"DADDY" : C ontrol Freak & Jerk

[kjun]

Well, our self-appointed "daddy" has finally proved to me that he is not the person who should be running this show. How did he come to run the show? Perhaps, as has been asserted by several others, he did steal this site after Hooboy died.

 

In the thread on BN he has announced ENOUGH and apparently sealed the thread. He is at least thin-skinned and fluffed up about himself and little BN.

 

the Cajun

[VaHawk]

Good show! Enough IS Enough!!! Am I the only one BORED of the bitching and sniping and attacking posts against BN, Daddy and this site in general?

 

Don't like the show? Then, you can always get off your butt and leave, as after all it didn't cost you anything, as the tickets were free.

[Guy Fawkes]

That's right; today I'm being thin skinned.

 

I'm tired of each month slipping another thousand dollars or so into the kitty to keep the site running; working 16+ hours a day so that I have barely enough income to keep the site running.

 

I'm tired of people that will Lie, Steal, and Cheat just so they can take advantage of Hooboys family; confusing the matters to the point where it's nearly impossible to get a simple operating agreement in place.

 

I'm tired of having to explain to people that No I can't accept donations; No I can't accept new advertising; No I can't make the simplest of changes with out conferring with a committee of people that doesn't have the slight idea of how the site operates.

 

I'm tired of dealing with people that can't maintain a semblance of civility for even a day; People that cause me to refuse to spend more than a few hours away from my office because of what they may do or say.

 

So instead of spending this day with friends or family, I'm spending the day working on another project that will bring in enough cash to keep the site running through the end of the year.

 

You bet I'm being a jerk today! It's because only a handful of people are causing this mess and frankly I'm getting tired of them. I have a broom in my hand, and I’m willing to start sweeping people out the door.

[FourAces]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

.

>

>I'm tired of each month slipping another thousand dollars or

>so into the kitty to keep the site running; working 16+ hours

>a day so that I have barely enough income to keep the site

>running.

>

 

This is something I simply don't understand. According to Hooboy and now daddy this site is losing money every month. Why after 6 years would anybody continue to support this site with their own funds?

 

daddy if you have an answer to that question then I would suggest you don't complain about keeping the site going. You have no legal obligation to do so.

 

About the frustration you experience while trying to run the site that is part of any business. It isn't new to this site and I'm certain you know that.

 

Though I do understand the frustration of having to answer to a group of people each time you want to make a change to the site ... that is something we briefly chatted about and am aware can be very troubling. Especially since these people don't have a clue what makes this site work well.

 

I hope you can get the legal BS worked out so ypu're able to move forward with your plans here.

 

Good luck.

 

PS and just for the record I don't care that you locked my other thread. Apparently kjum is upset about it but hey that is part of running a messager center.

[+ deej]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

>You have no legal obligation to do so.

 

Technically he does, but he would be within his rights to shut the place down when the money runs out. (Which it does every month.)

 

But, like Hooboy before him, he believes the site to be of genuine value to the community. He believes in it and is willing to put his money (and considerable technical skill) where his mouth is.

 

Being called a thief on Thanksgiving day, when he's actually the site's chief benefactor, probably hit a raw nerve. It would with me.

[+ Lucky]

RE: "DADDY"

 

kjun, your post is out of line. You should retract it.

[FourAces]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

>>You have no legal obligation to do so.

>

>Technically he does, but he would be within his rights to shut

>the place down when the money runs out. (Which it does every

>month.)

>

>But, like Hooboy before him, he believes the site to be of

>genuine value to the community. He believes in it and is

>willing to put his money (and considerable technical skill)

>where his mouth is.

>

>Being called a thief on Thanksgiving day, when he's actually

>the site's chief benefactor, probably hit a raw nerve. It

>would with me.

 

deej as you know everything around here gets blown up. I just want to clarify your comment above so the speed readers don't attribute it to me.

 

I did NOT refer to daddy as a thief it was the author of this thread who did so. In fact, I removed the "control freak" and "jerk" from the subject heading before replying as a courtesy as I felt they were not warranted.

[FourAces]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>kjun, your post is out of line. You should retract it.

I agree Lucky threads are locked all the time for various reasons - why is the one I created any different than the others? It isn't and like I said I had no problem with it being locked.

