How Sleazy?

Reading about members ripping off providers and now a drugging and rape!


My membership is up for renewal in a month. I'm asking myself do I want to be associated with a board that condones this activity? Some members even try to defend the perps. I think the members and mods here need to start policing their board better. Guess this board is going to allow some scum in and I understand he said she said, but isn't there some way to drive the wrongdoers out? Maybe three strikes (VP complaints) and your out?

wow I think I am in love, this is awesome of you and very very respected and truthful. Its a very sad situation and it could have turned out so bad and would of been yet another sad story on the board for the girls. I really hope the girls screen twice as hard and keep some form of protection near them. Never never drink anything open or with an unreg ever. I hope shes ok emotionally cause sometimes thats worse then the physical.

Sorry I just wanted to give you some mad props, this actually gave me goose bumps reading this seeing someone actually gave a damn and all

I am sorry but I can't agree with trying to ban someone from the website for rape or drugging.

We should not condone or allow such abuse within our power, but I say flag the account with a scarlet A visible to anyone so we can track the offender. If you ban them, they are just going to reset their IP and make a new account, and be right back committing the same offenses, with a new name no one will know. With the scarlet A, they might stay around for a hair longer were we can see them.

I'm not a mod here, but I was on ASPD. While it sounds good to talk about banning someone, it's not as simple as that. There are some pros and cons to acting like the hobby police.

1) If you ban someone, they'll pop up here or elsewhere with a new ID. If the bad actor is still using the same handle, their bad history follows along with them for those who pay attention or do their research.

If you ban them, they just get a new ID, and you find yourself talking with Newbie Ned with 6 months of board presence where he hasn't been outed as a bad guy, vs. Crazy Charlie with 3 years board presence as a known asshole and nutjob.

2) There's some value in a having a long running handle here on the board. Some long term members will use a certain amount of caution or moderation to prevent themselves from losing their "good name" here. Some will behave better in order to cultivate a good name on the board.

Some people become even worse after you've banned a few of their handles.

3) How much do you really want to try to control a person's "real world" behaviour by limiting their ID on an anonymous internet board?

4) Just because AmyAnonymous accuses BillAnonymous of doing something to them in person or via e-mail, how does the board management know it's true? Amy may be lying, misinterpreting, or misremembering. It might not have actually been Bill who did what he's accused of. We do have board identity theft all the time.

5) "The board" really can't be the hobby police, especially for off-board behaviour. They don't really have investigative tools. They don't have a lot of enforcement power. It's a bad idea to give people the idea you're the "hobby police" when you can't really provide much protection. If you give people that idea, they might get burned because they put their trust into some sort of protection that isn't there.

Note that I'm not saying to keep the bad actors on the board. I'm just pointing out that it's not as clear cut a choice as it first seems.

The board should and does ban people sometimes.

Very valid points! I was reacting in disgust to what I was reading and not thinking it through properly. Thanks for the perspective, but I will probably let my PA lapse next month and as one of my heros said "just fade away."

Reading about members ripping off providers and now a drugging and rape!

Thank you for your true concern and disgust! On a side note, I will be fine... I have a very strong mind... but there are many ladies out there, that could be the next victim, that may not be. I am going to the police with this... as an anonymous tip... and will be there if anything was to come from it.

My membership is up for renewal in a month. I'm asking myself do I want to be associated with a board that condones this activity? Some members even try to defend the perps. I think the members and mods here need to start policing their board better. Guess this board is going to allow some scum in and I understand he said she said, but isn't there some way to drive the wrongdoers out? Maybe three strikes (VP complaints) and your out? Originally Posted by cckid2006

I am sorry but I can't agree with trying to ban someone from the website for rape or drugging.

We should not condone or allow such abuse within our power, but I say flag the account with a scarlet A visible to anyone so we can track the offender. If you ban them, they are just going to reset their IP and make a new account, and be right back committing the same offenses, with a new name no one will know. With the scarlet A, they might stay around for a hair longer were we can see them. Originally Posted by mrhamm

So true... there are a few guys that we all know from here, that misbehave, get banned, and just recreate a new account. Their consistent bad behavior continues... it just gives them a chance to strike, before everyone puts 2+2 together! (Mr Hamm... it's a real shame we didn't get to do a repeat from our first encounter!!! )

Very valid points! I was reacting in disgust to what I was reading and not thinking it through properly. Thanks for the perspective, but I will probably let my PA lapse next month and as one of my heros said "just fade away." Originally Posted by cckid2006

And to you dear sir, I must make a stand for the hobby...and yes, to all of you that may not have read the alert I posted earlier this week in the Austin Forum. I have met so many wonderful, caring and truly compassionate men in the hobby. It is not the hobby that is the problem here. It is the man! He obviously has no respect for a woman, for whatever reason, and picks and chooses his victims very carefully. This isn't a case of a "hobbyist, gone bad". He has been bad... for a very long time. I say this, because, I believe a man would not drug a woman unless he feels incompetent, inferior, and has felt this way, about most if not all women, most of his life.

