Either way... there needs to be a method of control for incriminating commentary Originally Posted by Lacey CompanionDefinitely. Hence the prohibitions (at least, I think there are prohibitions) against pictures with nudity of underage individuals, or mentions of illicit substances, and the like.
complete disrespect of women in the hobby. Originally Posted by Lacey CompanionI'm not sure how much effect that would have (other than in the very long-term) on LE's efforts directed this way. I suspect that it's their belief that illegal activities are going on, rather than their recognition that there are some disrespectful assholes around here, that most influences the unwanted attention.
Some portion of the general population (and hence the politicians, and hence the police under the direction of the politicians) thinks that P4P is bad, wrong, evil, and needs to be stamped out, no matter where and no matter what it looks like. If they see a polite, civil community of people who appear to be nice and normal . . . eventually that may change the stereotypes and weaken their desire to see P4P stamped out. But stereotypes are very resistant to change, unfortunately.
Of course, the real pressure on politicians and cops is not the existence of P4P but how much it intrudes on the public awareness. That's likely the reason that in many locations LE's emphasis is directed mostly toward street action and/or the stationary/visible aspects like spas or AMPs. Meanwhile, "indoor workers," independents who arrange appointments through the Internet and are not as visible, are mostly (not entirely) given a pass. It's always possible that disrespectful attitudes on a P4P board could increase the "visibility," but I'm not sure that's a significant effect. Those who have strong negative feelings about P4P may focus more on the existence of a site rather than how people comport themselves there, while those who are more concerned about visibility may not worry about a website as opposed to street workers or AMPs. Making a board completely private, so that only registered members -- and perhaps those who are screened to a degree -- would reduce visibility, of course. But it would likely also reduce traffic, the overall number of members, and revenue potential for the site owners.
Of course, all of this is pretty much speculation. We don't really know how the civilian population and LE would react differently if the site were different. We can only guess. Your guess may be better than mine.
The nice thing is that there are a lot of choices in P4P boards. Those choices will operate differently and over time there can be a "sorting" of members, with people going where they feel most comfortable.
INFORMAL Quote : " "I hail from a different time and place,.... " 
( picture bam bam and pebbles.) 