Backlash?

[Guest DevonSFescort]

Am I the only one who wonders if there's a new mood in the message center about escorts who actively participate? Check out these comments from albinorat:

 

"The cheering section for about seven or so escorts who post a lot makes me suspicious. No one need be or will be sad, but those are seven I'll give a pass to." (See his post, #26 in the "Rick Munroe's less than glowing review" thread in the Deli, for the full context.)

 

Or spendlove in the "Are Sundays Really That Slow?" thread in the Lounge (#28):

 

"I'm sure you are right and self-promotion is the motive behind every word [Rick Munroe] posts here. But I thought this site was supposed to be to help consumers, not just another site full of escort ads. I think that if escorts want to advertise here they can pay the management a fee to have ads posted, right?"

 

Even Bitchboy, a Rick Munroe supporter, writes (post #27 in the "Rick Munroe's less than glowing review" thread):

 

"He's been a fascinating presence for a long time and one of the real reasons to return here. Has it been self-promotion? DUH! Of course. Has it been mostly sincere? Of course. He's a good guy, extremely witty, great conversationalist and quick witted. I dare say he even enjoyed just being one of the crowd.

 

"It's inevitable that things start to wear a little thin...Critics of Rick Munroe were unheard of in the early days of this site, but I think people have come to put unrealistic expectations on him and perhaps he's collaborated with them and put them on himself as well...Rick, as long as you hang around, I'll be reading, laughing and enjoying. You, of course, are just human and delightfully so. But if you decide to move on, I'll understand. Change is inevitable."

 

Yikes! Are escorts who "talk" too much hurting our own businesses? Would the "consumers" spendlove wants this site to help rather escorts kept a low profile and just let you get on with asking what Twink #47's new email address is since AOL bounced him?

 

Just what is it that is arousing so much suspicion? As far as I can tell, the only myths or expectations Rick's posts have created are that a) he gives great blowjobs, b) he likes to get rimmed, and c) he has an engaging personality. The first client in 39 reviews to find Rick merely 'satisfactory' didn't report any letdown with regard to any of these expectations, and he specifically remarked that Rick was very handsome and gave good head. He was (understandably) irritated but reasonably forgiving about Rick's Lucy/lateness episode, and his only mismatch on the expectations front was that the word 'versatile' had made him think Rick would be ready to bottom on a moment's notice -- a perception which, come to think of it, he couldn't possibly have gotten from Rick's self-promoting posts on the message center, which have said that you should let an escort know if you're going to want him to bottom so that he can be prepared. Nor could he have gotten it from the "hype" in the reviews, since only two out of several dozen mention Rick bottoming.

 

Strange, then, that Rick (who -- full disclosure -- is becoming a better friend the more I get to know him, and whose words on almost any subject have a mysterious aphrodisiac effect on me) has become the whipping boy of the moment on the subject of overhyped escorts. I don't doubt for a moment that some escorts are, in fact, overhyped -- what, you don't think my clients tell me stories? -- but it seems to me the best place to take them on is the review section. I was struck by albinorat's amazing statement:

 

"I know a lot of men who have been clients of the most popular and pushy escorts here. Because of their candid reports I have steered clear of those escorts. These clients, noting the escorts' popularity were unwilling to write less than highly enthusiastic reviews so they didn't review the experiences."

 

Say WHAT? Am I reading this wrong, or is albinorat all but blaming the escort's vocally happy customers (and/or would-be customers) for his friends' distinct lack of nuts? They were unwilling to write less than enthusiastic reviews under an ANONYMOUS HANDLE? For fear of what reprisal? Ironically, the only people whose message center handles are actually linked to real reputations which could, in fact, suffer some serious damage, are -- don't look now -- the escorts. If any escort, be he me, Matt Vancouver, or (don't get me started) Kip O'Brien, says something stupid he feels the repercussions immediately and for quite awhile. Embarrassing moments have a long shelf life. If someone gets laughed out of the message center -- or storms out -- under a non-escort login, guess what? They can come back in with a new identity (though BewareofNick may be on their case) and start over. The same goes for their reviewer handles. Just let an escort try that, and the penalty flags rightly fly. How long do you reckon it'll stay a secret if I change my name to Biff and try to escort under that name?