This was not the first time for him... and I know there are other girls that this has happened to, and have let it go unreported for whatever reason. I would even go as far to say, that he chooses BBW's because they typically, may have a low self esteem and afraid to post an alert, or go to the police. BUT I DON'T!

Maybe he only chooses traveling girls to drug, since they have no reputation on the local board, and it could very easily become a "he said, she said" scenario. For that reason, I tried to go into as much detail as possible and had to re-live the event in efforts to save the next lady! I certainly did not respond to the incident with the same amount of vigor as I would have, had I been at home. I was alone, no friends nearby, and had to focus on getting my mind right, and getting home safely.

I have gone back and re-read all our communication, and I can tell, precisely when he decided I was going to be his next victim. He is sick!!! You sir, sound like a kind, decent gentleman that will be missed if you decide to fade away, as you stated. Please DON'T allow the scum of the hobby, taint ALL the good stuff the hobby can bring... and perhaps helps to keep your world in balance. Truthfully, isn't that what we're all trying to do... just make it through this life... with more pleasant memories than negative ones and leave a positive impression on those we leave behind?

I hope that you will reconsider.... (don't you still want to be able to read all the juice behind the review front cover?) I would!!!

And thank you to everyone that has shown true concern and

I'm not a mod here, but I was on ASPD. While it sounds good to talk about banning someone, it's not as simple as that. There are some pros and cons to acting like the hobby police.

1) If you ban someone, they'll pop up here or elsewhere with a new ID. If the bad actor is still using the same handle, their bad history follows along with them for those who pay attention or do their research.

If you ban them, they just get a new ID, and you find yourself talking with Newbie Ned with 6 months of board presence where he hasn't been outed as a bad guy, vs. Crazy Charlie with 3 years board presence as a known asshole and nutjob.

2) There's some value in a having a long running handle here on the board. Some long term members will use a certain amount of caution or moderation to prevent themselves from losing their "good name" here. Some will behave better in order to cultivate a good name on the board.

Some people become even worse after you've banned a few of their handles.

3) How much do you really want to try to control a person's "real world" behaviour by limiting their ID on an anonymous internet board?

4) Just because AmyAnonymous accuses BillAnonymous of doing something to them in person or via e-mail, how does the board management know it's true? Amy may be lying, misinterpreting, or misremembering. It might not have actually been Bill who did what he's accused of. We do have board identity theft all the time.

5) "The board" really can't be the hobby police, especially for off-board behaviour. They don't really have investigative tools. They don't have a lot of enforcement power. It's a bad idea to give people the idea you're the "hobby police" when you can't really provide much protection. If you give people that idea, they might get burned because they put their trust into some sort of protection that isn't there.

Note that I'm not saying to keep the bad actors on the board. I'm just pointing out that it's not as clear cut a choice as it first seems.

The board should and does ban people sometimes. Originally Posted by GneissGuy

Very valid points! I was reacting in disgust to what I was reading and not thinking it through properly. Thanks for the perspective, but I will probably let my PA lapse next month and as one of my heros said "just fade away." Originally Posted by cckid2006

GneissGuy, I totally agree. Thank you for your input.

cckid2006, I don't like reading about people allegedly being hurt, etc either. This is a harsh reminder that the world we CHOSE to participate is not all peaches and cream. The majority of this life is dark and seedy. Sexual addicts, addicts, greed, betrayal, and a few others that I left out.

There are some good times to be had for sure, but with the good, you will get the bad.

Hope you choose to stay.

sixx

Meh, its not up to the operators of a web site to police the activities of a voluntary group of members.

If you are as offended (as you very often seem to be based on what you respond to in most of your posts) then this lifestyle is not for you & you SHOULD not just consider moving on, but indeed should do so.

Its as Sixx said, this lifestyle is going to have things happen. Getting offended each time someone brings something to the board is everyones choice. I don't think anyone defended this action, they merely just stated it cannot be proven. That's not defending it at all, its just stating a fact.

Now do what you do and feign disgust with my post and threaten to put me on ignore, as if I care.

Don't know why I didn't do it sooner. At least my last month on the board I won't have to see anymore of your posts.

Six - appreciate YOUR thoughts. I've gotten disgusted and left the board before and came back. Who knows?

Good...I don't have to read your whiney posts anymore. Grow a pair.

An interesting idea that some boards use (and I can't remember if it's been brought up here before or not), is the concept of "shadow banning" offenders that would be likely to just create a new account if they were banned normally.

Essentially, to the offender, everything looks like their account is in normal working order. They can post, read posts (their own and others), send messages, etc. But all his or her activity is invisible to everyone else, like all other members of the board have them on ignore.

An interesting idea that some boards use (and I can't remember if it's been brought up here before or not), is the concept of "shadow banning" offenders that would be likely to just create a new account if they were banned normally.

