Putting the Escort back into AOL...

[Guest Seven]

All members of the Fraternal Order of Escorts...

 

I posted this under a brand-new thread, so that everyone affected would be sure to notice.

 

Here's a way to flout Madge, the bitchy AOL censor who hates all things escort-y.

 

1: Go to your master screen name, and select Keyword: Screen Names

 

2: Select : Delete Screen Name

 

3: Select the screen name that has the profile in question, and delete it.

 

4: Immediately select Restore Screen Name, and restore the screen name in question.

 

5: Close out of the dialogue box, and hit CTRL+G (Windows), or CMD+G (Mac). You're going to do a profile search of your screen name. When the dialogue box pops up, your original profile should be intact.

 

Don't worry, deleting and restoring your screen name will not affect any e-mail that you have already received. It WILL however, bounce any new e-mail until your restore the screen name, so be sure to do this part immediately.

 

You should get into the habit of doing this twice a day.. once in the morning, and once mid-day. I have found that the TOS sweep will sometimes leave my profile alone for the day, but sometimes I get hit again after noon sometime, and have to do this procedure again.

 

If you decide to complain to AOL.. be sure to point out that...

 

1: The TOS sweep overwhelmingly seem to affect escorts who are male, which seems like a First Amendment class-action lawsuit just waiting to happen. I did a search just now of cities all across the country, paired with the word "escort." A good 90% or so profiles that did pop up were female.

 

2: The TOS sweep also seems to affect some cities a lot more than others. Right now, I am the only Nashville escort, according to AOL. But there are plenty in Chicago and Miami. And Birmingham UK is apparently the hotbed of sin for the entire world.

 

If we can be in the stupid Yellow Pages, then why the hell can't we be online?

 

Cheers!

 

Seven

[HooBoy]

On the other hand, you could make your PRIMARY point of contact a provider that does not invade your privacy, cancel your account and cause your clients to lose track of you.

 

Jumping through hoops twice a day to appease AOL seems like an expensive waste of energy. IMHO.

[Guest DickHo]

Hoo, you're missing the point. AOL is not just an ISP and email provider. For better or worse, it's a community, it's a gay ghetto. It's today's equivalent of cruising in cars or going to the bars. It's the only reason to be in AOL. And for these activities, it's effective.

 

Unfortunately, AOL police behaves just like the regular cops and worse because they are always riding their moral high horse. Imagine if the other units of AOL Time Warner behaved like AOL. There would be no "Sex and the City" or Gangsta Rap.

 

I think we should organize and bring a class action suit against AOL TOS. Not because of their escort sweep but because their TOS go against our freedom of speech. I'm not an escort and I don't advertise as an escort but my AOL profile was deleted because it had the word "escort" in it.

[woodlawn]

>Unfortunately, AOL police behaves just like the regular cops

>and worse because they are always riding their moral high

>horse. Imagine if the other units of AOL Time Warner behaved

>like AOL. There would be no "Sex and the City" or Gangsta

>Rap.

 

>I think we should organize and bring a class action suit

>against AOL TOS. Not because of their escort sweep but because

>their TOS go against our freedom of speech.

 

This is pretty silly. When you join AOL you sign a contract promising to abide by their rules for the use of their system. Some people make that promise merely to gain access to the system and use it in ways that violate the rules. That's called fraud. Those complaining about AOL's efforts to enforce their rules are complaining that they've been caught doing something they promised not to do. What's unjust about that?

[Guest DickHo]

You're being silly. Just because you sign a contract it doesn't mean that the contract is just or even legal. Their TOS doesn't say that the word "escort" cannot be used in profiles. I also had another profile deleted because I used the words: dick and hole. In another case, my profile got deleted because I said that I like "I'm into tops with big cocks".

 

The following are excerpts from AOL TOS and Community Guidelines:

 

"AOL does reserve the right to remove content that, in AOL's judgment, does not meet its standards or does not comply with AOL's current Community Guidelines, but AOL is not responsible for any failure or delay in removing such material."

 

"You will be notified of all violations made by any screen name on your account. Violations of the Community Guidelines can lead to actions ranging from a warning to AOL account suspension or outright termination."

