ROS

[The Drummer]

Originally Posted by Wakeup

Wait...you're this butthurt over two weeks of PA? Over $20...

Send me your address, I'll send you the $20, if you only promise to never start talking about this idiotic shit again...

Via PM is fine, but if you want my e-mail instead, let me know...

Hey Wakeup,

If Doove doesn't want the 20 bucks, send it to me. I'm runnin' on fumes!

[The Drummer]

Originally Posted by Wakeup

So, is this a "no" to my offer to pay your PA access for two weeks? Just want to clarify before I rescind it...

I'll take it!

[Guest072323]

Originally Posted by Doove

Fair enough. However, it was something you were able to address. The amount of detail you would choose to use in doing so would have been up to you. I, on the other hand, wasn't even handed the opportunity (until now) to respond by simply saying "That's preposterous!"



You could have pointed it out to me through PM. You refused to even do that much.



Of course it's true. And with the fact that i essentially outed myself in a response to one of your posts, (not to mention the two or three times where i pretty much admitted to it outright) i'm shocked you didn't already know that. Which led me to believe you thought you had something else on me.

Ok, here's the deal. If you don't care, you can stop reading now (i'm looking at you Rockstar).

But I do care Dove.

Over the course of the last year, there were three times when i thought i might have some interest in various providers outside of Autumn Bolan. Saige, Ericaisbetter, and Amanda i believe, come to mind initially. So i wanted to purchase PA in order to read some reviews on these ladies. I did so in February, May, and August. I won't get into why i didn't want to do so under Doove
Why not? If you're going this far... go all the way
except to say that the reasons were probably wholly unnecessary, as well as stupid. Either way, they're totally irrelevant. They are anything BUT irrelevant
So what i did was, i set up a second handle for the purpose of purchasing PA.

Now, once i outed myself as manic010101 in a reply to OSD, rather than attempt to edit the post and hide my tracks, i immediately PM'd the mods and confessed to what i'd done. In doing so, i made it clear that there was no agenda I thinck there IS an agenda.
in my setting up a second handle. I didn't do it to carry out arguments with myself, i didn't do it to evade a ban, nor did i do it to carry out any agenda against the board members. I set it up solely for use as a PA handle, to privately read the ROS areas, with no intention of using it for posting anything. So from my perspective, Ahhhh... from YOUR perspective....
the second handle was for no other reason than to give the board money, and giving it while maintaining my desire for privacy in doing so. And frankly, with the exception of my having PA access, i fail to even see much of a distinction between my logging in as Manic010101 (while never posting), and not logging in at all and perusing the board as a guest. But that's neither here nor there.

Well here is where you are wrong. It is both here AND there. Under false pretenses... you had access to "the ROS", "Private Comments" AND the ML.
Now... there are a NUMBER of things you could do with that information. You could "leak" what you found out to providers for one.
Try this on for size... hypothetically of course.... Perhaps you were interested in Victoria Lane. (You didn't reveal what providers you were interested in, so one can only guess.) You could have "leaked" things to her that I said in "private" or the "ml". Is that not somehow "more than" irrelevant, unnecessary and preposterous? AND... no one (besides you and her) would ever "know" it was you... because you in theory did not have access to that information.
Sounds like it could have been a bit more sinister than you intimated... hmmmm....

Anyways, after CC and i went back and forth a bit, he offered to make sure i got my two weeks of PA back after my two week ban was up. But apparently i wasn't gracious enough in that i made it clear that i still thought that my being banned (rather than simply being assessed points) was petty and yes, stupid, so he then rescinded the offer. Seems he got his butt hurt because i didn't feel the need to thank him profusely for his offer, when i didn't think it ever should have gotten to that point in the first place.

So that's it in a nutshell. I set up a second handle to do little more than give the board money and not only got banned for it, but was denied the benefits of my purchase - after i was promised that they would be restored to me. Did i break the rule? Sure, i'll admit i did. But the point of my hypothetical was to show that there are varying degrees of offenses and that automatically jumping to the death penalty while relying on little more than 'a rule was broken' doesn't always make sense.

