CoMo charges, be careful and get tested

[lacrew_2000]

Not exactly Bobby Fischer:

"I did find an ad on BackPage that appeared to be her and I both emailed as well as texted the number. I stated I was a client interested in booking and asked if she had any reviews on any sites or a friend available with reviews that she might recommend. I received no response"

[zeejoe]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

Not exactly Bobby Fischer:

"I did find an ad on BackPage that appeared to be her and I both emailed as well as texted the number. I stated I was a client interested in booking and asked if she had any reviews on any sites or a friend available with reviews that she might recommend. I received no response"

No wonder. Written like a police report.

[lacrew_2000]

Originally Posted by zeejoe

No wonder. Written like a police report.

Well he is the mall cop of the board.

I don't think he's le....just run off the mill dumb.

[lacrew_2000]

." I reposted several of the links he removed as well as others.*"

Chief, you're gonna have to point us to where you commited this grand act of civil disobedience. Its not showing up in your posting history....did you use the same handle?

[Whispers]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

." I reposted several of the links he removed as well as others.*"

Chief, you're gonna have to point us to where you commited this grand act of civil disobedience. Its not showing up in your posting history....did you use the same handle?

Post 19 in this thread has the link to the redbook story he deleted from another thread.

perhaps you need some reading glasses.

It is not civil disobedience to post information within the guidelines allowed by the board.

It's interesting how passionate some of you are to support the concept of censorship and to argue against your rights to have information and discuss topics in the same manner as others can on the board.

[Whispers]

Originally Posted by zeejoe

No wonder. Written like a police report.

The way I tell something her has no relevance to how it was posed when sent.... I'm a bit smarter than that.

[lacrew_2000]

No big man...not the Redbook story....methinks you are playing dumb.

The story this thread is about. Where did you repost that link? You boasted that you did - where?

Or was that all bluster?

I've done a 30 minute board search, and asked you directly with no response....and really thats about the most you can do when searching for something, right? And I couldn't find it.

So that means you threatenened to repost the hiv link and later boasted about it....but didn't really do it at all. Well its gotta sting a little that I'm pointing it out - all hat, no cattle?

Alas, Whispersnappper....it might be Marvin K Mooney time for you.

[lacrew_2000]

"... I'm a bit smarter than that"

Did you get that boys and girls....when Whisper contacts phones that are most likely in LE possession and asks about setting up a date.....he's SMART about it.

Lamont....you big dummie.

[ElumEno]

Originally Posted by Johnny4455

From my point of view we in kc are lucky to have JCM800 volunteering his valuable time. I say that because he has one of the most important characteristics a mod should have... he doesn't care about leveraging his mod status for his own personal agenda.

This statement here I could not agree with more... right now, in my personal opinion, we have one of the best mod teams the KC area has ever had.
I will even say that JCM has the makings of being one of the best mods on the board.
WHY? - Because he does not let shit on a SHMB get to him! he is also intelligent enough to know that this was not something personal against him.
I would have made the same comments and asked the same questions if it was Chica Chaser that edited out the link.

I'm not going to bother researching the issues discussed in this thread. Mule and Whispers are the type that look at every post from a gotcha point of view. Look at the mules posts. Almost half are pointing out his interpretation of a guideline. That's why some folks hang out on this board. Not me. The mule and whispers approach their issues like they are filing briefs in a free speech case before the supreme court of hookers board. Truth is its not some noble cause they are promoting. They are not fighting for a really good reason. They are just doing what they enjoy doing... trying to show they know the guidelines. What a fucking strange use of this board - sort of like pretending to be a mod.

When moderators become mods they should spend a little time researching what the Big Man (St.C) has said in some of his interpretations of his own guidelines and then follow those interpretations,
Maybe then guys like Whispers and myself would not have to speak up. I am not saying everyone has to agree with him (St.C)... but it is his board and he has the last say.
I can only imagine just how irritating it must be to have to came back over and over again to repeat something that should have already been made clear.

Also, what is so strange about wanting to have information be available on an information board to keep myself safe.
Some have said that I need to start using this board to get laid... that is what I am doing.
I would like to have that information unedited and uncensored when it comes to my safety and the safety of the community as a whole, what is so hard to understand about that?

Some might use the board to just get laid... some of us use the board to get laid SAFELY and stay that way.

Here is one for the mod wannabees to discuss.. do the guidelines say anything about any member using "mod" in his signature or name? Can someone hold themselves out to be a mod when they are not? If that is not in the guidelines, does an admin have the basis to remove "mod" from a pretend mods name?

