LET'S PUT IT TO A VOTE

[ad rian]

>The

>message exchanges within this particular forum reaffirm our

>more mainstream views or responses.

 

Just how many of your countrymen do you think believe that sticking a dick up your ass is "mainstream"?

[Guest JT]

As usual, BG adds a much needed sense of sanity to the discussion. "No" for me too!

 

JT

[Luv2play]

No, because the only speech that I think should be banned is the equivalent of someone yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre (unless, of course, there is a fire). Simply ignore those posts which are loathsome.:-)

[Guest Pulsator]

No - Because censorship is wrong. But I agree with those who prescribe ignoring him. Don't rise to his bait and maybe he'll become tired of his own offensiveness.

[Guest Bitchboy]

As much as I think he's evil incarnate, I would never ban the asshole. Now, if he should choke to death on a dick or something like that .... well, that's a different story!

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

>I vote for ignoring him.

 

That wasn't one of the two choices.

 

You must be French.

 

Continentally yours,

 

FFF

 

My vote: no

[woodlawn]

The proper antidote to offensive speech is more speech, not censorship. Censorship is and always has been a sign of the weakness of the ideas of those who advocate it. NO.

[CT Dick]

(" Well guess what, we laugh at you too! " I think VA's not really laughing. He sounds really pissed. -Dick)

[CT Dick]

No!

 

I agree that we simply ice him off the boards. in fact, I offer this curse to anyone who responds to his bile:

 

May you suffer a Bob Dole moment in your next escort experience. }(

 

Dick

[Guest countryboy76]

Free speech is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be limited by anyone under any circumstances.

 

However this is the last place I would have expected to see such an arrogant display of hatred and ignorance by anyone.

 

CB76

[ad rian]

>However this is the last place I would have expected to see

>such an arrogant display of hatred and ignorance by anyone.

 

This is all very interesting.

[phage]

As others have mentioned, voting is irrelevant, but I would still say “no” because I will take some pleasure in the shunning (if it can be pulled off). However, I wouldn’t blame Daddy a bit if he shut down the whole damn thing. Can you imagine doing the work that he does to keep this site and MC running and this is the end result?

 

I’m curious about all this talk of free speech. Isn’t this more analogous to a newspaper with a ‘Letters to the Editor’ section? Is the publisher of the newspaper obligated to print any piece of garbage that is sent to him?

[BewareofNick]

As Daddy points out, what we want is really a moot point. However, to shut down the message center over ad rian is overreacting and will just give ad rian further jollies. Better solution is just to put ad rian on mderated status for a while.

[MiamiLooker]

I vote No. I find most of his posts amusing.

 

In the locked thread "Space Shuttle Missing (Exploded???)" VaHawk posted about Adrian "He has always struck me as a very intelligent, educated man..." I almost laughed out loud.

 

Adrian started the provocative thread "Insurance for Travelling Escorts". In response to: "...so you were asking if the escort wants life insurance for the plane trip, should you pay for it?" he responds: "Yes, that's the question. It has not arisen, but I do wonder sometimes what would happen in the event of death or injury in a plane crash. Could the escort a family member looking for deep pockets to sue, see my name on the ticket and try to recover from me or my insurance company" This is from someone who's supposed to be an attorney?

 

And from the same thread: "Or let's say he slipped on the ice in front of the house, or tripped going down the stairs etc.I asume that the escort as an independant entrepeneur is responsible for his own insurance..." In one of the threads in "Escorts South of the USA" he discusses "slandering" a city. These are postings from an attorney?

 

One of his postings from "The Crimes of Father Amaro - A Review for ad rian" he states: "I think that is precisely the distinction that the RC church draws and why they want to treat the sickness." How is hiding, reassigning and promoting the abusing priests treating the sickness?

[Guest fukamarine]

>I’m curious about all this talk of free speech. Isn’t this

>more analogous to a newspaper with a ‘Letters to the Editor’

>section? Is the publisher of the newspaper obligated to print

>any piece of garbage that is sent to him?

 

 

Very good point - I had never looked at it that way but it does seem appropriate.

 

I am amused to read that I am the only one to vote YES. All the protestations about free speach are very noble and good arguments can be found for them.

 

I guess I see it a little differently.

 

I view M4M as a club. Let's compare it to the best gentlemen's clubs in any major city of the world. These organizations have a way with dealing with members whose conduct is considered as unbecoming to what the club stands for. It is called the Blackball. If ad rian belonged to such a club and continued to express his vile views to the members, he's be blackball out the door in a New York minute.