And as far as why i don't just go ahead and purchase PA (again)......you're kidding, right? I'm not giving the board another dime out of my own pocket.

As for the hypothetical

In all seriousness, let me throw a hypothetical out at ya with the understanding that this was clearly not my situation. Let's suppose someone finds this site one evening, and for the hell of it he quickly sets up a handle/account. Then let's suppose this same person doesn't come back to the site for over six months. And when he does, he forgets what handle he set up back six months prior so he just goes ahead and sets himself up with another handle.

Since as I understand it, this was NOT your situation....
Your "hypothetical" IS: irrelevant, unnecessary and preposterous

[Tiger]

Wasn't this thread about MD's access? and wasn't he given an answer?

[Guest042416]

Originally Posted by elghund

Hey, CC.......can you get Doove his answer? Is he owed PA that he paid for? I don't think you should let the issue linger about whether he is due the PA or not.

That's what used to happen for too long, mods let questions hang around unanswered too long.

Should be easy enough to find out. And I'd rather have him joining in the conversation than sniping, if it's owed to him. If it's not, then we will all know what to believe.

elg......

but this legit question tied to the thread needed to be answered.

mods commented many times as well

maybe a new thread would of been better but I think its been answered now

[Doove]

Rockstar,

First off, learn to quote and respond to a post.

Secondly, i'll send some props your way in that you're actually the first person to come up with something at least close to legitimate in the way of an argument.

But there's two problems with your suggestion. First, if i acquired the ML or ROS info as Manic010101 and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. And here's where your theory falls apart. If i acquired the ML or ROS info as Doove and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. So my obtaining the info as Manic010101 or as Doove would make absolutely zero difference in whether anyone could finger me as a culprit in leaking info.

Secondly, there is absolutely zero evidence that i leaked anything, or ever intended to leak anything. But because someone such as yourself can come up with some theory as to what i could have done or intended if i was so inclined, albeit absent any actual evidence, i've conceded all along that i shouldn't get away without any punishment at all. To which i've stated all along that i deserved to be pointed.

Nevertheless, you raised fair points. But you couldn't stop there, and just had to go back to you being you with this nonsense:

Originally Posted by Paulwantsya

As for the hypothetical
Since as I understand it, this was NOT your situation....
Your "hypothetical" IS: irrelevant, unnecessary and preposterous

The sole justification i've been given for my being banned was that i broke a guideline rule. That's it. And that the circumstances behind my doing so were totally irrelevant, because a broken rule is a broken rule. No harm done? Who cares? Case closed. So the point of my analogy is to point out that circumstances can, in fact, matter. Because if they can, then unless you got more, relying solely on the "you broke the rule" argument is nothing short of hogwash.

And as we've come to find out, if i understand OSD and BJ correctly (no guarantee there, that's for sure), a lifetime ban for outing someone can be turned into a 5 point infraction......based on the circumstances. So don't tell me, as CC has tried to do, that a second handle infraction can't be turned into a 5 point infraction....based on the circumstances.

So my analogy absolutely is relevant. Though i'll admit, maybe i could have used outing someone as a better example.

Edit: And oh yeah, i named three providers i had potential interest in, so you're wrong there.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Doove

Rockstar,

First off, learn to quote and respond to a post.

Secondly, i'll send some props your way in that you're actually the first person to come up with something at least close to legitimate in the way of an argument.

But there's two problems with your suggestion. First, if i acquired the ML or ROS info as Manic010101 and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. And here's where your theory falls apart. If i acquired the ML or ROS info as Doove and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. So my obtaining the info as Manic010101 or as Doove would make absolutely zero difference in whether anyone could finger me as a culprit in leaking info.

