Petition for Purplekow

[Guest greatness]

I don't know what happened when I was sleeping last night. However, he was one the most passionate and caring people I have met here. When one of the escorts here was in a financial trouble he helped him out even though he has never met him. He has been kind to NCM who is dealing with a serious illness and he is always quick to show commiseration for other members in pain. He encouraged good escorts and was always there to compliment them. He defended us when we were disparaged. He gave good pieces of advice in how to manage pets. Most of all he has a good caring heart toward others. Whatever he did, it is not in his character to do so. I think Daddy and moderators should give him a benefit of doubt and reinstate him.

[josephga]

I agree. He also helped and was very supportive when my dog became ill about a year ago. And was very good to me and concerned when my dog of 10 years passed away 2 weeks ago. I think he should be allowed back.

[+ Lucky]

And I join in as well. He has overall been a very positive poster. No, I don't know what he did to be banned, but in light of his contributions here, it seems harsh.

[+ Oliver]

Daddy's overkill

 

Banning Purplekow - definite overkill by Daddy on behalf of one of his "pets". The information obscurely divulged was readily available elsewhere. Yes, it's Daddy's domain, but this is ridiculous. (Now I'll probably be next, and this tread deleted, too.)

[Guy Fawkes]

I don't know what happened when I was sleeping last night. However, he was one the most passionate and caring people I have met here. When one of the escorts here was in a financial trouble he helped him out even though he has never met him. He has been kind to NCM who is dealing with a serious illness and he is always quick to show commiseration for other members in pain. He encouraged good escorts and was always there to compliment them. He defended us when we were disparaged. He gave good pieces of advice in how to manage pets. Most of all he has a good caring heart toward others. Whatever he did, it is not in his character to do so. I think Daddy and moderators should give him a benefit of doubt and reinstate him.

 

It was his decision to attempt to "Sneak" around the rules not once but three times. He may believe that he was being humorous however the rules are there for a reason and he doesn't get to pick and choose which ones that apply to him.

 

He will be welcome back in a little under a week.

[Guest greatness]

That's good..

 

Thanks Daddy... I know it's hard to manage a site. I do understand your hardship in dealing with all sorts of people. It is not easy. Thanks for your clarification. Purplekow hurry back~~~ For the other post I thank you for deleting it. It was not my intention. I was just lamenting my life.. I guess my depression got hold of me.

 

 

It was his decision to attempt to "Sneak" around the rules not once but three times. He may believe that he was being humorous however the rules are there for a reason and he doesn't get to pick and choose which one that apply to him.

 

He will be welcome back in a little under a week.

[JT Brooklyn]

Who would have ever thought an "Illegal Act" by a Working Guy other than "Working It" could cause so much Drama on Daddys!

[+ Charlie]

I read the thread in question yesterday, and saw nothing to justify banning purplekow, who has been one of the more positive contributors here for quite awhile. Many of us already knew the news about the escort in question before the thread appeared, and it was so non-specific about the identity of the escort and the crime that it took me a minute even to put the stories together. If purplekow's offense was to name another site that did identify the escort, does that mean that we are not allowed to refer to any news source that might mention a crime involving an escort (or at least an escort who is one of Daddy's favorites)?

[+ Lucky]

It was his decision to attempt to "Sneak" around the rules not once but three times. He may believe that he was being humorous however the rules are there for a reason and he doesn't get to pick and choose which ones that apply to him.

 

He will be welcome back in a little under a week.

 

 

Well, then, it's a suspension, not a ban. Even so, given how widely known the name had become, PK's action seems minor enough to merit a warning rather than a harsher punishment.

[+ Charlie]

Things are moving so fast here that the last three messages went up while I was writing mine, so I didn't see Daddy's response. Unfortunately, I don't really understand it, but it is what it is. I will welcome purplekow back in one week, provided I haven't done something to get banned myself by then.

[Guy Fawkes]

Who would have ever thought an "Illegal Act" by a Working Guy other than "Working It" could cause so much Drama on Daddys!

 

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned,

Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned,"

 

-The Mourning Bride (1697) by William Congreve Act 3, Scene 2.

[Guy Fawkes]

Well, then, it's a suspension, not a ban. Even so, given how widely known the name had become, PK's action seems minor enough to merit a warning rather than a harsher punishment.

 

Lucky you've been invited to be an moderator multiple times. Have you changed your mind?

[Guy Fawkes]

Charlie,

 

I'm always looking for another good moderator... Would you like to be considered?

[Guest greatness]

I nominate luck too

 

He will be so good....

 

Lucky you've been invited to be an moderator multiple times. Have you changed your mind?

[Guy Fawkes]

BTW: Least you wonder... I am a bit a bit grumpy and in moderate pain. I've a fairly nasty leg infection and I have a follow up visit with the Doctor in a couple hours so I don't want to lay down until I get back.

[Guest greatness]

I hope you feel better

 

I hope you don't have something serious...

 

BTW: Least you wonder... I am a bit a bit grumpy and in moderate pain. I've a fairly nasty leg infection and I have a follow up visit with the Doctor in a couple hours so I don't want to lay down until I get back.

[+ Charlie]

Thanks for the offer (I'm flattered), but I already spend too much time working online, and I'm trying to wean myself from sitting in front of the computer when I should be doing healthier things. I have always had enormous respect for the work that the moderators here have done.

[Guy Fawkes]

Drat! Missed by [ ] this much!

[Guy Fawkes]

I hope you don't have something serious...

