizzying degree of separation from reality? My Convoluted Reasoning and Abject Pomposity meter is off the charts reading these posts.