The only way I can answer this is... use some common sense.

I'm interested in your research on that mule. I would like your reply to include multiple citations, and give me some of that blue font.

You like the blue... I am getting kind of partial to it myself.

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

Whispers, you do realize that this has been hashed over a dozen times before, don't you?

Thank you... that is my point, it has been hashed over time and again... and the owner gave his input on how it should be handled.
The only reason I remember it is at the time I read it, I personally did not agree to it, but I knew it was his board and his rules that we have to play with.
You know as an ex-moderator that one of the jobs is to enforce the guidelines as written, even if you personally do not agree with the very guidelines you have to enforce.

Btw....what if you were arrested? Would you want your name plastered all over this board?..
Such that until the end of time anybody searching yorur name sees a connection?

How would a link from here to another site/report get linked in a search... now if you copied and pasted the story with names and all... only then would it get linked to this site.
That is why it is better to just post a link then to copy and paste the report.

Here is something... My real name, home address, phone number and place of employment has been linked on this very site... albeit not pertaining to the hobby.
So does that mean I was outed? NO... there was no way that the person that posted a local story could have known that the person in the article was also a member of this board.
It was just bunch of random names on a local story... no one really paid any attention to it.
So ultimately the only way to completely prevent linking real life info to a member would be to ban outside links all together.

Originally Posted by MsElena

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsElena
Well, its nice to know that this board will allow threads that out people if they get busted and happen to be in the paper. Its one thing if a handful of guys stalk out the LE websites for mugshots, but its another to post it for hundreds, if not thousands to see.

MsE I am not talking about Jack and Jill hobbyist who got busted here...
I am talking about a woman that knowingly and intentionally exposed the community to HIV.

Well, Whispers pretty much said it was OK, so post her info.

And I am talking about the posts where guys or gals got busted, you yourself said that links that contain real world info shouldn't be removed and you're standing right next to Whispers when he was yappin about it too.

I said no such thing... I said that when it comes to Jack and Jill being busted I understand why the mods have used a "better safe the sorry" approach, I would have too.
What I did say was USE SOME COMMON SENSE.
It was St. C that made the statement that it should not be considered outing unless the link can be directly linked to a members handle.
in those cases I have never had a problem with them removing the link... what I would have a problem with is if the moderator started handing out points for those links.

Hope you never get busted and have your info posted all over ECCIE or other sites if it happens.

It has already happened... but to be quite honest, if I got busted the last thing on my mind would be links on this site.
Posting a link is not the same as posting my real name all over ECCIE... unless the link itself has my personal info in it... it would not be linked to this site if you searched by name.

Tell me... to the best of my knowledge you have never use your face in any of your advertising/showcases/postings or website.
So even if (hope never) you got busted and someone posted a link to your Mug shot and full name.. how could it be linked to your account here?
The only ones that would be able to know it was you is your clients and the others that you have met.
and they would have already back-channeled that information anyway.

You do realize that not all of your fellow hobbyists are stand up guys right? Some stalk, some beat up and would have no problem showing up on a ladies door if they want to.

You do realize that not all of your fellow providers are stand up gals right? Some stalk, some extort and would have no problem showing up on a gents door if they want to.

You know damn well that it cuts both ways.

Yes, I do realize it cuts both ways, but usually if a lady does it....she has a pimp or a serious drug habit. Also, I really don't see a lady beating some guy up because he wouldn't fuck her.

I will concede that you ladies are at risk more then we clients ever will be... I think about girls doing outcalls and the very idea of going someplace unknown like that gives me the hebejebes.

But then again, this board has never really been about the ladies, just the guys......the ol' bros before hos mentality. So, I'm not expecting to see any links of the guys who get busted because you guys won't go against your fellow hobbyists. And a lady can't put a link up like that because you guys would roast her like a pig for outing the guys.

There is so much wrong with that statement that I don't know where to begin... your bitterness about something other then this is showing through.
You are right that St.C has said that this site is for the guys... the gals are just here to provide entertainment.

There's not a damn thing wrong with my statement. This board has always been about the guys and the yes, there's the mentality of "bros before hos." It may not be with all guys, but a very good majority of them.

I have no bitterness towards anything. The way this business works has been something I accepted a long time ago. I look out for myself and keep myself safe.


Lets see how did you put it... in your own words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsElena
But, just remember......you don't own this playground. If you don't like the way it is ran, go find a new playground. And its been ran the same fucking way since 2009 with or without you.

Yeap... that about sums it up.
.
Oh trust me, I know that.......I wrote it. Read my last sentence above. It applies here too.