 

So I'm sitting here thinking, oh shit, am I one of the pushy escorts albinorat has in mind because I post a lot and flirt with Rick Munroe? I'm getting a little paranoid, thinking maybe people don't want to see escorts on here. Maybe they want a place where clients can talk about the escorts in peace and not have to endure their self-promotion.

 

I think that's a question clients ought to ask themselves. Do you want a message center culture where escorts are NOT posting a lot, NOT flirting with each other and with clients, NOT trying to flag a little wind into the sails during a slow period, NOT making their opinions known, and throwing some raunch into the mix? Because if that's what you want, by all means keep up the backlash against escorts who frequently post. It's already working; the pool seems to be getting smaller all the time. I'm starting to wonder whether I'm doing my reputation net harm or net good by posting on here so much, even though I know for a fact I'm not misrepresenting myself in any way. I don't even want to think about the message center without Rick Munroe. The very idea is a cure for insomnia. But you know something? I wouldn't be surprised if Rick got tired of the daily trash talk directed at him and decided to pull out of the message center and just get a website already. Getting to know him has made me aware of how little things that I'VE said -- jokey posts like "Oh, c'mon, Rick's not that old," start to combine with Traveller's hilarious (and, I think, good-natured) "Rick's a used-up cum-hole" jokes to create this image that Rick's old and tired when -- reality check -- he's been doing this for, what, two and a half years? If stuff like this from friendly posters has a way of creating unanticipated image problems for a well-known escort, imagine what the casual smears from people who hate him (whether they've met him or not) start to do after awhile. Yes, we're public figures and should expect some of the attendant bullshit, but think about this: Rick and Matt both LOST business after being named escort of the year, and yet have had to endure sniping from jealous escorts who assume that it's a boon to their income. How's that for getting the worst of both worlds?

 

All of which is a long-winded way of saying the message center is in a strange place indeed right now -- dull AND dangerous for escorts. Even escorts who don't post here are subject to hit-and-run smears, with nothing like the context of an actual review. Who cares, it's only a whore, say whatever you want.

 

I'm curious: would people rather see an escort-free, or at least an escort-lite message center? Are clients coming to chat with other clients and finding our self-promoting presences a distraction? Am I wasting my time? With apologies to CT Dick, enquiring minds want to know!

[marc anthony]

Not all posters on this board are suspicious of escort participants. I wish more of them would participate... however, I do tell my twinky favorites to be careful of sticking their foots in their mouths here, as the environment can be unforgiving. Since most of them don't want to get in trouble, they stay away.

 

Bottom line... I like escorts. That's why I hire them. So naturally I like to hear from them, be it on this board or in email conversations.

[+ imagooddog]

I think that escort input in the message center is a valuable

addition and can lend insight into various subjects. I read

almost all the new messages everyday and not even thought of

any escorts comments as being self-promoting, just some fun

additions and topics to play with. Looking back now I can see

where some people could think of them that way, but hell, if

they are self-promoting, so what! None of them have been escort

profiles. I say the escorts are more than welcome to chime in

on any topic or to start new topics. Just my opinion.:-)

[Will]

I've noticed that there seem to be three types of posts from escorts. Type #1 is the intensely personal, whining, spoiled-brat kind of post that always has to do with something that the escort in question does or does not like and resents anyone who doesn't agree. Type #2 is the knee-jerk and frequently pointless witticism whose sole purpose seems to be to turn everybody's attention to the escort-poster, not to the subject of the thread. Such posters have a way of repeating themselves until the sense of the thread is lost altogether. Type #3, of which you, Devon, are one of the stars in my book, is the thoughtful response that draws on an escort's experiences. For me, those are invaluable, and I am very, very grateful to all those escorts out there -- Rick, JeffOH, and Matt come to mind, along with you -- who will agree simply not to be on stage for a minute.