 

I believe that the infection was caught in time. The Doctor has me on two different antibiotics. I suspect that if She isn't happy with the progress (and there has been) that I'll be getting antibiotics via IV today.

 

The swelling has gone down and the pain is up (common occurrence)

[jgoo]

Thread Removed

 

Just a note to say that at the other message board, the thread there on this escort was also removed (but it sure did take some time compared to it here, especially considering the identification of personal info for the escort). The other site administrator/moderator did post something to detail why the thread was removed.

 

I am not sure it is appropriate or allowed to post what was said there but I will do so at the risk of being rebuked because it does concisely state the position regarding such a post:

 

"Personal gossip is fun but has no place in an escort forum where reputations and business careers can be unfairly damanged. Furthermore, we won't lend this site as a forum for anyone with an agenda against individuals whether the facts are based on truth or falsehood.

 

The thread regarding alleged personal problems of an escort member has been taken down because the thread violated site privacy policy by linking to alledged personal identification information.

 

In addition, the alleged problem pertains to personal issues, not business issues. We extend the same member-personal-privacy-privleges to escorts as we do members. Only their business related attributes, attitudes and activities are fair game for discussion in this venue.

 

Any further threads reagarding alleged personal problems of any member will be removed. Violation of the Forums Policy can lead to loss of post privleges."

[Guest greatness]

oh my

 

I hope you feel better soon. I go to hospital a lot these days and it is no fun. Here is a song for you...

 

 

I believe that the infection was caught in time. The Doctor has me on two different antibiotics. I suspect that if She isn't happy with the progress (and there has been) that I'll be getting antibiotics via IV today.

 

The swelling has gone down and the pain is up (common occurrence)

[Guy Fawkes]

I hope you feel better soon. I go to hospital a lot these days and it is no fun. Here is a song for you...

 

 

Thank-you greatness, that was cute!

 

Warning: Certain members of the M/C may be offended by the Pussy Juice

[Lookin]

I will welcome purplekow back in one week, provided I haven't done something to get banned myself by then.

 

Same here, alevai!

 

BTW: I've a fairly nasty leg infection and I have a follow up visit with the Doctor in a couple hours . . .

 

If you haven't already, it's probably a good idea to insist on a lab test to find out exactly what bug is causing it. Scrolling through a bunch of different antibiotics in hopes of finding the one that works could lead to trouble.

 

Best of luck. http://www.smileyshut.com/smileys/new/Others/nurse-163.gif

[Guest greatness]

i like your nurse

 

What is her name?

 

Same here, alevai!

 

 

 

If you haven't already, it's probably a good idea to insist on a lab test to find out exactly what bug is causing it. Scrolling through a bunch of different antibiotics in hopes of finding the one that works could lead to trouble.

 

Best of luck. http://www.smileyshut.com/smileys/new/Others/nurse-163.gif

[Boston Guy]

I read the thread in question yesterday, and saw nothing to justify banning purplekow, who has been one of the more positive contributors here for quite awhile. Many of us already knew the news about the escort in question before the thread appeared, and it was so non-specific about the identity of the escort and the crime that it took me a minute even to put the stories together. If purplekow's offense was to name another site that did identify the escort, does that mean that we are not allowed to refer to any news source that might mention a crime involving an escort (or at least an escort who is one of Daddy's favorites)?

 

That was not PK's offense. I was the one who mentioned MER, which was not a violation of the rules as I understand them. Since I was the one who originally wrote the rules, I do feel that I have at least some knowledge of them and felt that I was within the rules when I posted the link to MER. I also mentioned that I felt it was reasonable for the owners of each site to specify the rules for their site and to expect others to live within those rules.

 

PK got in hot water by writing sentences that contained capitalized words where the capital letters spelled out the screen name of the escort in question. At least that's my understanding of it. That did seem to be a pretty clear violation of the rules to me. And, as noted above, MER has also chosen to remove the information posted at their site.

 

I find this entire topic to be a difficult one because of the tension it places on the varying goals of these sites. In the first instance, both sites have policies that (quite rightly, in my opinion) aim to protect the personal privacy of both escorts and clients. But both also, in the end, exist almost solely to allow clients to learn more about escorts. Thus, when an escort is accused of a crime in his personal life that might bear in some way on his role as an escort, the two parallel goals -- privacy and the sharing of information -- come into conflict.

 

In the past, there have been other examples that fell more squarely at one end of the line or the other. For example, there used to be two brothers from Canada who would advertise on Rentboy in NYC. They were reasonably attractive but would routinely steal things from clients. They were discussed heavily and openly on the HB Message Center that predated this one -- quite rightly, I think, because what they did was completely related to escorting.

 

Then we have the two gentlemen who are in jail in PA, who are accused of murdering a man who was not a client. This has made the national news and, if they ever get out of jail, one would hope that any escort sites would loudly warn any potential clients.

 

But, in the current instance, the crime the escort is evidently accused of is not a violent crime that might make him more likely to threaten clients or their property (I think; the details are sketchy and should not be relied on). Consequently, one could imagine him resuming escorting with clients who remain happy with his services. In this event, would I feel an obligation to warn a future client about this event? Probably no, unless there is far more to it than meets the eye.

 

In the end, I think Daddy is taking the right course in deleting the information. If the crime were one of violence or if our understanding changes as events unfold, it's possible where the need to warn clients becomes greater than the need to protect the privacy of an individual. But I don't foresee that in this case and thus I'm on Daddy's side in erring on the side of personal privacy.

 

BG