[woodlawn]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>I agree Lucky threads are locked all the time for various

>reasons - why is the one I created any different than the

>others?

 

All of the threads that are locked have one thing in common -- management has made a decision that it wants to stop members of this board from talking about something that they clearly DO want to talk about.

 

Given the number of threads about BN, anyone of at least normal intelligence should have figured out quite some time ago that there are many members here who enjoy or are interested in discussing him. If this message board does not exist for the purpose of allowing members to discuss subjects that are of interest to them, then what is its purpose?

[VaHawk]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>All of the threads that are locked have one thing in common --

>management has made a decision that it wants to stop members

>of this board from talking about something that they clearly

>DO want to talk about.

 

You should state your observation with the prerequisite of "imo", and not state your opinion as a fact! And, as you, yourself, have so often stated, who are you to speak for all the members of this board, with this sweeping statement. So, have YOU taken a survey of opinion from the posters to this site? I'm sure the answer is NO!!!, but that never stops you from demanding from others that which you so willing don't abide to, while you state your OPINION!

 

As for me, as I stated in my earlier post, I'm BORED with all the negative, hateful postings about BN, Daddy and this site, when the people making those posts are stating an opinion and not facts! BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

>Given the number of threads about BN, anyone of at least

>normal intelligence should have figured out quite some time

>ago that there are many members here who enjoy or are

>interested in discussing him. If this message board does not

>exist for the purpose of allowing members to discuss subjects

>that are of interest to them, then what is its purpose?

 

WRONG AGAIN????? IMO only a FEW members, mostly those who post on ES, are even remotely interested in yet ANOTHER posting castigating BN, Daddy, this site, and BN's connection to this site! BOOOORRRRIIIINNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, at least to people with a LIFE! :-(

[+ deej]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>All of the threads that are locked have one thing in common --

>management has made a decision that it wants to stop members

>of this board from talking about something that they clearly

>DO want to talk about.

 

That's not true but truth never has much mattered with you when you've got an unrelated ISSUE you can pound on like a dead horse.

 

>Given the number of threads about BN, anyone of at least

>normal intelligence should have figured out quite some time

>ago that there are many members here who enjoy or are

>interested in discussing him.

 

Well, no. That's not true either. Based on posting/viewing statistics, a small minority seem to be interested in beating this dead horse. And they're mostly interested in beating it much like frat boys in a gang rape. They're not in it because it's good or right, they're in it to get their jollies, consequences be-damned.

 

But again, truth never got in your way.

[Guy Fawkes]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

It's difficult, but I'll try to explain.

 

It never was about money. Both of us were perfectly willing to just break even. When the time requirements to publish the site started to affect his “Day Job”, Hooboy agonized over whether to shut down the site or to greatly reduce his income level to what the site could provide.

 

Luckily for all of us, Hooboy choose the site. Over the years (up to last December) the income grew to just about enough to support one person. The reason that the site survived was that Hooboy was a master of pinching pennies, and finding the absolute rock bottom prices while gallivanting around the globe.

 

Now I’m in the same position, the site requires a significant amount of work each and every day. Enough time that I can only work out my office, which greatly reduces the contracts that I can accept (most companies want me to be onsite) and the amount that I can get.

 

The difference is that currently all of the income from the site is going to the Estate, and the only expense that has been paid to date is the ISP fee (which is slightly below cost).

 

So why did Hooboy and now myself do it? Because we both thought it was important to both the Escorts and their clients.

 

Every time I get a note that says: “Daddy, I was able to finish my schooling and I now have a good job. I need to retire.”, I celebrate.

 

Every time some “Mature” gentleman mentions that they were able to put “That Spark” back into their life, I’m pleased.

 

That’s why I’m here, and that is why Hooboy was here. As long as there is enough that I can sleep indoors, eat three meals a day, and every once in a blue moon have a chance to go out and smell the roses, I’ll be content.

[+ Lucky]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

http://www.raviapte.com/albums/Roses/Roses_0004S.sized.jpg

[Guy Fawkes]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

<Blush> Thank-you Lucky!

[tazmanian5230]

RE: "DADDY" :

 

Hmm,

Lucky never sent me roses !!