Once again... it is not your are my opinion that counts... it is not our board.


Are you missing being a MOD? You seem to want everything proven to you. To play judge and jury and your word goes.

HELL NO... I like the freedom I have to voice my opinion and start lively debates like this one.
when you are a moderator, your hands are severely tied because everything you say and do reflects onto the board and the owners themselves.
As a member I can play chess today and then go back to playing tic-tac-toe tomorrow, moderators have to stay on their game at all times.


This is a hooker board, you seem to have lost your perspective on how this board works. You're supposed to be looking to get laid, not work part time for Drudge Reports.

No I have not lost my perspective of how the board works and all.
I will repeat...
Some use the board just to get laid, but some of us use the board to get laid safely and stay that way.

Ultimately this board is here solely for the entertainment of St. Christopher.

So St.C...

Are you not entertained?????

[ElumEno]

Originally Posted by Urban Dahlia

Not taking this girl's side, but if you guys investigate this story a little more there is a very disgusting 61 year old man (pimp or whatever the fuck he is) that was working with another female that is 37 years old. His mug shot is available if you find his name, then do a Google Image search on his name. These two were pimping out this girl, and another girl that is 19 years old.

We do not know the whole story so please keep an open mind regarding whether you choose to pardon her or not.

NO, there is NO EXCUSE to keep working/seeing people after she knew that she has a disease that is deadly and/or highly infectious.

BUT...
There is more to this story than we are allowed to see. So please try to see this from that girl's position. He/They may have been forcing her to keep escorting. I know you are all mad at me for having sympathy for her, but I am trying to convey to you that this hobby world is NOT all that a lot of you think it is.

A lot of it is Extremely UGLY, DARK and SAD. Think about when you were 20 years old. Think about that now if you had pimps dictating your every move. Fear is a great motivator in many people who don't know what Freedom means, or that is even attainable.

With that being said I don't know what I would do if I was one of those men that had seen her. I know I would be freaking the fuck out!

I get these Vitamin B shots twice a week for Energy and general health. One of the nurses accidentally stuck herself with one of my needles. I had to go in to get tested for STDs, HIV and HEPT A-C. The wait was excruciating because I am thinking about this poor nurse who is probably freaking out wondering if she was okay or not. Everything was fine, but I know for that 2 week waiting period that nurse was on pins and needles waiting for my results. So I can only imagine what is going through the minds of these men. Scary!

After reading this story I did do some research on this, and the probability of getting HIV from oral sex is very low unless she had an open wound in her mouth, and he had an open wound on his cock. So as long as those men wore a condom, they should all be safe. (Dear God PLEASE let this be the case)

They still need to go get tested asap, even if it is anonymously. Then they need to go get tested again in 6 months just to be on the safe side.

No matter what side of this story I look at, it's just a complete travesty all the way around.

So Sad!

Your post is by far the most thoughtful, sincere and intelligent post to this thread so far (including my own).
I don't see how anyone could ever get mad at you for showing compassion... no matter how you look at it, it is very sad.

One of the things that sit me off about this was that I too did a little research and read some snippets of the police interview.
They at first made it sound like she told them she intentionally wanted to infect (not expose) as many as she could.
That report has now been removed...
It was what really got my goat and I do think that the safety of the community as a whole should outweigh her privacy.
Even if the report is true and she was trying to infect others, maybe compassion is what she needs... it might just be the one thing she has never been shown.

We should take this as a reminder that we all need get tested regularly... it reminded me that is has been over 6 months since I last got tested.
and I am one that advocates that if you are active in this little sub-culture at all you need to get tested at least every three months... goes to show how time can get away from you.

Even though most of us here have not met each other personally (yet), when it comes right down to it,
the chances that we have all been "together" by proxy one way or another are pretty high.

[lacrew_2000]

Onemule...you are assuming that since this girl isn't a member, your interpretation of the guideline is correct.

And that right there is the part that has been hashed out many times before. You brought up that I was an ex-mod. That's right - and I would have hidden that link as fast as possible. Why? I don't have the time or inclination to make a determination as to whether or not she's a member. Its too much effortt...too many real world problems that could come out of it, to risk it. Thats the part that has been hashee out before.....think about it, we still don't know for sure she isn't a member.

And there is no trade off. Absolutely nothing is lost by merely posting "hey in Columbia a girl with hiv got arrested - go check it out".

So as I've said before, its a no brainer. I can be 100 percent sure a member won't get outed while still providing information. Why not do exactly that.

