Benjamin Nicholas comes clean

[jackhammer91406]

Speaking as a yammerer (is that even a word? Oh well)

 

I have written to Daddy many times as you have suggested and the response has been as you have suggested. That being said, while I think it's well known where I stand on the issue of the link, as Rick pointed out in his original post, this site gets more readers, and just in case someone doesn't know where I stand on this issue, I'll keep yammering.:7

[Guest mbarz]

>>on the front page of this site

>

>A page few people actually see, by the way. I'd never even

>know the link was there if it wasn't constantly yammered about

>here.

 

Few people see the front page? Come on deej, that's bullshit, the cover boy of the day is on the front page, everyone sees that, when Benji has a new 15 minutes column, the link to it is right below the picture of the cover boy. You'd have to be blind not to see it or lying about it.

[+ deej]

>You'd have to be blind not to see it or lying about it.

 

Or you'd have to be smart enough to have a shortcut directly to "Today's Reviews", which bypasses the front of the site and does away with the top frame (giving the reviews more screen real estate).

[Doug69]

>This is the wrong venue for your complaint.

 

This is called a Message Center, the purpose of which is to discuss things, particularly things relating to escorts and escorting, as well as matters relating to this website. Benji is an escort. This site links to his blog. Therefore, this is the exact right venue to discuss Benji and his blog.

 

The MC runs

>independently of the M4M review site, where that link exists.

>If you want to complain about it, write to

>daddy@male4malescorts.com. I have, many times.

 

Why are you pretending that "Daddy" doesn't look at posts here? He edits enough of them, which means he is looking at them.

 

Moreover, if you and others have written many times to "Daddy" about this matter, I seriously doubt that my writing to him is going to change anything. Many people have written to him about this, apparently, and he ignores the criticism. Why would I waste my time writing to someone who has expressed such obvious indifference to the opinions of the participants here?

 

Finally, in case you haven't noticed, I haven't been complaining about the fact that this website links to that blog or crusading to have the link removed. I say what I think about Benji and his blog and that's it. I would continue to do so when and if the mood strikes, regardless of whether or not this site links to him. So I have no personal interest one way or the other in whether he is linked.

 

I was simply making clear that -- contrary to your criticisms -- this is a perfectly legitimate place to criticize the content of Benji's blog if one is inclined to do so.

 

>always that the owners do not consider the issue important

>enough for consideration.

 

Who do you mean by "the owners"?

[+ deej]

So in other words, you're perfectly happy bitching about about City Hall but you're too fucking lazy to get off your ass and vote. How convenient for you!

 

>Who do you mean by "the owners"?

 

Is the concept foreign to you? (I know it isn't!) I meant those who own the site.

[Guest mbarz]

>>You'd have to be blind not to see it or lying about it.

>

>Or you'd have to be smart enough to have a shortcut directly

>to "Today's Reviews", which bypasses the front of the site and

>does away with the top frame (giving the reviews more screen

>real estate).

 

not everyone that comes here is an old relic of the site, so I'm guessing that the majority of the people that come here do see the front page and the link to Benji's column. It's nice that you know how to create a link and that it gives you the opportunity to show off you vocational training, but I hardly think it makes you smart, who knows though, with a lot of work and perseverance, you may be able to turn it into a career...

[+ deej]

The people who visit here will forgive you your backwards ways, I'm sure.

[buckguy]

Clearly the madness goes on....I can think of at least one couple that has retired in the past few months. They made porn, so I guess that might make them high profile. They never really advertised as a pair, though. So perhaps this just a hoax. BN hasn't posted, which is a little odd because he hasn't been shy before.

[VaHawk]

Wow, cut BN a break, already! If people have a need to piss and rail, then do so against the op of the other thread!

 

BN's blog referred to "former" not "current" escort couples. How could that possibly be "tied into" Rick and Derek? OOOOH, I KNOW, could it be that someone started a thread on this site, and then proceeded to "cut and paste" out of context, from BN's blog?

 

If the op had not done so, on this site, where most people would assume it was about R&D, then there would have been no such outrage, caused by such an illusory allusion!

 

How many potential clients read BN's blog, versus how many who read this site? How many of R&D's potential clients first heard the "implications" on this site, and not BN's blog?????

 

Rick should not blame BN and his blog, but blame the op who cut and pasted the comments on this very site, where most people, would inaccurately ASSUME that BN was referring to R&D!

[Guest mbarz]

>The people who visit here will forgive you your backwards

>ways, I'm sure.

 

Yeah...but how sure are you they will forgive you.