 

Of course, in many ways these are overdrawn distinctions, and in some ways they apply to clients as well as to escorts. But you asked about escorts. For me, Types 1 & 2 get very old, very fast, and I do not miss them. But I'd sit in front of my computer by the hour to read posts of Type 3 from escorts.

[Guest spendlove]

You quoted some comments of mine in another thread. I was simply agreeing that the poster Thunderbuns, who seems a lot more knowledgeable about Rick Munroe and a lot more interested in him than I am, is probably right in saying that Rick's motive for posting here is self-promotion. I've seen several threads created by Rick that have no obvious purpose other than to draw attention to himself. So I conclude that Thunderbuns is probably right. I defer to him in this matter which he obviously cares much more about than I do.

 

It doesn't make much difference to me whether escorts post here or not. Now that the message board is being censored (one of my posts in that same thread was censored even though it didn't violate any posted rule) my only interest in this site is comments by clients about escorts. I have noticed from messages posted on the board by clients that some who have had negative experiences don't want to write reviews because clients who do are often attacked by escorts for being (a) unclean, (b) drug addicted, © stalkers or (d) all of the above. Even though they are reviewing under a fictitious name they seem to find this an unpleasant experience. So anyone who wants to get the lowdown on a particular escort needs to check not just the reviews but also the message board. I don't find posts by the escorts who post here very entertaining except for Rod Hagen, who seems like an intelligent guy and does not seem motivated by self-promotion in much of what he says, at least in my opinion.

 

Escorts who post here have the option of posting under a fictitious name also, so they can't complain they that can't participate without drawing critical attention to their professional identities. If they choose to post under their professional identities to promote themselves, they should be aware that they might encounter dissatisfied clients or other problems and it is their choice.

[Guest MikeConway]

Its the nature of the beast that you will find all sorts of people on these kinds of message boards. I think its valuable to have both escorts and clients on here. This site has been a great resource for me, and allows the free flowing discussion on some issues that not always have clear cut answers. Is there a backlash or is it just another round of complaining that we so often see here that will happen time and time again.

[mmk]

I like it when an escort participates in this message center, regardless of the topic. To here what tv shows, magazines, books,etc they like I think gives us more insight to there charcter then just a mere review can. To me, it shows that they are not just a "sex machine" or "a dumb piece of meat for hire". What I especially like is whenever an escort will recomend another. I think that does show that they do care about the money that the client is spending. By recomending another escort, they are quite possibley taking money out of there own pocket and putting it in the pocket of another.

 

Is the fact that they are posting here a sense of advertising themselves? Yes, it probably is but who cares. They might have something interesting to say or some advice to give. I do wish that more of them would post more often.

[Guest bottomboykk]

>one of my posts in that same thread was censored even though it didn't violate any posted rule

 

What post was that? There's been no mention among the moderators about any posts needing to be deleted. We make it a practice to talk about these things.

 

Tell me about this supposedly censored post.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>I was simply agreeing that the poster Thunderbuns, who seems a lot >more knowledgeable about Rick Munroe and a lot more interested in >him than I am, is probably right in saying that Rick's motive for >posting here is self-promotion.

 

Yes, and I quoted you as saying that. I also quoted you as, in effect, complaining that the message center was becoming "just another site full of escort ads." That seems to go well beyond "simply agreeing" with Thunderbuns.

 

 

>It doesn't make much difference to me whether escorts post here or >not.

 

Then why complain that escorts' self-promotional posting doesn't serve to "help consumers," and why the "escort ads" dig? Although I'm arguing with you, I give you credit for raising an interesting quality issue. My question to the group is, do escorts' self-promotional efforts on the message center ultimately make it a livelierm more interesting, more fun, and sexier place than it would be otherwise? Would it be better if there were fewer escorts posting or more escorts posting? If you'd like to see more escorts posting, do you think the climate here encourages that or discourages that? Okay, that's more than one question. :7

 

>my only interest in this site is comments by clients about escorts.