Iow - how about you look at every single photoo in every single showcase and every single provider ad and compare it to her mug shot. Only then do you know with certainty tbat you aren't outing her....and only then will the ghideline be satisfied. Then you can go ahead and post the link.

Or just do it the easy way and not risk outing.

[ElumEno]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

Onemule...you are assuming that since this girl isn't a member, your interpretation of the guideline is correct.

No I am not assuming anything of the sort... the guideline is pretty black and white in that it only applies to members.
You are the one that keeps assuming that it is my interpretation of that guideline that I have been talking about..

And that right there is the part that has been hashed out many times before. You brought up that I was an ex-mod. That's right - and I would have hidden that link as fast as possible. Why? I don't have the time or inclination to make a determination as to whether or not she's a member. Its too much effortt...too many real world problems that could come out of it, to risk it. Thats the part that has been hashee out before.....think about it, we still don't know for sure she isn't a member.

I notice that you keep assuming that the burden of proof that she is/is not a member would land upon the moderator... that is where you are wrong.
A moderators job is to enforce the guidelines as written and directed by the owner... not to become hobby police.

And there is no trade off. Absolutely nothing is lost by merely posting "hey in Columbia a girl with hiv got arrested - go check it out".

So as I've said before, its a no brainer. I can be 100 percent sure a member won't get outed while still providing information. Why not do exactly that.

Okay, I know I am pretty dense but when it comes to outing, how would doing that be any different then posting a link?
Guess my logic circuits are fucked... because logic tells me that if you are guilty of outing her by posting the link,
then would you not be just as guilty of outing her by posting "hey in Columbia a girl with hiv got arrested - go check it out"?
So I click once or a have to click and type a little more... both ways end with the same results.

Iow - how about you look at every single photoo in every single showcase and every single provider ad and compare it to her mug shot. Only then do you know with certainty tbat you aren't outing her....and only then will the ghideline be satisfied. Then you can go ahead and post the link.

You also assume that the burden of proof completely falls on the poster, it does not. (Personally I believe that most of it should... after all, it would be them getting the points)
The burden is upon all the members of the board, if any of us recognizes the linked person as a member of the board then it should be RTM'd.
until that time then the link should stay unedited and as posted... at least that was my understanding of how the owner wanted it handled.

Or just do it the easy way and not risk outing.

I will say this again... that is not my personal opinion... it is how I remember the owner of the board wanting it.
Moderators should never be hobby police... it is not in their job descriptions.

Again... personally I have never had a problem with the removal of the links... I on the most part understand and agree with what you are saying.
But in this case we are not talking about a typical bust here... we are talking about something that directly effects the safety of the whole community.

I started out by saying that sometime you have to use a little common sense...
Someone once gave an analogy on something similar, I can not remember who it was but this is the just of it.

We as drivers all know that it is illegal to run a red light... but an emergency vehicle in the coarse of providing a faster route to the scene can run those some red lights.

Typical Jack and Jill busts = red light stop- remove the link

Uncle Joe broke his arm saving the neighbors cat = green light - link stays because it is not related to the hobby UNLESS Uncle Joe or someone that recognizes him RTM's it as having a members RL info.

Provider admits to intentionally exposing the community to HIV - EMERGENCY OVER RIDE OF RED LIGHT - turn on all sires and alarms. (regardless on being a member or not)

Guy pretending to be a cop and raping providers finally gets busted - EMERGENCY OVER RIDE OF RED LIGHT - This happened locally, and the guys info should have been linked so that all members, especially the ladies, would know about it.

That is how I would try to use a little common sense to do it... but it is not my sandbox therefore it is not my rules.


We sometimes take it for granted that everyone knows how to do a internet search...
that is not always the case and that is why, in my opinion, that sometimes things that effect the communities safety as a whole should not have the links removed.

Pretty clear right... at least as clear as mud can be.

[lacrew_2000]

The guideline everybody is pointing to requests that members go to 'great lengths' to avoid accidental outing. I interpret that to mean side towards caution....and the extra work of doing your own google search does not exceed the standard of 'great lengths'. That would be my judgement call....which btw is consistent with numerous other similar situations on the kc forums.

Now here is where Whispers fucked up - in blatant violation of guideline 14, he did not accept this judgement call. And he went way beyond politely questioning it...he threatened to defy that judgement call. Rule 14 shattered.

Then Whispers is so insecure, he went on to violate rule 17 - Cyberstalking. If you glance at the "welcome aboard" threads for JM in both KC and St. Louis, Whispers has added disparaging comments...seriously, to the welcome thread....and in St Louis...just to let everybody over there know how incompetent he thinks JM is. Rule 17 shattered.

