I am open to looking at the facts (or hear say as you call it) and posting an opinion on them. Everyone I sent a list to I explained the list with stuff like- this was know in the past but could be different or not sure about her involvement but here is what has been reported or seen. In none of them do I ever say this is 100% fact and we know this for sure.[... ]Most guys know that we can't 100% definitively prove things one way or the other and take these posts and list as a reference or something to consider when making choices.
Originally Posted by homer13
So, Homer, if you can't be 100% certain and you have fairly loose criteria for who is on the list, where are you going to draw the line once you actually get around to compiling this list?:
- girls who are managed by Marco
- girls who used to be managed by Marco but are no longer
- girls who may or may not now be managed by Marco, we can't 100% definitively prove one way or the other
- girls who may or may not have in the past been managed by Marco, we can't 100% definitively prove one way or the other
- girls who aren't now or weren't in the past managed by Marco but reputedly have/had some other association with him
- girls who may or may not be somehow associated with (ex. have done a double with) a girl who may or may not be somehow associated with Marco
Are you going to explain which of these categories a girl falls into and the level of certainty or uncertainty associated with it? Are you going to identify the source of the information?
And how are you going to vet this list? Or should we just assume that it will also inevitably include:
- girls who do not now and never have had any association with Marco, but someone is interested in fucking with their business so they ended up on the list
My point here is not to question whether you should or shouldn't put the list together - that is up to you. My point is to ascertain how reliable a guide the list will be once it is compiled.