Essentially, to the offender, everything looks like their account is in normal working order. They can post, read posts (their own and others), send messages, etc. But all his or her activity is invisible to everyone else, like all other members of the board have them on ignore. Originally Posted by Schmafty

It's sort of sneaky and underhanded. More importantly, the bad guys would figure it out pretty quickly because they wouldn't get any response. Then they'd verify by looking at the board when not logged in, or by using multiple ID's.

Fun to think of, but not really that effective.

Unfortunately, there is zero

Provider Curriculum Requirements nor any Prerequisites.

Some ladies fall (no pun intended) into the hobby and either choose not to follow others' learned lessons or may be hard headed enough to or soft headed enough to believe whatever one or two male members tell is or isn't necessary.

Although some established ladies take newcomers "under their wing," that doesn't happen often enough. imo, the Sisterhood is a very loose association and I see no easy way to tighten or tauten that up to protect the female newbies, or, for that matter, to acclimate the new gents, either.

And, of course, there is zero concurrent screening/verifying process for guys joining a board or getting into the hobby. (Except for attending certain community events, that is. And, I am the first to admit that that process ain't perfect, either.)

= = = = =

The "former" protocol for the ages' old hobby protocol involved ladies in "houses" and gents networking via madams, bell hops, cab drivers, and, yes, even cops!

Usually meant that the stuff BCD was exactly there, never on the streets.

BCD the guys were safe; the ladies, too. The madams knew who was who, LE helped police the ruffians, went after the pimps, the druggies and the like.

We cannot put that genie back into the bottle, but, we can, as a somewhat community, help educamate (thanks, dj!) the new ladies coming into the community and maybe out the jerks for what they are and hopefully significantly reduce the bad actors population.

Unfortunately, there is zero

Provider Curriculum Requirements nor any Prerequisites.

Some ladies fall (no pun intended) into the hobby and either choose not to follow others' learned lessons or may be hard headed enough to or soft headed enough to believe whatever one or two male members tell is or isn't necessary.

Although some established ladies take newcomers "under their wing," that doesn't happen often enough. imo, the Sisterhood is a very loose association and I see no easy way to tighten or tauten that up to protect the female newbies, or, for that matter, to acclimate the new gents, either.

And, of course, there is zero concurrent screening/verifying process for guys joining a board or getting into the hobby. (Except for attending certain community events, that is. And, I am the first to admit that that process ain't perfect, either.)

= = = = = Originally Posted by ck1942

I also feel their is no true "sisterhood." The ladies are competing against each other, they are a business when they join a board like ECCIE. In my experience in the board part of the hobby, established girls may take a girl under her wings, but there are motives. Motives like someone to rent their incall, share the rent, a doubles partner because everyone wants the "new girl". It's not often that it's a genuine interest in a new providers success.

I say blame it on the internet. Anyone can be a provider now. CL, BP, ASPD, ECCIE, etc. It doesn't take much effort or cost to join a site or advertise. This has caused much competition because its a crowded market.

Just my thoughts.

sixx

I thinks it's a mistake to try and generalize. Some sisters share sisterhood, some backstab, and some just try to keep their head down and avoid being seen as partisan...you know, just like the guys. And, just like guys and humankind homogeneously, the constant and universal problem is that of defectors who manipulate the trust that glues any society together so as to gain the benefits of social inclusion without following the rules that allow it to work. Bruce Schneier has a great book on the subject for anyone interested in more insight into the problem of balancing networks of trust with security.

http://www.amazon.com/Liars-Outliers...qid=1402328876

The cliff notes is that there is always a certain inescapable risk within any society because trust can never be omniscient, but the free and open exchange of information is the best available tool to enforce honesty, with the side effect that it also helps avoid honest mistakes based on bad information.

As the descendents of mildly social pack animals (primates), our first instinct is to drive the offenders out of our tribes (out of sight, out of mind). Unfortunately, while this serves primates well (or evolution would never have selected for it), it serves modern humankind with our quasi-hive-like communities rather poorly since its easy for exiled members to reinvent themselves and reenter.

Some insular societies try to mitigate this by attempting to seal their boundaries with the wider world. But the market's need to trade goods, services and information with other communities (due to what economists call the law of comparative advantage) ensures the borders are never really sealed, and the result is usually all of the disadvantages of isolationism and none of the advantages of a small community where everybody knows your name).

In the end, sunlight really is the best disinfectant. It's never going to be perfect because people also need privacy since information is leverage and there are other members of a society who will use personal information to facilitate exactly the sort of bad behavior the elimination of privacy was trying to expunge in the first place.

I would humbly submit to cckid2006 that, although the impulse to simply leave the tribe and its problems behind is quite understandable, it's better to be part of the solution by being an advocate for better behavior. Defectors thrive largely because society implicitly allows their behavior to go unremarked upon. Silence is the shield of injustice.

BTW, it's been ages since I've heard anyone use the word edumacate or educamate