Would You Hire Him?

[Chuck50]

Not sure why you are picking on VAhawk he is truly a nice guy. Just because some people like to defend ohters doesnt make them in love with them. Some of us just dont like some of the hate and discontent that goes on at this message center. To bad more people can't be more upbeat about itall. HUGS Chuck50:9 :9 :9

[Doug69]

>Not sure why you are picking on VAhawk he is truly a nice

>guy. Just because some people like to defend ohters doesnt

>make them in love with them. Some of us just dont like some of

>the hate and discontent that goes on at this message center.

>To bad more people can't be more upbeat about itall.

 

http://images.art.com/images/products/shdws/small/10056000/10056205.jpg

 

http://images.allposters.com/images/MMPH/161131_a.jpg

[Guest jeffOH]

>Jeff of Ohio is another one who hasn't been

>mentioned on this board yet. Not only would I hire him only

>from his comments here (not really my type from the still

>picture, but I bet he is in action)but I wish he'd go back to

>sharing some of his exploits, too. What ever happened to that

>gorgeous neighbor he met by the pool, the one who was maybe

>the son of an old flame? Etc.

 

Well, thanks Bilbo, unfortunately nothing happened with the gorgeous 21 year-old neighbor boy. He was indeed the son of a former crush I'd first met 15 years ago. His still gorgeous father(who's now 44)moved to Boston a couple of years ago. The boy moved to another apartment building up the street a month or so ago. He was quite interested when I told him I worked as an escort, lots of questions. Maybe he'll be reviewed on this site some day!LOL!

 

JEFF

jeff4men@hotmail.com

[Chuck50]

Thank you Shirley!!!!

[Rick Munroe]

>Rick Munroe and I actually bumped heads in a Thread when I

>first appeared here

 

It was more fun when I got to give head instead. }(

[Rick Munroe]

>Anybody know why we haven't seen much of Rick lately?

 

Well, it's about time someone noticed. Between escorting, going back to school, and volunteering for Howard Dean (petitioning door-to-door in the snow; what fun), my life has been pretty hectic lately. It's always good for me to take breaks from posting, anyway. I wouldn't want to be overexposed. :+

[Rick Munroe]

RE: NOT insulting Rick

 

>he's probably busy with Dean meetups (i fucking HATE that

>word!) and campaigning. he said he was going to even do some

>doorknocking and trudging through snow in NH for him.

 

You're almost right; we were instructed by our NYC campaign managers to stay in NY and petition. Hey, I'll go wherever the next President of the United States needs me. And yes, that includes under his desk on my knees if it comes to that (it won't; he's no Clinton in that regard but I can dream, can't I?) :9

[buckguy]

I've hired at least four past or present posters here. Two were pretty negative experiences (and approps of my previous comments about Atlanta, they were both based in Atlanta!), but their posts only added slightly to their desirability (they came across as people who might be interesting company). Scott Bradley (total airhead, unreliable, barebacker) is the one who still escorts and he slams the guys on this site on other bulletin boards.

 

I hired Rick Munroe, in part because of his response to a negative review: he admitted that he fucked up---no excuses, no bullshit. One of the few escorts who's ever responded that way to a negative review. I also like it when he talks political and when he shows the edgier side of his obnoxious sense of humor (rather than the cornier side). I enjoyed meeting him & had a good time. I also hired Aaron Scott, who came across as a really nice guy in person.

 

I've also corresponded with another escort regarding his plans for vacation travel to a part of the world where I've been many times. For whatever reason, I've not considered hiring him (either before or after our correspondence), although I think it would be interesting to have a drink or dinner and talk about travel with him.

[Rick Munroe]

>I can't believe I forgot Rick Munroe on my definite YES list.

>Sorry, Rick. I hope to be in NY soon.

 

Bruce, you read my mind. Be careful; you know we escorts have fragile egos. I hope you get to NY soon, too.