 

Fair enough. How do you know they're really clients and not jealous fellow escorts?

 

>I have noticed from messages posted on the board by clients that >some who have had negative experiences don't want to write reviews >because clients who do are often attacked by escorts for being (a) >unclean, (b) drug addicted, © stalkers or (d) all of the above.

 

Have you also noticed that the responses tend to speak for themselves?

 

Even though they are reviewing under a fictitious name they seem to find this an unpleasant experience. So anyone who wants to get the lowdown on a particular escort needs to check not just the reviews but also the message board.

 

But of course the posts on the message board are under a fictitious name and are subject to the same types of attacks. On the message board, it's much easier to say, "oh, I've seen that escort and he's out of shape and smells." BLAM. There's a hit on that escort's reputation that's impossible to refute. Saw him where? Saw him when? Under what circumstances?

 

I'm not suggesting that escorts who post here deserve a free pass and should get no criticism. I'm pointing out the fact that it is already a risky business for us to do so, and when the "anonymous" posters decide to have a field day on escorts for reasons that appear to have nothing to do with their actual job performance, when they persist in perpetuating the worst, most cynical stereotypes over and over, they are making it riskier for us to be ourselves and post here. I am also arguing that this is extremely short-sighted and will lead to the final decline of the message center if the ppol of regularly posting escorts gets much smaller. However, if clients tend to agree with spendlove that this would not be a bad thing, it certainly makes sense for me to hear that too.

 

>Escorts who post here have the option of posting under a fictitious >name also, so they can't complain they that can't participate >without drawing critical attention to their professional identities. >If they choose to post under their professional identities to >promote themselves, they should be aware that they might encounter >dissatisfied clients or other problems and it is their choice.

 

But see, this is what's so interesting. Rick ISN'T encountering dissatisfied clients. Yes, late last year he encountered "nice guy," and that issue was very thoroughly debated; the scenario was an extremely unusual one that most escorts never confront, and most of us have moved on. Nobody in this round of Munroe-bashing is actually stepping up and claiming to be a dissatisfied client. By "other problems" I think you must mean smears and innuendos by anonymous cowards.

 

As for "the option of posting under a fictitious name also," sure, that's an option if our purpose for being here is the sheer love of message center posting. I have made no bones about the fact that I'm here to promote my services and my diary -- i.e., myself -- so posting under a fake name won't do me much good. My reason for starting this thread is to try to get a sense of whether clients generally like/don't mind that we self-promote on here, or does it give them a bad impression of us?

[Guest spendlove]

>What post was that? There's been no mention among the

>moderators about any posts needing to be deleted. We make it

>a practice to talk about these things.

>

>Tell me about this supposedly censored post.

 

 

When I logged on this morning I found a post #34 in that thread written by Hooboy in which he called me a nasty name or two. Part of his post is quoted in a subsequent post by Lucky which is still on the board. I submitted a post in reply in which I did not engage in any namecalling. Now I see that my post was never added to the thread and his post #34 has been deleted.

 

Look, go ahead and play whatever little games you wish with this message board, just don't insult people's intelligence by pretending that you are enforcing the same set of rules for everyone and with no favoritism. We all know that isn't true, so why bother to pretend?

[Guest spendlove]

>Tell me about this supposedly censored post.

 

Actually Hooboy's post that contained the namecalling was #30 and that was the one to which I replied. Post #34 was another post by him in much the same vein. Both posts #30 and 34 have been deleted and my reply to #30 was never added as I said.

[+ deej]

>I submitted a post in

>reply in which I did not engage in any namecalling. Now I

>see that my post was never added to the thread and his post

>#34 has been deleted.

 

Hooboy has consistently deleted his own posts on this message center since the day it opened. Sometimes he has an "oh no!" moment, and other times he just doesn't want to put up with the people who lambast him for having any involvement at all. He's screwed either way. He gets shit for becoming involved, and he gets shit for not becoming involved. Deleting follow-on posts makes sense since they wouldn't have any context once his own posts are gone.