Secondly, there is absolutely zero evidence that i leaked anything, or ever intended to leak anything. But because someone such as yourself can come up with some theory as to what i could have done or intended if i was so inclined, albeit absent any actual evidence, i've conceded all along that i shouldn't get away without any punishment at all. To which i've stated all along that i deserved to be pointed.

Nevertheless, you raised fair points. But you couldn't stop there, and just had to go back to you being you with this nonsense:



The sole justification i've been given for my being banned was that i broke a guideline rule. That's it. And that the circumstances behind my doing so were totally irrelevant, because a broken rule is a broken rule. No harm done? Who cares? Case closed. So the point of my analogy is to point out that circumstances can, in fact, matter. Because if they can, then unless you got more, relying solely on the "you broke the rule" argument is nothing short of hogwash.

And as we've come to find out, if i understand OSD and BJ correctly (no guarantee there, that's for sure), a lifetime ban for outing someone can be turned into a 5 point infraction......based on the circumstances. So don't tell me, as CC has tried to do, that a second handle infraction can't be turned into a 5 point infraction....based on the circumstances.

So my analogy absolutely is relevant. Though i'll admit, maybe i could have used outing someone as a better example.

Edit: And oh yeah, i named three providers i had potential interest in, so you're wrong there.

What Paul is saying , I believe, is that even without proof that your second Handle leaked -- it gave you "means and opportunity" to do so. Some asshole once said that about me too. It was an asshole thing to say to me , but it escapes me who said such an asshole thing. You rightfully refute his theory as he is basing it on what you "could" have done if you intended to with no proof that you actually did it. I applaud your logic. If only that asshole who accused me had used the same logic to realize that no conclusions should be based on what "could" have been done were it intended -- especially when means and opportunity is an overly broad and meaningless generalization (i.e.. I have means and opportunity to drop my laptop on the floor right now , but that doesn't mean I did it), and quite frankly , if you knew the details , you would realize how preposterous a suggestion that actually was. Still , sometimes people make asshole comments because they can't see past their own deficiencies and project them on others. Sometimes.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Taskmaster

What Paul is saying , I believe, is that even without proof that your second Handle leaked -- it gave you "means and opportunity" to do so. Some asshole once said that about me too. It was an asshole thing to say to me , but it escapes me who said such an asshole thing. You rightfully refute his theory as he is basing it on what you "could" have done if you intended to with no proof that you actually did it. I applaud your logic. If only that asshole who accused me had used the same logic to realize that no conclusions should be based on what "could" have been done were it intended -- especially when means and opportunity is an overly broad and meaningless generalization (i.e.. I have means and opportunity to drop my laptop on the floor right now , but that doesn't mean I did it), and quite frankly , if you knew the details , you would realize how preposterous a suggestion that actually was. Still , sometimes people make asshole comments because they can't see past their own deficiencies and project them on others. Sometimes.

And you'll notice, i mentioned that Paulie raised fair points. And therefore, I didn't refer to him as an asshole for having done so. He raised a few issues, presented me with an opportunity to rebut them, and i took advantage of that opportunity. That's how it works around here.

Additionally, what Paulie threw out there was his theory. What i threw out there, even though it was relayed to me as an unequivocal fact, i threw it out there solely as a possibility. Giving you more consideration than a lot of people give a lot of people around here.

So on we go, i suppose.

[Guest042416]

Originally Posted by Doove

Rockstar,

First off, learn to quote and respond to a post.

Secondly, i'll send some props your way in that you're actually the first person to come up with something at least close to legitimate in the way of an argument.

But there's two problems with your suggestion. First, if i acquired the ML or ROS info as Manic010101 and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. And here's where your theory falls apart. If i acquired the ML or ROS info as Doove and leaked it to anyone, the only way anybody would know it was i who leaked it would be if the person i leaked it to ratted me out. So my obtaining the info as Manic010101 or as Doove would make absolutely zero difference in whether anyone could finger me as a culprit in leaking info.