 

"I've said it before and i'll say it again... If you don't like 15 Minutes, then simply ignore it."

BN 2005

 

http://www.15minutesmore.com

[woodlawn]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>>All of the threads that are locked have one thing in common

>--

>>management has made a decision that it wants to stop members

>>of this board from talking about something that they clearly

>>DO want to talk about.

 

>That's not true

 

Not true? Can you explain to us the purpose of locking a thread if it is NOT to prevent people from posting messages in that thread? Locking doesn't prevent people from reading what is already posted, it merely prevents new posts. And if people did not want to continue posting in the thread then what would be the point of locking it? A lot of the things you've said on this board make no sense, but with this one you've reached a new low.

 

 

> but truth never has much mattered with you

>when you've got an unrelated ISSUE you can pound on like a

>dead horse.

 

Being called a liar by you is like being called cruel by Hitler.

 

 

> They're not in it because

>it's good or right, they're in it to get their jollies,

>consequences be-damned.

 

What exactly is "good" or "right" about a message board whose purpose is to facilitate prostitution? I've seen a lot of ridiculous statements on this board, but your pompous moralizing definitely belongs in the top ten.

[JT Brooklyn]

RE: "DADDY"

 

Daddy. IMHO.. I can understand The "BN Thing" apparently for some, turning into quite a "Therapy Session" for them and being Discontinued abruptly, has made some very irritable.

 

Perhaps if you gave them 48 Hours to make their Final Statements?

Then again, I am sure we all know what would be said for 48 hrs! LOL

 

The Best to you in 2006. :+

[imrthr]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>

>What exactly is "good" or "right" about a message board whose

>purpose is to facilitate prostitution? I've seen a lot of

>ridiculous statements on this board, but your pompous

>moralizing definitely belongs in the top ten.

>

>

>____________________________________________________________________

Woodlawn:

 

Over time, I have read many of your posts made on this site. For the most part, I was impressed with your written responses and with the logic shown in your posts.

 

The above quote from your recent post, however, has caused me to rethink my assessment of your opinions and your postings.

 

It is true that ONE purpose of this board is to facilitate prostitution through its reviews and through some of the forums. However, facilitating prostitution is NOT the board’s only purpose.

 

Merely reading various forums of this site confirms that most postings made herein are in connection with travel and other bonafide requests for and sharing of information. Quite simply, the site serves as a refuge and warehouse of information for the gay community. That is a community service. The "escort" portion is not used by all who use this site.

 

Saying it a different way, because of society’s general stigma attached to being gay, this board serves as a support tool for those who want to share information who are similarly stigmatized.

 

To denigrate the board by implying its “purpose is to facilitate prostitution” is unrealistic and hurtful to most of the readers who are not interested in or do not hire the “prostitutes” (escorts) that are available through this site.

 

Do us a favor, please return to your former informative posts and logical exchanges of ideas. They were fun to read.

[Guest alanm]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>kjun, your post is out of line. You should retract it.

 

Lucky

 

 

I disagree completely. As a result of that post, Daddy finally wrote twice about the current state of the this site, information that was gossip and rumor before. It is understandable that Daddy was reluctant to discuss the estate. But, how is Kjun supposed to know the inner working of this site as well as you seem to?

 

What has always confused me is why Daddy did not post months ago that Benjamin Nicholas was a friend of HooBoy and as long as he's in charge the link to 15 Minutes will remain. That statement would not have stopped the BN discussion completely, but at least Daddy would be more a real person to many of us and not just a faceless techie who makes the trains (pardon me, makes that escort reviews) run on time.

[woodlawn]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>Over time, I have read many of your posts made on this site.

>For the most part, I was impressed with your written responses

>and with the logic shown in your posts.

 

How nice.

 

>The above quote from your recent post, however, has caused me

>to rethink my assessment of your opinions and your postings.

 

How dreadful.

 

>It is true that ONE purpose of this board is to facilitate

>prostitution through its reviews and through some of the

>forums. However, facilitating prostitution is NOT the board’s

>only purpose.

 

I didn't say it was the only purpose. But this website was created, according to its founder, to assist people who want to connect with gay escorts. All of the sections on this message board are in some way related to that purpose, even the Lounge, which has functioned as a repository for posts that don't fit into any of the other categories.