[Rick Munroe]

>I would like to meet Rick Munroe

>because he seems like a really fun guy

 

Actually, I think Rick is a total asshole but that's just my opinion.

[Rick Munroe]

>I'd definitely hire Rick

 

}( :o :7 ;-) :* :9

 

>It's truly amazing how much energy people expend around here

>JUST to tarnish someone they've even never met.

 

Yeah, especially when it's much more satisfying to spit polish than to tarnish. :9

[Rick Munroe]

>I also like it when he talks

>political and when he shows the edgier side of his obnoxious

>sense of humor (rather than the cornier side).

 

You little bitch (edgy enough?). Seriously, thanks. I'll try to suppress the corn. :7

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

>Not sure why you are picking on VAhawk

 

Because I think he's a hypocritical, brown-nosing, hyper-active little cunt.

 

 

>he is truly a nice >guy.

 

Outside of what I stated above, I'm sure he is.

[JamesK840]

I don't concede that I make many negative posts, especially lately--since my truce with VAHAWK (I did go a bit overboard there, but I also learned from it). I've certainly responded to attacks on my friends in ways I would've edited later, were it possible. But I don't think of myself as initiating negative threads, though you're welcome to present recent evidence to the contrary.

 

That is one thing about this place: some people, who's opinions and behavior seems practically cast in cement, don't realize that others are still (hopefully, at least) changing, growing, and improving.

[JamesK840]

Wait a minute, I'm being called on supposed negativity by someone who just wrote:

 

>But you're just a big fat leftist fairy blob in Louisiana, so

>what can one expect from you?

[woodlawn]

>Should I have this pointed out to me when I make a mistake and

>do what I criticize? Yes, of course. But most of the time I

>have already seen and regretted it. Will you call me a

>hypocrite too for agreeing with James? Does regretting the

>negative things I have posted and actively TRYING to not add

>to the problem make the criticism more valid?

 

I am one of the people at whom you frequently aim your negative remarks. As such, I do indeed consider you a hypocrite for engaging in attacks on people who express opinions you don't like and then lamenting the negative atmosphere on this board.

 

I don't believe you when you say you "regret" being negative. If that were true, you always have the opportunity to say so in the same thread in which you post negative comments, and so far as I know you have never done that. I believe that what you do, you do quite deliberately, not as the result of a "mistake." Saying you "have already seen and regretted" the negative remarks you post is just a way of absolving yourself from your hypocritical behavior. Like so many people here, you want BOTH the opportunity to attack people you disagree with AND the opportunity to pretend you are the sort of genteel individual who deplores such behavior. Here's some news for you: the pretense isn't working, so you may as well drop it.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Would You Fight Him?

 

Advice to James: Do not get into a pissing contest with the two most negative posters here.

[JamesK840]

RE: Would You Fight Him?

 

Woody was actually responding to Duke, but you're right of course. I just didn't want it to stand unopposed; as Fox "News" teaches us, if lies are repeated enough then people start to believe them.

[Doug69]

RE: Would You Fight Him?

 

>Advice to James: Do not get into a pissing contest with the

>two most negative posters here.

 

Here's a nice example - but by no means a rare one - of someone bemoaning negative posts and, in the very same post where he does that, personally attacking and insulting other posters.

 

Only in this forum would that sort of naked hypocrisy be unnotable.

[Doug69]

>I don't concede that I make many negative posts, especially

>lately--since my truce with VAHAWK (I did go a bit overboard

>there, but I also learned from it).

 

The personal insults and attacks I've read posted by you were, by no means, confined to VaHawk, although those were some of the more egregious and vicious ones I've read from you. But I've seen equally insulting posts and personal attacks from you directed at numerous others here as well, including me. Knowing that you've done that, I couldn't help but be quite bewildered when I read a post from this very same person declaring how bad and harmful negative posts are.

 

>I've certainly responded

>to attacks on my friends in ways I would've edited later, were

>it possible.