And somehow Whispers suddenly had a KC fanboy club...gone now, after discovering he's not a mod.

All this bandwidth wasted. The Pied Piper of anti-mods turned out to be a fraud who just likes to stir up trouble.

We obviously won't agree on the outing rule...although it does suggest erring on the side of caution.

But can we agree that our new Pied Piper of anti-mods broke two other rules and is a fraud?

[KCSmutMonkey]

Truthfully, I think you guys got a little too involved in trying to beat up some internet douchebag to realize you could have been wrong. Whispers wasn't the point of the thread. The point of the thread was that somebody was actively trying to potentially KILL members of the community. That absolutely needed to be communicated.

I've never really agreed with how these link removals have been handled but that is strictly my opinion. There is really NO difference between posting a link to a news story and just saying "Hey, go check out the Columbia Tribune for a provider spreading HIV." No difference at all. 99% of the people on the board can find that. Unlike these supposed BACK CHANNELS that are completely ineffective for probably 80% of the board, posting news about the hobby helps us all. So, if there is no difference between how the information is communicated, there really is no outing involved by posting a link. The "Outing" happens at the time of the arrest, when someone's name is linked to a alleged crime in the Public Record and then further outed when the news picks up the story. But then real life names do not even link to board handles. The only thing that actually would is if someone's FACE is shown in a mugshot AND that someone has used their face in ECCIE (or BP). Just like with this provider in question. We know very little by just her name. We don't know if she's worked in KC. Nobody knows if they've already banged the girl or not and should get tested. Nobody knows if their next customer that is on the way over to get a BBBJ has been with the provider. If her face was posted, and it was clear that she was on the site (used her face in pics on the site) or some other method of linking the real life name to an ECCIE account, then remove the link. For guys it's a different standard. Since guys never use our face on the site, just posting an article to an arrest doesn't 'out' us on the site AT ALL. Unless the news article says "Tom Smith, better known as Kcsmutmonkey on ECCIE, was arrested for Soliciting an Prostitute" then NO OUTING HAS OCCURRED.

This is how I would handle and/or interpret the outing rule. I fully understand this is not how it was handled in KC in the past but that doesn't mean that past mods were right to handle it that way.

[ElumEno]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

The guideline everybody is pointing to requests that members go to 'great lengths' to avoid accidental outing. I interpret that to mean side towards caution....and the extra work of doing your own google search does not exceed the standard of 'great lengths'. That would be my judgement call....which btw is consistent with numerous other similar situations on the kc forums.

I concur that we should always side towards caution but that was not the point now was it.

Now here is where Whispers fucked up - in blatant violation of guideline 14, he did not accept this judgement call. And he went way beyond politely questioning it...he threatened to defy that judgement call. Rule 14 shattered.

I do not see how guideline 14 has come into play in this thread yet... my understanding of that guideline is that it only applies to keeping threads on topic.
We pretty much are all in violation of taken this thread way off the original topic, now I will say that he has skimmed along a very gray area of #3.

Since I do understand where you were going with that, here is my opinion on moderators giving instructions.
That guideline only applies if the given instructions are with in the guidelines of the board... if they fall outside the guidelines then those instructions became null and void.

As members of the board we do have the right to questions the moderators and ask them to explain their instructions/actions... we are not all a bunch of lemmings.

Then Whispers is so insecure, he went on to violate rule 17 - Cyberstalking. If you glance at the "welcome aboard" threads for JM in both KC and St. Louis, Whispers has added disparaging comments...seriously, to the welcome thread....and in St Louis...just to let everybody over there know how incompetent he thinks JM is. Rule 17 shattered.

I was not aware of the other areas that he was posting in... I didn't want to violate guideline 17 to find out.

And somehow Whispers suddenly had a KC fanboy club...gone now, after discovering he's not a mod.

Just who are these so called members of his fanboy club... is there monthly meetings? dues? benefits?
I also know where you are going with this... even though our (Whisper and mine) message started out being the same, he took that message just a little to far,
therefore the message, no matter the intent, got last account of the attacks he started to make on JCM.

All this bandwidth wasted. The Pied Piper of anti-mods turned out to be a fraud who just likes to stir up trouble.

We obviously won't agree on the outing rule...although it does suggest erring on the side of caution.

See now I can agree to that and even drink to it.

But can we agree that our new Pied Piper of anti-mods broke two other rules and is a fraud?

I have not known or dealt with Whispers enough to make that call yet... I will keep my mind open.

.