Review: Cameron0908 - The end of a Legend - Page 6

Shyster, my apologies. I guess I try to avoid hearing objections :-). It is unfortunate but here, people have bastardized the term White Knight so badly, it is now just a broad term to discredit anyone who can actually shed some light. I don't know if it is hatred of women or just raw, mindless emotion, but it is the way of ECCIE.

Originally Posted by Waldo P. Emerson-Jones

77 posts. What more do I know?

1. Cameron is cute.
2. A lot of guys really like Cameron in bed.
3. Cameron ain't going to go to bed with the OP.
4. Lot of people really care about who Cameron will & won't see. Better said, lot of people want to say Cameron will see them and not the OP.
5. NCNS reports should not be a review. (I already knew that, but felt I should repeat it for anyone who might have missed that.)
6. Some people think if the review tab is used to post a NCNS report, that anything in the ROS/Private arena is fair game to discuss in public.
7. I don't see where the MODs have ever said ROS becomes public knowledge on a NCNS review/report, and if I was dealing with this, I'd err on side of caution: WHAT STARTS IN ROS OR PRIVATE STAYS IN PRIVATE.
8. MODs are really patient to let this crap go on for 77, oops, with me, 78 posts.

FYI, I am really good at being the last poster on threads, perhaps this will make some consider letting this thread die. Honestly, I suspect the OP has gotten Cameron more free advertisement than she even wanted...

Well I really appreciated the picture of her pussy, er, cat. Thanks Matador!

If the guys would simply follow the posted instructions, it would not be in review format and both sides would see all the content as designed. Originally Posted by Bubba3452

Is there a problem with Staff taking out the ROS tags to that can happen?

As noted several times, a NCNS thread can be replied to because the provider can see what is written. By failing to make this a thread when the OP failed to follow Staff directions, and using the review form, she can't reply because she isn't supposed to be able to SEE what he is saying and even then I doubt she'd come on here an reply anyway but it would sure be informative to the other providers.

Summary to Bubba: Why can't the staff remove the ROS tags?
============================== ================

Chrisfun27,
LL has decided to post ROS information, the mods have been alerted, and none of the info has been removed. Originally Posted by 69er

Actually, it seems you missed the original issue that the OP decided to use the Review form to create a NC/NS type of report when in fact this is NOT a damn NC/NS. And according to the Sticky in the Indy review forum, it should be a thread where the provider can see what the poster is claiming and can therefore reply. As others have posted in this thread and also in the discussion, when a client fucks up and uses the review form, many of the participants on this board believe the entire ROS should be made 100% public since obviously there is nothing sexual in nature being described so no need to "hide" anything from the prying eyes of the public.

This non-review is a long and drawn out one sided tale of the OP's attempts to schedule an appointment with Cameron.

Did he actually ever have a confirmed time, and date, and exact location?

That "confirmed" appointment issue has been discussed at great lengths and there really has never been a solid consensus of what that means.

I think someone has already mentioned Hooter and how this reminds him of how flaky she was to the point that it became a running joke.

This appears to actually be the first NC/NS report and if it were truly what it appears to be, great because the initial reports of erratic behavior are valuable so other might not waste time or be prepared but looking at the sum total of his post, I don't think he ever had a true confirmed appointment that she blew off. The last portion is him getting denied an appointment and that is NOT a NC/NS, it is actually him failing her screening and that can happen up to and including the moment you are ready to knock on the incall door. This sucks for you but happens to people every day that they fail screening but that doesn't mean you post a REVIEW about it or even a NC/NS thread.

Guys,

1. First, sorry if I posted this in the wrong place. I could swear I had seen similar reviews about bad experiences like here..so that is why I did it, and it got posted/approved. Originally Posted by Chrisfun27

Again. The subject of whether NC/NS should be in the review forums or not was decided some time ago. If I can find some of the threads about the issue I will.

BUT the sticky about where and how to post such things was created back in July 2011 so it has been some time and that was debated in some detail so saying "you thought you had seen similar reviews" means you failed to follow the staff instructions for this sort of thing.

Obviously, whatever staff member approved the "review" fucked up.

Your credit for this "review" should be removed and this "review" removed from Cameron's profile. Mistakes happen by the volunteer staff and what i am sure is a nice pile of RTMs have made the staff well aware of the corrective actions needed regarding this issue. Heck, when doing some research, I found another NC/NS review credited and attached to another provider's account and that has been reported also.

