Escorts should post, of course

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>You continued inability to point to any recent post that

>justifies the accusations you've been making says it all, in

>my view.

 

Yawn. I don't have to. There's already an apology thread going in the Lounge which makes my point for me. I have also recently responded directly to a couple of smears in other threads which maligned one escort's trustworthiness and accused another of misrepresenting himself. I won't repeat the smears here. If you care, however, which you say you don't, you can certainly search my recent responses.

 

Other posters have said that they, too, sense the phenomenon I've described. Admittedly, they tend to be the kind of people who think that there's more than one "entertaining" escort on the message center, but that does not invalidate their opinions.

 

>Anyone who reads your post in which you mock people who

>participate here "for the sheer love of posting on the

>message board" and state that you "make no bones" about the

>fact that you post here to promote your business will have

>to conclude that that is the motive for every word you

>write. No supposition is necessary. One merely has to take

>you at your word.

 

There must be some problem with the Search feature. The only post of mine with the words "for the sheer love of posting on the message board" contains no mockery of such participants. Instead, it states that that is not my motive for maintaining a presence here. I encourage people who are predisposed to participate on message boards for the for the sheer love of posting. I spend time on here for professional reasons. That doesn't mean I disparage anyone who spends time here for different reasons. To the contrary, I believe the more participants the better.

 

It should go without saying that "the fact that post here to promote [my] business" does not mean that "that is the motive for every word write." My desire to promote my business is a necessary precondition for the words I write -- it is why I am here to write them. It is not the motive for the words themselves, which are honest, spontaneous responses to ideas expressed on this board. Furthermore, the type of marketing my message center presence supports is not so much aimed at increasing the volume of clients, which hasn't been low since I started escorting, but at attracting the types of clients who might like me for my personality as well as my body. I have more fun with those kinds of clients. This marketing strategy has been wildly successful so far, and will continue to be so despite your attempts to redefine me. Maybe even because of them, judging from the emails I've been getting. Thanks!

[Guest DevonSFescort]

Not sure what happened with the italics. Sorry about that.

[Guest regulation]

>Yawn. I don't have to. There's already an apology thread

>going in the Lounge which makes my point for me.

 

After saying you were done with this subject you have decided to post on it again. What a shock. Is this your absolute last, final and ultimate post on the subject?

 

Yes, I read Al's apology post. That's how I know it refers to comments he posted AFTER you started the complaints about the posts attacking escorts, not BEFORE. So where are the recent posts saying that Rick is a bad escort or bad person that inspired you to start all of this? Still can't come up with any?

 

I also observe that there is nothing in Al's comments comparable to what you said about me, for example, when you used the words "sleazy" and "beneath contempt" in referring to me. Anyone reviewing his comments, mine and yours would have to conclude that the problem here is not clients insulting escorts but the exact opposite. Of the three of us, your comments have been by far the most insulting. If there is anyone here in a position to complain about incivility, it certainly isn't you.

 

>If you care, however, which you say

>you don't, you can certainly search my recent responses.

 

If you don't care enough about the point you were trying to make in the "Backlash" thread to substantiate it, why should I? I've never believed there was anything to it, and you've produced nothing that contradicts that view. As I expected.

 

>Other posters have said that they, too, sense the phenomenon

>I've described.

 

They "sense" it? That sounds as though they've been consulting a medium or a Ouija board. We are talking about a message board in which communications are posted in black and white. Either they are on the board or they are not. I don't see you coming up with any that validate your point. What a surprise.

 

>There must be some problem with the Search feature. The

>only post of mine with the words "for the sheer love of

>posting on the message board" contains no mockery of such

>participants.

 

When you say that you post to promote yourself rather than "for the sheer love of posting on the message board" you imply that those are the only two reasons for posting. Glad to hear you didn't really mean that.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>Yes, I read Al's apology post. That's how I know it refers

>to comments he posted AFTER you started the complaints about

>the posts attacking escorts, not BEFORE.

 

Good point! You're right, it's an ongoing problem.

 

>I also observe that there is nothing in Al's comments

>comparable to what you said about me, for example, when you

>used the words "sleazy" and "beneath contempt" in referring

>to me.

 

Awww, don't take it personally, Reg. I wasn't talking about YOU. I merely said that your "tactic of disparaging escorts (sometimes individually, sometimes as a group) from multiple handles is sleazy, pathetic, beneath contempt, and one you have been confronted and mocked about extensively in previous threads." Seems a shame to leave out that last bit. Still awaiting your denial, by the way.

[Guest regulation]

>Good point! You're right, it's an ongoing problem.

 

But a problem of which you can't seem to point to any example occurring in the proper time frame to inspire your complaints. Which means that they were inspired by something else. As I've already pointed out.

 

 

>Awww, don't take it personally, Reg. I wasn't talking about

>YOU. I merely said that your "tactic of disparaging escorts

>(sometimes individually, sometimes as a group) from multiple

>handles is sleazy, pathetic, beneath contempt, and one you

>have been confronted and mocked about extensively in

>previous threads." Seems a shame to leave out that last

>bit. Still awaiting your denial, by the way.

 

You're in for a long wait. If I were to do anything to stop you from posting the hysterical insults and accusations which are such an important feature of your behavior here, I would deprive myself of a source of much amusement. And why would I want to do that? Amusement is what escorts are for, correct? :-)

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>You're in for a long wait. If I were to do anything to stop

>you from posting the hysterical insults and accusations

>which are such an important feature of your behavior here, I

>would deprive myself of a source of much amusement. And why

>would I want to do that? Amusement is what escorts are for,

>correct? :-)

 

Finally! I've made that exclusive list of escorts whose posts entertain "reg!" (Unless, of course, I amuse him without entertaining him, which in "spendy's" world of split hairs, is certainly possible.) Now my TRUE agenda has been revealed. }> :+

[Guest regulation]

>Finally! I've made that exclusive list of escorts whose

>posts entertain "reg!"

 

 

If pressed, I would have to admit that your posts are not actually entertaining, but I would still maintain that some are at least on the edge of being entertaining and that with a great deal more work on your part they could cross over into the territory of the definitely entertaining. This gives you something to aim for.

 

You have also made the list of escorts who have said that they are going to stop posting on this or that subject or stop posting altogether, but who have posted on and on and on nevertheless. But I'm afraid that is not a very exclusive list. :-)