 

They are cleary in breach of this since the profiles have been deleted without notification and when asked to explain, AOL claims that the profile was not deleted by them.

 

The AOL Profile Guidelines say, in part,:

* [profiles may not] contains highly explicit or graphic descriptions or accounts of sexual acts, including but not limited to sexual language of a violent or threatening nature, directed at another individual or group of individuals, particularly when unsolicited.

* [profiles may not} contains vulgarities directed toward another individual or group.

 

And more importantly, AOL reserves the right to cancel your profile if it "otherwise uses the service in a manner deemed inappropriate by AOL."

 

So today, cock, hole, escort (even when not advertising an illegal act) are deemed inappropriate. What will be inappropriate tomorrow?

[Guest DickHo]

> Some people make that promise merely to gain access to the

>system and use it in ways that violate the rules. That's

>called fraud.

 

BTW, finding loopholes in rules and laws is the American way. Haven't you heard about tax shelters?

[HooBoy]

...and the band played on.

[woodlawn]

>You're being silly. Just because you sign a contract it

>doesn't mean that the contract is just or even legal.

 

I certainly have my silly moments, but I'm not silly enough to sign a contract and then complain when the other party asks me to live up to the terms I knew about before I signed. Nor am I silly enough to think that a private corporation has an obligation to provide me with "freedom of speech."

 

In the law of contracts, the word "just" describes any contract into which both parties enter freely, with knowledge of the terms and in which both give and receive consideration. The law does not generally inquire whether the terms of a given contract seem wise or good or fair to third persons, because it's supposed to be the responsibility of the parties to make that determination for themselves BEFORE they sign.

 

 

>Their

>TOS doesn't say that the word "escort" cannot be used in

>profiles.

 

Does it need to say that? Are you contending it isn't the case that many of the people who use that word in their profiles are doing so in order to advertise an illegal business? If you're not, then just what is it you're complaining about?

 

>I also had another profile deleted because I used

>the words: dick and hole. In another case, my profile got

>deleted because I said that I like "I'm into tops with big

>cocks".

 

And according to the guidelines you quoted, the words you used could easily come within the category of what is prohibited. In case you had any doubt you could certainly contact AOL and ask. Did you?

 

>They are cleary in breach of this since the profiles have been

>deleted without notification and when asked to explain, AOL

>claims that the profile was not deleted by them.

 

If you feel AOL has violated its agreement with you, you are certainly free to pursue legal remedies. And if you feel that way, why continue to do business with them (if you do)?

 

>So today, cock, hole, escort (even when not advertising an

>illegal act) are deemed inappropriate. What will be

>inappropriate tomorrow?

 

What will be inappropriate tomorrow is whatever AOL decides will be inappropriate. That is the arrangement you agreed to when you decided to join. What is the position you're arguing for -- that some AOL members should be allowed to use the system that was paid for by AOL shareholders to troll for sex or engage in illegal transactions and that AOL should not be allowed to stop it if other members or the authorities object? That would put AOL in a rather tough spot, wouldn't it?

 

What you're really complaining about is that you live in a society in which most people don't approve of some of the things you want to do. Aren't you used to that by now?

[woodlawn]

>> Some people make that promise merely to gain access to the

>>system and use it in ways that violate the rules. That's

>>called fraud.

 

>BTW, finding loopholes in rules and laws is the American way.

 

What "loophole" are you referring to? When the profile guidelines say that you are not to include sexually explicit language in your profile and you write "I'm looking for tops with big cocks for my hole," what's the "loophole"?

 

American courts have consistently held that getting someone to enter into a contract by making a promise you have no intention of keeping is fraud. Perhaps you know a lot of people who cheat and defraud. Please don't generalize from your experience and tell us that cheating is the American way.

 

>Haven't you heard about tax shelters?

 

I think we've had this discussion. Not too long ago some people created a thread claiming that wealthy Americans are taking advantage of tax shelters to avoid tax on large amounts of income. When they were asked to describe legal ways an American can shelter large amounts of income, they couldn't. It made me wonder why they started a discussion when they didn't know what the hell they were talking about.