 

Well, given this admission, aren't you a prime example of the very problem you were just decrying - the problem which you claim your friend told you keeps people away from here? And if that's the case, wouldn't your energies be better directed at reforming your own behavior rather than parading yourself around as the Advocate of Civility? At the very least, wouldn't your sermon about Civility be a lot more credible if, rather than pointing to others, you acknowledged that you yourself frequently post uncivil and insulting material here?

 

I thought people hate right-wing lecturers and think they're hypocritical because they preach against behavior which they themselves engage in, without admitting that. How come it's ok for you to do that?

 

But I don't think of myself as initiating

>negative threads, though you're welcome to present recent

>evidence to the contrary.

 

So the only problem that your friend was identifying is when someone starts a thread with negativity? Negative posts don't bother him as long as they appear in the middle of a thread?

 

As for your other post referencing what you consider to be a negative post of mine, you should be aware that I am not condemning, nor have I condemend, "negative" posts. So whether I engage in them or not seems quite besides the point. You are the one who has come here to tell everyone how bad those types of posts are, so the fact that you engage in those very same posts that you condemn is quite remarkable.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Not Just A Job, An Adventure

 

In addition to meeting a number of clients from this site, I have also met a number of escorts - some through this site, some through other sites and some from AOL. With only one exception, everyone I have met from this site has been as interesting and intelligent as their posts. All of the escorts I have met have been interesting and sharp, and I enjoyed meeting them all, but the ones who do not post here, do not do so because their impression is that they have little to gain and do not wish to be the brunt of the kind of judgments and opinions they see going on in this site. When I have suggested that they should consider participation, that has been the standard response.

 

As I wrote above, I think this site is interesting, informative and amusing. Some escorts likely get business from this site and who among them simply posts with that expectation and rationale is easily apparent. I can speak only for myself, but the rest of us, especially the escorts listed on here I have met and/or corresponded with, I believe view this as a community they take an interest in and therefore a part in.

 

Finally, even with the pissing contest that go on and the number of short or repetitive or merely sophomorphic or inane posts that can sometimes appear here, when I look at a few other such Boards, this one frequently offers more in content and value.

 

Just for clarity, the escort mentioned as the exception, WHILE reviewed on this site, has NOT posted on the MC, at least not to my knowledge and NOT under his escort name. My opinion of him is based on the fact that in person, he did not match his advertised description nor photograph, and because, while advertising himself as bisexual, he made it clear to me he hated having sex with men and was only doing it only for the money.

[JamesK840]

You are conveniently skipping over the fact that my negativity was confined to responses to the three or four people most here would probably agree are the ones who delight in driving people away.

 

And I continue to think that some response, though not necessarily in-kind, is warranted, so that it's clear to the person under attack (especially if they are new) as well as any lurkers considering participating that those couple of people are in the minority.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Would You Fight Him?

 

Naked hypocrisy is the the only acceptable kind, in my opinion!

[Doug69]

>You are conveniently skipping over the fact that my

>negativity was confined to responses to the three or

>four people most here would probably agree are the ones who

>delight in driving people away.

 

OK - thank you for clarifying that. Negative posts are ok provided that they are used by certain people (you and posters you like) and directed against certain other people (the posters you dislike).

 

So it's not that negative posts per se are bad - to the contrary, they actually can be quite justified and useful as long as the right people are wielding them against the people on the blacklist. Negative posts are only bad when used by the people you dislike against the ones you like.

 

That's what I thought you meant.

 

>And I continue to think that some response, though not

>necessarily in-kind, is warranted, so that it's clear to the

>person under attack (especially if they are new) as well as

>any lurkers considering participating that those couple of

>people are in the minority.

 

How do you know whose posts are supported by a minority of posters and lurkers and whose posts are supported by a majority? If it's YOU and your friends who are in the minority, then does that mean it's ok to launch personal insults and attacks against you?

[JamesK840]

You see, you are still missing one word in the sentence: responses. I refuse to ascribe to the turn the other cheek, get walked all over philosophy of some other liberals, much to certain people's distress.