 

> Quite

>simply, the site serves as a refuge and warehouse of

>information for the gay community. That is a community

>service. The "escort" portion is not used by all who use this

>site.

 

I have no way of knowing whether there are those who use this site and who do NOT use the information it provides about escorts, and neither do you. There are other websites, message boards and chat rooms for and about the gay community and NOT devoted to escorts, and I rather think that most people who have no interest in escorts would prefer to patronize them.

 

>To denigrate the board by implying its “purpose is to

>facilitate prostitution” is unrealistic and hurtful to most of

>the readers who are not interested in or do not hire the

>“prostitutes” (escorts) that are available through this site.

 

If you think there is something wrong with prostitution, then I suppose linking this board with prostitution could be considered denigrating it. But since you have explicitly told me that you have hired prostitutes in the past, I find it odd that you would take that position.

 

As for being "unrealistic and hurtful to most of the readers who are not interested in . . . 'prostitutes,'" I don't know if there is any significant number of people who read this board and who fit that description and you don't know either. I tend to doubt it.

 

>Do us a favor, please return to your former informative posts

>and logical exchanges of ideas. They were fun to read.

 

Okay.

[imrthr]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>

>

>

>If you think there is something wrong with prostitution, then

>I suppose linking this board with prostitution could be

>considered denigrating it. But since you have explicitly told

>me that you have hired prostitutes in the past, I find it odd

>that you would take that position.

>

 

________________________________________________________

 

 

I personally do not think there is something wrong with prostitution; I never said that I did.

 

However, I do find something wrong with your false statement above wherein you alleged that I "explicitly told" you that I hired prostitutes in the past. I have NEVER communicated with you at any time either on or off this site and I do not know you. Furthermore, I never posted anything on this site even remotely resembling what you claim I "explicitly told" you.

 

The search function of this site will confirm that you are incorrect as I never made nor posted any such statement on this site.

 

As I said in my initial post concerning you, I was impressed with your written responses and with the logic shown in your prior posts. Now that I have encountered, first-hand, your arrogance and fabricated accusations, I now realize that I was wrong in my favorable assessment of you.

[+ Lucky]

RE: "DADDY"

 

Just because he provoked a response doesn't make kjun's Jerry Springer approach any more desirable. He engaged in name-calling and spurious allegations just because he was in a twit over something he didn't like. He is the same one that criticized a poster in another thread for bringing a personal dispute into the thread. kjun is more often a poster whom I like so I actually hope he considers my point of view.

 

Daddy can speak for himself as to why he chose to respond here but he shows a lot more patience than I would in a similar situation. What happens to the ownership of this site is none of my business. How many websites do you go to where you don't have a clue as to who the owner is? And do you care? I think not!

 

As for the BN link, I wrote him with my objections and he did respond that the link predated him and he felt obliged to keep it. I would have taken a different course, but I do not make policy here, or at any other website that I frequent.

 

It would seem to me that we all need to lighten up a bit.

[+ deej]

RE: "DADDY"

 

>Daddy finally wrote twice about the current state of the this site,

>information that was gossip and rumor before.

 

And now there's even MORE gossip and rumor, so what's been gained?

 

Those who don't know what they're talking about continue to flap their gums and toss around unfounded accusations. Those who know what they're talking about stay mum for the most part (partly due to legal constraints) and any time they say anything they're called liars by the liars that spread gossip, rumor, and innuendo.

 

Again, what's been gained? The gossip and rumor certainly won't stop because, after all, dissing is the only sport gay men have! ;-)

[+ Lucky]

RE: Dismissed

 

"dissing is the only sport gay men have!"

 

 

deej, you are up there just a few posts above feeding the trolls just as you warn others against. And then down here you make such a homophobic remark about gay men. Just what do you think was gained by that?

[SAdler]

RE: Dismissed

 

>"dissing is the only sport gay men have!"

 

>And then down here you

>make such a homophobic remark about gay men. Just what do you

>think was gained by that?

 

Wow. And you have the nerve to reference "lightening up" in another post? You obviously have no sense of humor or grasp for cynicism.