 

Personally, I wish he wouldn't do it. But he always has (and I've yelled at him about it) and he always will (and I'll still yell at him about it).

 

>Look, go ahead and play whatever little games you wish with

>this message board, just don't insult people's intelligence

>by pretending that you are enforcing the same set of rules

>for everyone and with no favoritism. We all know that isn't

>true, so why bother to pretend?

 

There's no pretending at all. There are published rules. They say we'll delete anything we care to delete. If you don't like the rules, make your own message center. It's just like "Miss Mona's No-No rules" from the musical "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas" -- the door's thataway!

[Rick Munroe]

>Rick's motive for posting here is self-promotion. I've

>seen several threads created by Rick that have no obvious

>purpose other than to draw attention to himself.

 

This is completely untrue and I resent the implication that I come to this, a website devoted to escorting, to promote my escorting career. When I post a picture of my body, like this one:

http://www.maximumescorts.com/armbands.jpg

it's just to show the proper way to wear armbands to the Black Party.

When I show this one of my ass:

http://gayescorts.net/images5/145_4.jpg

or this one of my ass:

http://www.rentboy.com/pictures/rickmunroe.jpg

or this other one of my ass:

http://malenation.com/images/RickMNYC2A.jpg

or this one of my warm and friendly smile:

http://www.executivemaleescorts.com/rickbothny2.jpg

...in these cases, I am NOT attempting to promote myself. Nor am I being a vulgar self-promoter when I talk about how horny I am (ALL THE TIME) or how I love to go to the theater (WHERE I WEAR MY VERY ATTRACTIVE & APPROPRIATE SUITS) or be taken to Paris (I SPEAK FRENCH) or how I love to be hired for overnights (I LOVE TO CUDDLE AND I NEVER SNORE AND I AM SOOO HORNY IN THE MORNING) or how I love to get rimmed and sucked (ALWAYS TASTY AND ALWAYS HARD) or how I love to top (GET THAT ASS READY FOR ME!) or how I love a hot 3-way with my sexy hot partner Derek Ross:

http://www.male4malescorts.com/images/derekrossnyc03--06-02.gif http://www.rentboy.com/pictures/derekross.jpg

I hope this clears it up for you.

[Guest regulation]

>There's no pretending at all. There are published rules.

>They say we'll delete anything we care to delete.

 

No, that isn't exactly what they say. They provide some specific criteria for what will be deleted. If, as you imply, those criteria mean absolutely nothing and anything can be deleted on a completely arbitrary basis, it makes no sense to publish those criteria at all. All you should publish under "Rules" is the third sentence I quoted above. Anything else is very misleading.

 

I see some posts in this section and the Deli section that clearly violate the criteria you've posted. They haven't been deleted. On the other hand, we are told, posts that don't violate those criteria have been deleted. If so I can understand why some people feel that your very use of the word "Rules" is a misnomer.

 

 

>If you

>don't like the rules, make your own message center. It's

>just like "Miss Mona's No-No rules" from the musical "The

>Best Little Whorehouse in Texas" -- the door's thataway!

 

A number of intelligent, thoughtful people have already taken that suggestion and this board is a poorer place for it.

[Guest regulation]

>Yes, and I quoted you as saying that. I also quoted you as,

>in effect, complaining that the message center was becoming

>"just another site full of escort ads." That seems to go

>well beyond "simply agreeing" with Thunderbuns.

 

Pardon me. I've read the Thunderbuns thread and it seems to me you are reading into spendy's post a good deal more than is written there. He didn't say this site is becoming an ad site. Thunderbuns stated that self-promotion by escorts is the likely motive when escorts post on a board frequented by clients, and spendy replied that he thought such self-promotion really isn't the purpose of this site. That's different from the "complaining" that you attribute to him.

 

 

>Then why complain that escorts' self-promotional posting

>doesn't serve to "help consumers," and why the "escort ads"

>dig?