With regard to Here's a fun read about a client who wants to see a provider but she won't see him. Summary is that pretty much, providers don't need to give a reason.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=83899

It appears Chris was demanding that Cameron had to give a reason.

Wrong attitude.

Providers are not "required" to give a client any reason at all, some do, some make shit up and some may change their mind down the road but who knows.

I hate to say it but given the number of providers reading this thread, Chris has most likely gone on a ton of DNS lists for his actions and behavior here without even knowing it. NOT for posting a NCNS but because of his behavior leading up to the posting of this thread.

Some guy didn't want to see Cameron..whats the big deal

Some guy didn't want to see Cameron..whats the big deal Originally Posted by ralph lauren

... come on RL, get w/ the program, she chose not to see him... haha... dude, haven't seen u post in a while, thought you may have changed your handle following the ISO Bareback thread from RALPHLauren!!! haha... peace...

... come on RL, get w/ the program, she chose not to see him... haha... dude, haven't seen u post in a while, thought you may have changed your handle following the ISO Bareback thread from RALPHLauren!!! haha... peace... Originally Posted by latin6pack

Latin..Im still banging, just felt like bs'ing around today don't really like to post no more unless I'm bored at work. And yeah that thread was bs had to clear that up asap! Maybe highjacking this will get it closed.. definitely not helping Cam

stay low pro..

...7. I don't see where the MODs have ever said ROS becomes public knowledge on a NCNS review/report, and if I was dealing with this, I'd err on side of caution: WHAT STARTS IN ROS OR PRIVATE STAYS IN PRIVATE.
... Originally Posted by tigercat

I forget the thread, but it was one of the first NC/NS's in a review format that got moved to coed. I could be wrong, but the mods agreed that the ROS should be public when moved. The theory being that the entire point of moving a NC/NS into coed is to give the accused a chance to respond. Otherwise, what's the point?

As it stands now, women are scared to death to post because they might accidentally reveal that they all have PA.

I forget the thread, but it was one of the first NC/NS's in a review format that got moved to coed. I could be wrong, but the mods agreed that the ROS should be public when moved. The theory being that the entire point of moving a NC/NS into coed is to give the accused a chance to respond. Otherwise, what's the point?

As it stands now, women are scared to death to post because they might accidentally reveal that they all have PA. Originally Posted by TheBizz

Actually, their point is that a NC/NS is not a review as there was no session to review. The lady can always respond to anything other than Locker Room info, they just may have to do it in co-ed.

Oh, and since, if I am reading the thread right, we are supposed to brag if Cameron will see us, I've seen Cameron.

Holy fucking Shit!!!!! All this for a NC/NS? People really need something productive to do.

Torito

Well THIS was a friggin' novel...

Agree...freaking novel...and freaking amazing how much people can distort things. I actually had to go back to re read my original "review" (or whatever you want to call it), because even I had doubts of what I said at this point...because I read how people distort things...and is unbelievable. I will continue in private (something I have learned through this post.

No such thing as bad publicity, congrats to Cameron.

The responses to this thread, with the exception of a few “appreciate it dude’s”, typically for ECCIE, fall into these categories:

Response Type Number 1:“The provider in question is the Mother Teresa of providers, and would never have demonstrated the behavior the OP alleges, and the OP is a no-account-lowlife for even suggesting that she did.”
Response Type Number 2:“The OP's reaction to her behavior is not what my reaction to her behavior would have been, therefore the OP's reaction to her behavior is totally wrong.”
Response Type Number 3: “The OP's dedicated effort to see a well reviewed provider is not really dedicated effort, but in fact stalking and harassing, and he should be banned from the board, and quite possibly arrested and incarcerated, and perhaps even castrated.”
Response Type Number 4: “I know this provider better than anyone else knows this provider; I was there when the OP alleges to have contacted her, and I have an ad nauseam-length response, complete with pictures, to prove the OP's account is fiction.”
Response Type Number 5:Ad nauseam-length rebuttals to ad nauseam-length responses.
Response Type Number 6: “I am in total agreement with what Response Type Number 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 (or maybe some or all of them) said.”

And then there is of course my response: impartial, unbiased, witty, succinct, focused, pertinent, awe-inspiring and entertaining. If only more posters were like me…