 

None of our members have condoned what he said - only his right to say it. I think it's about time we grew some balls and called a spade a spade! Political correctness has it's place, but in my opinion, not with vermin like ad rian.

 

And if Hooboy also agrees with the majority here, then he had better NEVER kick someone off the board again, simply because they pissed him and the moderators off. That kind of duplicity would not sit well with many members.

 

I still would vote for YES, even if I am the only one voting this way

 

fukamarine

[ad rian]

>I vote No. I find most of his posts amusing.

 

I am happy that you read them though!

 

>Adrian started the provocative thread "Insurance for

>Travelling Escorts". In response to: "...so you were asking if

>the escort wants life insurance for the plane trip, should you

>pay for it?" he responds: "Yes, that's the question. It has

>not arisen, but I do wonder sometimes what would happen in the

>event of death or injury in a plane crash. Could the escort a

>family member looking for deep pockets to sue, see my name on

>the ticket and try to recover from me or my insurance company"

>This is from someone who's supposed to be an attorney?

 

Yes, I have my own thoughts about that question. I had a specific reason for asking. Unlike some here, I do like to hear the opinions of others.

 

>And from the same thread: "Or let's say he slipped on the ice

>in front of the house, or tripped going down the stairs etc.I

>asume that the escort as an independant entrepeneur is

>responsible for his own insurance..."

 

I also went on to explain that there is a line of cases that makes this question relevant.

 

>In one of the threads in

>"Escorts South of the USA" he discusses "slandering" a city.

>These are postings from an attorney?

 

I was not using "slander" in a technical legal sense. I think most readers knew what I was getting at - the repeated false or misleading statements about the safety of Rio.

 

>One of his postings from "The Crimes of Father Amaro - A

>Review for ad rian" he states: "I think that is precisely the

>distinction that the RC church draws and why they want to

>treat the sickness." How is hiding, reassigning and promoting

>the abusing priests treating the sickness?

 

That's a nice cut and paste job, but that's not at all the context of what I wrote. Read the post I was responding to.

 

Nonetheless, if I contribute to your literacy by encouraging you to read, I guess that leaves one less good deed for me to do today!

[Guest Dan]

>As others have mentioned, voting is irrelevant, but I would

>still say “no” because I will take some pleasure in the

>shunning (if it can be pulled off). However, I wouldn’t blame

>Daddy a bit if he shut down the whole damn thing. Can you

>imagine doing the work that he does to keep this site and MC

>running and this is the end result?

>

>I’m curious about all this talk of free speech. Isn’t this

>more analogous to a newspaper with a ‘Letters to the Editor’

>section? Is the publisher of the newspaper obligated to print

>any piece of garbage that is sent to him?

>

 

Or when a record company decides not to release what they determine is an incindiary rap record. I believe that the First Amendment pertains more to GOVERNMENT censorhip, not the private sector.

 

Don't be so open minded. You'll end up like congress in Mars Attacks.

 

Dan Dare

http://meetlocalmen.com/mlm/dandarela.html

[trilingual]

Yes. It's time to kick Auntie Semitic off the board. If he re-registers under a new nickname, you'll just need to keep kicking him off. He's hijacking M4M for his own purposes, and harming the site.

 

There's no "free speech" issue here. The board is privately owned, and the owner can pick and choose who he wants to allow to post on his site and what he want to allow to be posted. If I were the owner, Auntie S would have been history months ago.

 

In case everyone has forgotten, with the exception of "The Lounge" the message center is about the escort industry, in all of its various aspects. Auntie S goes into the most innocuous threads and hijacks them for his own hateful purposes. People (including myself) end up rising to the bait and a thread that originates with factual information or a discussion otherwise directly relevant to the topic of escorting goes straight to endless hell.

 

Viewers come to this site looking for information about escorts and escorting. Advertisers pay to post their ads believing that they will be reaching viewers interested in this topic. If viewers come to M4M and all they find is endless, hate-filled screeds from Auntie S, instead of information about escorts, they won't return and they won't contribute. That actively hurts the site and could lead to its eventual demise. I don't want to see that happen, and I doubt most viewers/members want that to happen either.

 

The owner of a business has the right to kick out and ban a shoplifter. Auntie S's hijacking M4M for his own hateful agenda which is unrelated to the purpose of the site is very much akin to shoplifting. Or industrial sabotage, viewed from another angle. There's no reason to tolerate that, and particularly not if you and HooBoy want M4M to survive. Letting Auntie S go on with his campaign here on M4M would be just like an airline allowing Richard Reid to continue flying and trying to blow up its planes because he has a right to express his opinions by attacking its business. Obviously, no airline would do that, and M4M shouldn't allow Auntie S to try to blow up its business, either. And the same should hold true for any other poster who comes in and hijacks the site for purposes unrelated to the principal subject matter.