 

I think those sentiments are coming from you rather than from him. Sorry, but one of my pet peeves about this board has always been people who attribute to others things they didn't really say and then take them to task for "saying" them. That's not nice.

 

>My question to the

>group is, do escorts' self-promotional efforts on the

>message center ultimately make it a livelierm more

>interesting, more fun, and sexier place than it would be

>otherwise? Would it be better if there were fewer escorts

>posting or more escorts posting? If you'd like to see more

>escorts posting, do you think the climate here encourages

>that or discourages that? Okay, that's more than one

>question.

 

Speaking only for myself, I seldom find the posts of escorts here interesting because there is seldom anything original or unexpected about them. Kip O'Brien would be an exception to that, of course. :-)

But I would do nothing to discourage escorts from posting. I am firmly in the 'don't like it, don't read it' camp.

 

>Fair enough. How do you know they're really clients and not

>jealous fellow escorts?

 

I don't, but I've always found it a little hard to believe that any escort would feel it so much to his benefit to harm the business of another that he would post a false negative review here. Perhaps I simply underestimate the sleaziness of this business. Some people have told me that.

 

How do you know that all of those who claim to be escorts are actually escorts? I have never met any of the escorts who post here under their professional identities nor any of those who claim to have hired them. For all I know, there isn't a word of truth in any of their posts. Or yours.

 

 

>Have you also noticed that the responses tend to speak for

>themselves?

 

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

 

>But of course the posts on the message board are under a

>fictitious name and are subject to the same types of

>attacks. On the message board, it's much easier to say,

>"oh, I've seen that escort and he's out of shape and

>smells." BLAM. There's a hit on that escort's reputation

>that's impossible to refute. Saw him where? Saw him when?

>Under what circumstances?

 

Impossible to refute? There's nothing to stop the escort from replying on the board, is there? And the board allows him to reply in far more detail than a review response, correct?

 

 

>I am also arguing that this is extremely

>short-sighted and will lead to the final decline of the

>message center if the ppol of regularly posting escorts gets

>much smaller. However, if clients tend to agree with

>spendlove that this would not be a bad thing, it certainly

>makes sense for me to hear that too.

 

 

Again, you are attributing to someone sentiments that he never expressed. Spendy never said that a dearth of posts by escorts would be a bad thing or would not be a bad thing. He said he didn't really care. I think you should be able to talk about this issue without using another poster as a "straw man."

 

 

>But see, this is what's so interesting. Rick ISN'T

>encountering dissatisfied clients. Yes, late last year he

>encountered "nice guy," and that issue was very thoroughly

>debated; the scenario was an extremely unusual one that most

>escorts never confront, and most of us have moved on.

>Nobody in this round of Munroe-bashing is actually stepping

>up and claiming to be a dissatisfied client. By "other

>problems" I think you must mean smears and innuendos by

>anonymous cowards.

 

What can you be talking about? Is it a "smear" to say that you don't find someone's posts terribly interesting or humorous? If you can direct me to a recent post saying that Rick is a bad person or a bad escort, please do. I haven't seen one.

 

Really, although you say you don't think escorts should be beyond even the gentlest criticism here, I am getting the impression that that is exactly the situation you would prefer. I really don't think any amount of censorship will make the message board into that sort of place.

 

 

>As for "the option of posting under a fictitious name also,"

>sure, that's an option if our purpose for being here is the

>sheer love of message center posting.

 

How about the sheer love of communicating with other people about issues of general interest? Anything wrong with that?

 

> I have made no bones

>about the fact that I'm here to promote my services and my

>diary -- i.e., myself -- so posting under a fake name won't

>do me much good. My reason for starting this thread is to

>try to get a sense of whether clients generally like/don't

>mind that we self-promote on here, or does it give them a

>bad impression of us?