Secondly, there is absolutely zero evidence that i leaked anything, or ever intended to leak anything. But because someone such as yourself can come up with some theory as to what i could have done or intended if i was so inclined, albeit absent any actual evidence, i've conceded all along that i shouldn't get away without any punishment at all. To which i've stated all along that i deserved to be pointed.

Nevertheless, you raised fair points. But you couldn't stop there, and just had to go back to you being you with this nonsense:



The sole justification i've been given for my being banned was that i broke a guideline rule. That's it. And that the circumstances behind my doing so were totally irrelevant, because a broken rule is a broken rule. No harm done? Who cares? Case closed. So the point of my analogy is to point out that circumstances can, in fact, matter. Because if they can, then unless you got more, relying solely on the "you broke the rule" argument is nothing short of hogwash.

And as we've come to find out, if i understand OSD and BJ correctly (no guarantee there, that's for sure), a lifetime ban for outing someone can be turned into a 5 point infraction......based on the circumstances. So don't tell me, as CC has tried to do, that a second handle infraction can't be turned into a 5 point infraction....based on the circumstances.

So my analogy absolutely is relevant. Though i'll admit, maybe i could have used outing someone as a better example.

Edit: And oh yeah, i named three providers i had potential interest in, so you're wrong there.

Doove Im not sure but I recall what happened, osd can and is the one that knows what went down.

I know the xy blog was an issue but I don't know what happened behind the scenes after that.

I often wondered why some get short bans and some get longer bans.

to name a few
xy
gp
goat
vl
They come back then banned again, lol I don't know the protocol for how long or what represents a lifetime ban.

Ive told CC I would be on good behavior so my point total is very low

On we go!!!

The 3 threads in co ed right now with ladies commenting back and forth with the guys is what this board is all about, good threads.

[elghund]

Originally Posted by bjwstw

The 3 threads in co ed right now with ladies commenting back and forth with the guys is what this board is all about, good threads.

Which is the whole point of what the current staff is trying to achieve........


elg......

[Guest042416]

Originally Posted by elghund

Which is the whole point of what the current staff is trying to achieve........


elg......

yes I would agree!!!

[JohnnyCap]

Originally Posted by elghund

Which is the whole point of what the current staff is trying to achieve

That empty feeling that something is in your mouth but you just can't taste it? Bland nothingness?

This pathetic shitbird of a slap fight over 2 weeks of PA is the only mildly interesting content in Upset right now, unless you enjoy debating whether to text Angel ' Hi Sweetie' before or after your handjob.

[elghund]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

That empty feeling that something is in your mouth but you just can't taste it? Bland nothingness?

This pathetic shitbird of a slap fight over 2 weeks of PA is the only mildly interesting content in Upset right now, unless you enjoy debating whether to text Angel ' Hi Sweetie' before or after your handjob.

I disagree JC.

I think that some semblance of enjoyment is slowly returning. Whatever the Upstate forum had become, it wasn't a place to exchange ideas and convo with the ladies or with other hobbyists, to help everyone enjoy what we do more.....but it is returning to what it should be.

elg.......

[offshoredrilling]

Originally Posted by Doove

So wait.

You linked to a blog that was outing people? And got a 5 point infraction?

Or am i missing something?

Originally Posted by bjwstw

he was banned got back in after.

he linked the blog for sure and fucked up osd never known for his brains when editing and left some bad bad personal info in there.

not sure why or how he got back in, but he did.
others would not for the same offense, but hey that's life

In his defense gp was on his ass for every little thing and really looking to hammer away at him point wise and was doing a leap of joy when osd got banned
I believe gp put the hammer down and maybe that was when it was deemed unfair, osd could elaborate more on what happened.

I been banned before, I took my ban like a man and took it no emails no crying, on I went, no big deal

I was defying GP more than he was after me

[Chica Chaser]

Originally Posted by offshoredrilling

I was defying GP more than he was after me

So defiant.....
Still living in the past huh?