[ad rian]

>In case everyone has forgotten, with the exception of "The

>Lounge" the message center is about the escort industry, in

>all of its various aspects. Auntie S goes into the most

>innocuous threads and hijacks them for his own hateful

>purposes. People (including myself) end up rising to the bait

>and a thread that originates with factual information or a

>discussion otherwise directly relevant to the topic of

>escorting goes straight to endless hell.

 

How exactly is the Space Shuttle related to escorting again? If you have some inside information, please start a thread. I am sure it would be of great interest to all of us!:+

[Guest newawlens]

>As others have mentioned, voting is irrelevant, but I would

>still say “no” because I will take some pleasure in the

>shunning (if it can be pulled off). However, I wouldn’t blame

>Daddy a bit if he shut down the whole damn thing. Can you

>imagine doing the work that he does to keep this site and MC

>running and this is the end result?

 

I don't see the problem. Anyone is free to ignore posts and posters he finds distasteful. I have never heard anybody who has complained about any particular kind of post give a convincing explanation of why he can't just scroll down and pass it by.

 

>I’m curious about all this talk of free speech. Isn’t this

>more analogous to a newspaper with a ‘Letters to the Editor’

>section? Is the publisher of the newspaper obligated to print

>any piece of garbage that is sent to him?

 

This would be analogous to a newspaper if there was nothing in the paper except 'Letters to the Editor.' As it is, visitors and not the management provide just about all of the content that is worth reading here. The more restrictions management places on what visitors can contribute, the fewer contributions they will get from intelligent, opinionated people, who as a rule do not like being treated like children. And they are the only people whose contributions are of any interest. There are several people whose contributions I liked who never or very seldom post anything any longer due to some actions management took awhile back. If I am not mistaken I saw a post from you last month saying something similar about the current state of the board. If the management does something like that again the reaction will probably be the same.

[phage]

>If I am not mistaken I saw a post from you last month saying something

>similar about the current state of the board. If the

>management does something like that again the reaction will

>probably be the same.

 

And as I said, I’m not in favor of banning the little psycho and just plan on ignoring him completely. My post last month was in response to the constant finger wagging and lecturing of some of the other members. I believe it is that “old hen” mentality that was driving the more interesting people away – not the banning of one bad apple.

 

However, I don’t think all the references to freedom of speech apply. The fact is he pollutes thread after thread and has the same relentless need for attention that Ethan had. When the first post went up and mentioned an Israeli, I knew exactly what was going to happen and he fulfilled my prediction in spades.

 

I honestly wouldn’t care if he were moderated or even banned. I think management has demonstrated that they usually need to be pushed beyond all reasonable limits before taking action. (Moderating FFF is an exception. Even though his politics suck ;-) I think he got a raw deal on that one.) There is no reason why they should tolerate major disruption to the board based on cries of “freedom of speech” that I don’t think are absolute in this context.

[ad rian]

>However, I don’t think all the references to freedom of speech

>apply. The fact is he pollutes thread after thread and has

>the same relentless need for attention that Ethan had. When

>the first post went up and mentioned an Israeli, I knew

>exactly what was going to happen and he fulfilled my

>prediction in spades.

 

Your views here are interesting.

[dick_nyc]

Idiot - the space shuttle posting was in the Lounge part of the message center. as he said the lounge is the exception not to have an escort based reason for being. thus it was appropriate there.

[Guest Bitchboy]

>I’m curious about all this talk of free speech. Isn’t this

>more analogous to a newspaper with a ‘Letters to the Editor’

>section? Is the publisher of the newspaper obligated to print

>any piece of garbage that is sent to him?

>

 

 

I certainly didn't base my desire to let the officous oaf continue to post his drivel on a 'freedom of speech" basis. I've always been for letting ugliness out into the sunlight where it can be seen for what it is. We most often are hurt by that which is hidden. This fool does more for the cause of Israel than any Israeli. I also find it very easy not to read him. When I've had an unsettling day, I never read the asshole's crap. He's a liar anyway, since he continues to purport that his beef is with Israel and not Jews, and then continues to mock Jews that have never made any kind of stand on Israeli occupation of the West Bank or even Bensonhurst. At best and worst, he's become a joke.

[trilingual]

Hate speech isn't appropriate in any forum, IMHO. It's Hoo's site, and it's up to him if he wants to allow it, but if M4M belonged to me Auntie S would have been banished back to Planet Plaza Athenée long, long ago. . .