[VaHawk]

OOOOOOHHHH! Do we get a vote???? I'd vote for deej over mbaaaaaaaarz any day! :7

[Guest mbarz]

>OOOOOOHHHH! Do we get a vote???? I'd vote for deej over

>mbaaaaaaaarz any day! :7

 

You know VaHawk, I almost feel sorry for you, you're uneducated, you have no friends - now that Buzzard died - no life, you live in a trailer, and, obviously, you lack all social skills to maintain any type of relationship beyond what you have with the hookers you pay. So, if it brings joy to your rotten little heart to say publicly that you prefer deej over me, who am I to stand between you and happiness, I hope the two of you have a long lasting relationship, no two people deserve each other more...may God bless both of you.

[Anton]

Okay, time for some fun :

 

The perfect escort visits his doctor since he has trouble with his memory :

 

"Hello doctor, I think I'm having trouble with my memory, is there anything that can be done about it?"

 

"Hmm maybe, can you tell me how long you're having trouble with it?"

 

"Eerr, with what?" :7

 

email : antonM@antonamsterdam.com

mobile : +31 6 2523 1001

website : http://www.antonamsterdam.com

reviews : http://www.antonamsterdam.com/text-en/reviews.html

[+ deej]

Wow. I had to read that a couple of times to see if you really said what you said.

 

What you're saying is the equivalent of saying to ignore the guy who yelled "Fire!" in a crowded theater, and blame the whole stampede on the first guy that ran.

[+ glutes]

>

>I just don't understand why this site allows the princess to

>say things like that and get away with it.

 

Ah, you hit the point that I have brought out before: Why does Hedda Hopper of Hooville get special treatment??

[jackhammer91406]

Hawk, pull your head out..

 

Hawk, you have your head stuck so far up BN's ass you can't think straight. If this site links to BN's blog, then the offensive statement as much as appears here. Get it?

 

Now, I don't think anyone can tell BN what to print in HIS OWN blog. But if he is going to print stuff, just to excite and cause controversy, then he has to accept the fallout (read responsibility) for his actions. He can't keep commissioning his clients to come here and place the blame somewhere else (that's what Bush and his administration do). For those of you who are BN's apologists (oh wait, that's wrong, he hasn't apologized) you guys need to get some sense of what is going on. These blind items could just as easily be about you next time. Then is it still ok, will it be your fault then (by your own reasoning)?

 

See, it's like this; you and the others can trot out here every time he does something that shows his true (lack of ) character, and still it doesn't make what he does all right.

 

I think Rick's anecdote about Hooboy's take on BN is just about perfect.

 

By your argument, it's ok for BN to peddle pigshit, just as long as we don't call it that and don't blame him for slinging it. Am I getting that right? Cause at the end of the day and after all of his legions of defenders rail and point, the crap is still pigshit.

 

My argument has never been whether he can print what he wants, of course he can....But as long as he is linked to this site, and he prints inflammatory blind gossip, well then he has to take the heat that goes with it, and so do you and his other choir boys who come on here and say "leave BN alone"

 

Geesh

[RockHard]

RE: Cleaning house.

 

Gentlemen; rumor, innuendo, and titillation is what gossip writing is all about (I think I'm repeating myself...forgive me). As long as Mr. Nicholas doesn't name names, he's free to write whatever he wants within the generous parameters set by law. I would even go scandalously further to say that, technically, he could even make things up. As long as you can't prove in a slander suit who he is talking about, freedom of speech gives him, and others, tons of exaggeration latitude.

 

You're all free to call his writing venomous, shit-smeared, pigshit and/or question his morals until the day comes you start questioning your own (which for some of you will be never). Freedom (and blogging) gives you that right. Gossip and gossip writing has never been my favorite cup of "tea" but, BN is free to write to his heart's content as long as he plays by legal freedom-of-speech rules. Read his blog or view porn (very high moral ground there), I'm free to read both.

 

Just because you are absolutely sure who BN is referring to in his column doesn't mean you can prove it in a court of law.

 

As far as the link issue goes; whoever pays the bills, makes the decisions. Nobody is forced to click any link. Nobody is forced to read anyone's blog. Maybe HooBoy and BN had a special relationship? Maybe they had a business understanding or agreement? Maybe Daddy and BN have an understanding? Whatever the reasons for providing the link, they're none of my business. I would suggest, they're none of yours, either.

 

Of course, you're all free to gripe, moan, moralize, complain, and send letters, if that's how you choose to spend your time. Freedom permits these lovely pastimes, also. However, unless you own your own site, your rights to control content and/or links in other sites are non-negotiable. In other words, you have none.

 

If you hate and/or despise and/or disagree with any fact or element regarding this site, you're free to go elsewhere. It really is that simple. :-)

[Guest Mikel]

For what it is worth, Rick, I am glad that you feel vindicated...as well you should be. All the unintentional arguments that your post precipitated set aside, your reputation rises above all the other garbage and I just wanted to reinsert that perspective. You have a right to a well earned, good reputation. Enjoy it, along with those of us who respect and enjoy you.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Yawn

 

Rockhard, are you becoming more of a BlowHard? Yes, you are repeating yourself. Kinda pompous as well, but hey, I like that in a guy.