 

It has not given me a bad impression of you. It is exactly what I expected, and so gives me a warm feeling of self-satisfaction. I love being proven right. :-)

[sdg]

while we are on the topic of posts being deleted, I would like to have this explained:

 

Are Sundays Really That Slow? [View All]

I checked "The Lounge" "Ask an Escort" and "The Deli" at around noon today (Sunday - Pacific time) and read all the new messages.%0... Thunderbuns Mar-06-02 12:39 PM

by sdg 36 742

 

as you can see on this topic "Are Sundays..." i show as being the 36 post, however, in the body of this post Devon is #36 and my post, which i though was good and not offensive never made it for viewers to read.

 

curious

sdg

[Guest regulation]

>>But see, this is what's so interesting. Rick ISN'T

>>encountering dissatisfied clients. Yes, late last year he

>>encountered "nice guy," and that issue was very thoroughly

>>debated; the scenario was an extremely unusual one that most

>>escorts never confront, and most of us have moved on.

>>Nobody in this round of Munroe-bashing is actually stepping

>>up and claiming to be a dissatisfied client. By "other

>>problems" I think you must mean smears and innuendos by

>>anonymous cowards.

 

And while we're on the subject, let me add one more thing. I have seen no "smears" about Rick. I have seen Kip, another escort, called a "thief," a "pscyho," a "sociopath" and several other very bad things in a thread in the Deli section. Despite the so-called "rules" against name calling and personal attacks, these posts are not deleted, and I don't see many people leaping to defend this escort from far more serious and damaging accusations than anything that has been said about Rick. You certainly don't seem too concerned about it. Why would that be? Are some escorts "more equal" than others here?

[+ deej]

>No, that isn't exactly what they say. They provide some

>specific criteria for what will be deleted. If, as you

>imply, those criteria mean absolutely nothing and anything

>can be deleted on a completely arbitrary basis, it makes no

>sense to publish those criteria at all. All you should

>publish under "Rules" is the third sentence I quoted above.

>Anything else is very misleading.

 

What part of:

 

We further reserve the right not to publish your post if it is judged to be inappropriate, regardless of the published guidelines.

 

didn't you understand?

 

Do you need further explanation? OK, here: "If Hoo doesn't like it he'll delete it." Is that more clear?

 

Go whine to Ace Bannon or Butch Harris about a board operator censoring posts. Just try it. Just see how far you get.

 

>I see some posts in this section and the Deli section that

>clearly violate the criteria you've posted. They haven't

>been deleted. On the other hand, we are told, posts that

>don't violate those criteria have been deleted. If so I can

>understand why some people feel that your very use of the

>word "Rules" is a misnomer.

 

Talk to HooBoy. Moderators can only speak to the posts that pass through the queue. That is our only responsibility here. (That's in the rules too, if you've read them recently.) If posters are breaking the rules, feel free to point it out to HooBoy in e-mail and he'll demote them to moderated status and probably bitchslap the moderators (politely, of course). Don't bitch at moderators for posts that they might never have seen and have no responsibility for.

 

>A number of intelligent, thoughtful people have already

>taken that suggestion and this board is a poorer place for

>it.

 

I can't honestly say I miss them, and I suspect they're still with us.

[Guest Thunderbuns]

Just in case...........

 

Just in case there is any misunderstanding of my intention in the "Thunderbuns" post that suggested that Rick was into

self-promotion (is that anything like self-felatio?)........... let me unequivocally state that

 

(a) My assumption was based on what I perceive as logic - why wouldn't any businessman take the opportunity to self-promote if it is afforded to him? The answer to this ain't rocket science.

 

(b) I have NO PROBLEM with him (or any other escort)doing so - should that be his purpose.

 

We sure do manage to get our knickers in a twist (or those that wear them) with relentless regularity on this here board!

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest DevonSFescort]

Anyone familiar with regulation/pickwick/spendlove's posting habits knows the drill: one of "them" makes indefensibile statements which another poster calls them on, then the next identity comes along to split hairs and say "spendy never said that" in lieu of actually arguing a position. People can decide for themselves whether I characterized "spendy's" posts correctly, though I'll concede regulation knows "spendy's" mind better than I do.

