Not Trying to create Drama But This has to Be explained

I'm not following the 'chicken shit' comment either. Deign to clarify, DH

Nope...sorry...gonna have to disagree.

I write a review and store that review in a folder on my HD. Eccie gets a COPY. What I do with MY REVIEW is up to my discretion since I wrote it and I own it. I'll send another COPY of my review to whoever I choose too.

Now...if it can be proven that you copied and pasted the ROS from a review that was submitted to Eccie...well...they may have something to say about it. Originally Posted by john353

No problem... But that is kinda like rubbing 2 shiney nickels together to get a brand new quater right?

You save, don't save.. Once you hit submit, that version becomes property of this board.

I guess if you want to argue true facts ....

It will all be intellectual property, and then drag the hooktard to court with you.

As was said above, there has been a lot of discussion about revealing your own ROS.

I have info now that indicates I was wrong in my statement above.

You are allowed to reveal your own ROS comments. You are not allowed to reveal others responses to your ROS.

This is a definitive answer,

Now, let's everyone get back on the topic, we got sidetracked.

Stacy, based on he comments posted in the open on that review thread, you are the weakest link.

. . . get off the gas man Originally Posted by KaitlynDior

Don't know, don't care.
But wanted to support this groovy and pithy statement.

you guys just don't learn...

I don't particularly give a fuck whether some you get it or not. There is an expectation of the ROS remaining ROS.

The whore in this case had a meltdown over the "no" review and assumed incorrectly why it was a "no" review........if the whore wants to know what is in the ROS, one of you WK bitches just send it to her.

The public schools in Houston are high quality.

I don't particularly give a fuck whether some you get it or not. There is an expectation of the ROS remaining ROS.

The whore in this case had a meltdown over the "no" review and assumed incorrectly why it was a "no" review........if the whore wants to know what is in the ROS, one of you WK bitches just send it to her. Originally Posted by dearhunter

the old fashioned way.

As was said above nicely by GS, there has been a lot of discussion about revealing your own ROS.

I have info now that indicates I was wrong in my statement above.
....... Originally Posted by Pistolero

FTFY.... y, de nada.

.....

You are allowed to reveal your own ROS comments. You are not allowed to reveal others responses to your ROS.

...... Originally Posted by Pistolero

Simple answers are often not quite clear. I understand it not to be okay to share one's own ROS with someone who doesn't have Premium Access.

.....

This is a definitive answer, Originally Posted by Pistolero

Click HERE to enjoy the discussion.

.....
Now, let's everyone get back on the topic, we got sidetracked. Originally Posted by Pistolero

Yes...back on topic: AlluringStacy crying she doesn't like to be accused of being a "hustler" ....and bashing an honest "no" review.



.

Eh. I'll still fuck them one of these days...

But just not both of them at the same time?

A disagreement over what happened is inherent in every dispute. *Often you are left to judge the truth by extraneous facts. *

If Stacy is to be believed Rick haggled over the price and she called Rick out before the session ever started for shorting them. *If that happened I can understand how that might put a provider off her game and cause a no.*

If a provider called me out for shorting me when I gave them an extra $20 I'd sure put it in the review. *Especially if I was honest in the review about everything else that caused me to give a no. *

However Rick in this thread says he left the part out about being accused *of being shorted. *And then goes on to say he wasn't sure what he paid her ("maybe I misplaced it"). *That leads me to wonder if there wasn't more he was unsure about.

Then Kaitlin backs up Stacy's version.

And there are other inconsistencies in the ROS.



I don't know what happened. *I wasn't there. *But judging on the two stories I have to give this one to Stacy.

My recommendation. *Don't haggle over price and double count the money if you want to have a good time. *Otherwise you are setting yourself up for a bad one.

Simple answers are often not quite clear. I understand it not to be okay to share one's own ROS with someone who doesn't have Premium Access. Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter

I've always wondered about this one and have seen mods rule differently on it over the years. You're right, simple answers are often not clear. So here's the deal, and it's the definitive ruling.

Obviously revealing or specifically referring to other's ROS or other Private content is a violation of Guideline#20.

In regards to discussing/quoting/reiterating your own posts that were private but you now choose to make public, you are allowed to do so. There is no violation as long as, in doing so, you do not reveal anyone else's private content in the process.

The goal of Guideline#20 is to to protect OTHER people's private posts not to disallow sharing of your OWN, similar to being able to reveal your OWN medical condition but not ANOTHER persons.

This prevents restriction of, for instance, making a post in the Men's Lounge and then making the exact same post in Coed in a new thread. Also, in the case of a lady's coed rebuttal of a review such as this one, the gentleman can choose to quote his own review to alleviate concerns or clarify the situation as he chooses.

Without the ability to do so his reputation may be damaged or people without premium access could get the wrong idea as the lady is free to say whatever she wishes but he cannot discuss the session in detail since he has already done so in his review.

I hope that's more clear. And, as Pistolero has said, this is a definitive answer from the powers that be.

If i trust any of them....it's the spicy hippo.