Even though I think it is unecessarily foolish to call out a member of LE and say something nasty about him, I don't see a problem with it.
Originally Posted by lacrew_2000
I agree it is unnecessarily foolish. I respectfully disagree that it is not a problem.
KC has a VERY small and tightly knit LE community and it is a well established fact that they (LE) read and archive everything here (in KC that fact is a matter of public record being stated by LE at trial, more than once - and more than one department does it). They pay attention. Close attention. We all know that they're here, hell, we all know they post.
If threads such as this were to become prevalent, then good ladies that post here may possibly end up getting more than their fair share of attention, they may stop getting "passes", or they may no longer be told they can "run if they run clean" (don't think for a minute that LE tries to stop everything, they know there has to be a safety valve somewhere and they can't stop it all) . . . maybe they (ladies here) get their throats stepped on a little harder (figuratively) when they do get clipped "becasue she advertises on ECCIE" - threads like this make it personal, not for Dumit, but for ALL of them (LE) - you poke one, you poke them all . . . and things can go south quickly.
If things like this were to continue, you (and other gentlemen) may feel somewhat differently about it down the road a bit, especially if LE decides to really make a push to make it their business to want to know the real names behind the screen names. Do you guys really not realize that of the nine or ten ladies that get clipped on average in the metro area every
week, that every single one of them that makes it as far as an interview room over the next several
months will be asked if they know the real name of 6ULDV8? I can almost guarantee you they will; at the very least they'll be asked
a little more (you do the math) about ECCIE identities (if the lady knows any real names to match a screen name)!
I'm sorry, but in the final analysis you guys all armchair - you certainly don't play the game like we do (you don't have to) or even by the same rules (they don't apply) . . . the overwhelming majority of you are spectators except for an hour or two once every two or three months. You sit back and think "oh, that can't happen, LE has better things to do", "She's full of shit, that know-it-all Jackie" . . . Well, I don't know everything and I have never claimed to but what I do know, I know cold. I'm not full of shit (contrary to popular belief) and no, they (LE) don't have anything better to do, especially when someone decides to make it personal. As they did here.
You really might want to reconsider establishing a board policy that gives someone a free pass to talk shit on someone just becasue you
believe they're a public figure, especially when the particular person you've independently "adjudicated" to be a "public figure" is LE and can make a whole lot of your member's lives very, very difficult, very directly - even possibly your own (you too, after all, participate as a client as well). And, I really can't believe that board ownership here would condone or tolerate anyone pushing LE like this on any level. Why invite the heat?? Seriously?
Most of you have
absolutely no concept of how deeply intertwined LE is into the vast majority of this endeavor. If you knew the full truth of it, you'd all be flying to Nevada to visit a "legal" brothel to scratch the occasional itch and be paying ten to twenty times the going rate. All I can say (again) is, you really don't want to poke the bear. There's a
reason why there is a status quo. Why go fucking it up? It has served a lot of people very well . . .
That's my "tinfoil hat wearing, Jackie's a complete bitch" 2 cents, for what it is worth. I really do trust that you can see how this could become a larger issue if left unchecked.
Be safe everyone!
Kisses,
- Jackie