 

>I've always found it a little hard to believe

>that any escort would feel it so much to his benefit to harm

>the business of another that he would post a false negative

>review here.

 

I was talking about false "hit and run" message center posts, which are no trouble at all to write -- "oh, I've met him, he's older than he says he is and doesn't look like his photo" -- presto, whether you're a rival escort or just a bitter queen, you've just made a swipe at his reptuation. Reviews take more work and may be subject to at least some confirmation effort, and they take time to post, etc.

 

>How do you know that all of those who claim to be escorts

>are actually escorts? I have never met any of the escorts

>who post here under their professional identities nor any of

>those who claim to have hired them.

 

If you doubt it, you can see if their email address and website in their profile match the contact info in their reviews. You can even call the number in the reviews and ask the escort if he's aware someone is posting under his identity. That's IF you doubt it, of course. You never SAID you doubted it. I don't want to get in trouble with "pick" or "spendy" for putting words in your mouth.

 

>Again, you are attributing to someone sentiments that he

>never expressed. Spendy never said...

 

Here we go again. That "spendy" sure has a lot to not say! :+

[chrismac]

>My reason for starting this thread is to

>try to get a sense of whether clients generally like/don't

>mind that we self-promote on here, or does it give them a

>bad impression of us?

 

Devon, due to my self-styled preference for bigger, top guys in the past, I probably wouldn't have considered hiring you had it not been for your posts here. I consider myself a savvy enough consumer to sift through promotion to find the things I want.

 

It has been the paragraphs you and some of the other escorts have written, particularly subject matter that seems to come from the heart, and a true sense of humor displayed that has prompted me to open my eyes to guys here I might have overlooked in the past. To devote that much time and energy here on this board purely for profit would be a serious waste of resources. Obviously it can't hurt your reputations, but it must be clear to all that you participate here out of a sense of enjoyment and engagement, far beyond the profit potential.

 

Keep it up (in all ways! ) - and don't let the cynics get you down.

}>

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>I have seen no "smears" about Rick. I have seen Kip,

>another escort, called a "thief," a "pscyho," a "sociopath"

>and several other very bad things in a thread in the Deli

>section. Despite the so-called "rules" against name calling

>and personal attacks, these posts are not deleted, and I

>don't see many people leaping to defend this escort from far

>more serious and damaging accusations than anything that has

>been said about Rick. You certainly don't seem too

>concerned about it. Why would that be?

 

Probably because Kip admitted to stealing from his client and also threatened to expose him to his wife on this site. He's done his own reputation so much harm that an outraged client calling him a psycho from the sidelines is superfluous.

[duke37]

I'm not sure what magic words you used spendlove to get Rick all fired up and post this but PLEASE do it again!

 

Jeff

[Guest 7Zach]

Well, just like the email section said (or was it news), there's no back stubble there in the pic...

[Guest Bitchboy]

Of course people don't really want to see an escort-free message center. But what people do seem to want is an escort in his place. He shouldn't be too pushy, too much like he is a real person, and godforbid he shouldn't get cocky or too many good reviews.

 

I have a theory and I point it at no one in particular. I've hired escorts as well, so this is not casting aspersions against clients. But I do think that clients CAN and OFTEN DO become resentful of paying for this service. It's sort of a resentment that brews over a period of time. And then along comes an escort, like maybe Rick Munroe, or Devon, or Jeff or anyone of the regular dudes here, and he seems to be having a good time. He seems to enjoy his work. He gets off on people liking him. He's handsome or cute or pretty or buff. At some point the client-held resentment bubbles over and turns into suspicion. Rick lasted (and by no means is it over and done with) a long, long time. I would leave the message center for months at a time and when I'd come back, there would be Rick Munroe still posting, still getting the good reviews. Even I (and I adore that ass - and the mind that goes with it) felt how long can this go on?

 

Anyway, yes, Devon, I think you do have to be careful. Backlash? For sure.