[+ Lucky]

RE: RockHard Photo

 

From the Onion.com, we learn of this graphic outerspace galaxy that could be RockHard:

 

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Astronomers-Discover-C.frontpage_thumbnail.jpg

[AdamSmith]

Repetition compulsion

 

RockHard, you idiot. But I repeat myself.

 

The trouble is, you do too.

 

You have posted over and over that BN’s gossip is not legally actionable. But this refutes a point that no one made.

 

The posters objecting to BN’s behavior did not say he broke the law. We said what he did was base, low, scurrilous, contemptible. Get it?

 

By the way, you said slander when you meant libel. No doubt a ploy by the honed legal mind to fuddle the opposition.

[RockHard]

RE: Oh dear, repeating myself again.

 

"You're all free to call his writing venomous, shit-smeared, pigshit and/or question his morals until the day comes you start questioning your own (which for some of you will be never)."

 

"Of course, you're all free to gripe, moan, moralize, complain, and send letters, if that's how you choose to spend your time. Freedom permits these lovely pastimes, also. However, unless you own your own site, your rights to control content and/or links in other sites are non-negotiable. In other words, you have none."

[+ Lucky]

RE: Oh dear

 

How funny that you would talk about our lack of "rights" to control content in a site when you yourself started out here complaining that daddy wasn't listening to your suggestions and that he had better make some adjustments or you would be out of here. Now from your perch in the galaxy you are telling others to take a hike if they don't like it. The fact is that we have every right to make our opinion known whether you like it or not!

 

(Last line edited out as not being nice. Regrets extended to RockHard)

[jackhammer91406]

Simplicity itself

 

Rockhard,

I stand by my welcome of a few short days ago. You are a new voice ( I think) and it's good to have some of those every now and then.

 

As for what I think of BN, yeah, it's not much, but one of the great things about this site is that we are able to express our opinions each and every one. I don't rail on people often, but when I get the bit in my teeth, I can give it a good run. As I said sometime before you signed on, I have met Ben. He's a nice kid. I have also said I don't care for gossip in any way , shape or form, nor the people who engage in it. Just my opinion and in no way should anyone construe anything other than that.

 

After all that has been said pro and con, it's still comes down to whether I think BN takes responsibility for what he writes and what he tells clients about other clients. As a result of what I would call a casual relationship with trustworthiness, he has been partially responsible for the identification of a client, the tabloid type outing of a public person and now an innuendo campaign to besmirch the reputation of as yet unidentified fellow colleagues.

 

In addition, other well know personalities have been identified through tales he tells clients and clients can't help but blab to others. The unofficial line here has always been confidentiality. When an escort violates that, he should expect to be judged by that. If this site cannot facilitate the choosing of trustworthy escorts, then this site should shut down, (something I in no way advocate).

 

I do have the right not to read his blog, and I do have the right to go elsewhere. But, Rockhard, I also have the right to address what in my opinion is unacceptable behavior by an escort, and nothing you say, write, or threaten will ever change that.

 

Have a nice day and once again, welcome to the jungle.

[AdamSmith]

Having it both ways

 

>As far as the link issue goes; whoever pays the bills, makes

>the decisions. Nobody is forced to click any link. Nobody

>is forced to read anyone's blog. Maybe HooBoy and BN had a

>special relationship? Maybe they had a business understanding

>or agreement? Maybe Daddy and BN have an understanding?

>Whatever the reasons for providing the link, they're none of

>my business. I would suggest, they're none of yours, either.

>

>Of course, you're all free to gripe, moan, moralize,

>complain, and send letters, if that's how you choose to spend

>your time. Freedom permits these lovely pastimes, also.

>However, unless you own your own site, your rights to

>control content and/or links in other sites are

>non-negotiable. In other words, you have none.

>

>If you hate and/or despise and/or disagree with any fact or

>element regarding this site, you're free to go

>elsewhere. It really is that simple. :-)

 

This diatribe against complaining to the site's management is the oddest thing, coming from someone who a few days ago posted all in favor of plaguing Daddy with entreaties for change if not outright threats:

 

"I'm writing you to suggest, once again, the institution of a registration fee. When a registrant is required to pay to belong to this very helpful service you provide, he will be most disinclined to be a troll, become a troll, or behave like a troll.

 

"Also, please consider utilizing a stronger moderation process. If you wish to attract the kind of quality-posters this helpful site deserves, blatant name calling must not be permitted. I strongly recommend a policy of one-warning and then banning the username from the board. Many other successful forums utilize this approach.

 

"Finally, I know this might be considered a strong-arm procedure but I would not be opposed to forbidding free email addresses in the registration process. If registration requires a paid-for ISP address, I can almost guarantee a very civilized group of participants and zero trolls. Free email address can be used in user-profiles to protect from spam and privacy issues."