Meet & Greet in KC

Hey Capt – dere mays be some fightin and hunches goin on and LEO mights to want dat to happen BUT EVEN worst and whats they wants a MOST is to do exactly whats you said and turn down ours paranoia KNOB I aints gonna turn mine down fer nuttin and is u gonna be responsible for tellin peeps to turn it down and then thems gets busted casue they listens to you? Originally Posted by kc1

I really can't believe I am going to +1 KC1 (of all people), however, when he / she states (and I'll have to paraphrase the broken English) that the discord on this board may be what LE wants, but that turning down the "paranoia knob" is even worse . . well, as much as it pains me . . .

+1, because, he / she is correct. Turning down the paranoia knob (and it isn't solely LE that is worrisome) and becoming complacent is never advisable, IMHO.

I'm not turning mine down, ever. And frankly, I don't even have words for the fact that a moderator just suggested that people be less suspicious of anyone or anything, especially in light of recent events (notwithstanding the persistent dangers already inherent in this endeavor as a whole by its very nature).

Although, I can agree that being overly suspicious of others may be harmful. However, I don't believe anything mentioned in this thread is outside of the realm of the normal level of scrutiny that would be applied to anyone under any circumstance - it is just good observation. In other words, IMHO, I don't believe that this thread is indicative of "an uptick in the level of personal accusations based on hunches and paranoia going on around here".

Many people have obviously been paying very close attention lately to the postings and patterns of certain screen names that may appear to have no reason for existence other than for social engineering (see link) / intelligence gathering.

I've said it before, I'll say it again . . . Be safe everyone!

Kisses,

- Jackie

Yes, there was during another era, a real sweet lady did it for us. But she has retired and left the area. Originally Posted by vernors1940

While I think M&G's can be a great idea they have to be done properly. The first thing is they have to be put together by someone who is well known. The first get-together I went to in Dallas was put together by a couple of people that had been around "the hobby" for years. They were well known on several boards and in a couple of very private groups.
The real key to all of these parties was the screening and privacy. The people that put them together had been around for a while and knew who to trust when it came to vouching for people. When I went to these M&G's I felt very comfortable that everyone there was "safe." Originally Posted by Bubba

an M&G would not be in my hands because I would not organize such an event nor do I even know whether I would go to such an event. I am curious, but I am even more careful. I asked the question because I have heard about events in places like Texas, California, etc. Originally Posted by Redwolf

well then, the first step and the biggest.
who is going to do it.
only about 5 people here i would trust to organize it.
they are all busy people that know its a lot of work.
finding people that have references, understand professionalism of discretion and decorum, and that are members of the community in good standing, is not as easy as it sounds.
because le isn't the worst thing out there, it's the crazies.

well then, the first step and the biggest.
who is going to do it.
only about 5 people here i would trust to organize it.
they are all busy people that know its a lot of work.
finding people that have references, understand professionalism of discretion and decorum, and that are members of the community in good standing, is not as easy as it sounds.
because le isn't the worst thing out there, it's the crazies. Originally Posted by jeff one086

+1

Kisses and Licks-
Carlie

Jackie,

Please don't think I'm calling you out, because I'm not. I would like to say that I believe that my job as a moderator requires me to keep a level head and encourage that same type of discourse on the boards. Safety requires vigilance, but it doesn't require someone to be suspicious.

I am just going to tell you a story, I know some "fella's" in Chicago, everytime theirs an event such as a wedding, funeral etc. There are these professional looking gentlemen in the parking lot taking pictures, writing down license plate numbers, car descriptions etc. When I read this thread that came to mind, so take that for what you will.

I will also say this, and while its a long shot, I dont put anything past those guys with the initials. When a group of people meet to discuss an illegal activity (i.e. prostitution for an example and its only an example) it constitutes a Federal Felony known as conspiracy, now this might seem like a joke, but remember this, you do not know the personal history of the others that will be in the room with you. You might find yourself involved in a conspiracy for other criminal activities you are unaware of, it's much easier to talk yourself into a problem than out of the FBI's target. A little personal information, my first conviction evolved by me just hanging out with a couple of guys, next thing I knew I was knee deep in a Ricco violation, now I understand that most likely were not talking about the same kind of people, but you never know do you.

Safety requires vigilance, but it doesn't require someone to be suspicious. Originally Posted by CaptainKaos

. . . you've obviously never been an Escort or provider, or run afoul of the law seriously, perhaps. That's fine, we can agree to disagree.

I believe that safety requires both a prolonged alertness and attention (vigilance) and a healthy cautious distrust (suspicion).

I can say that from the perspective of an Escort having been active in this endeavor, NOT meeting most things "hobby" related with a measured cautious distrust (and failing to be vigilant in being gently suspicious) can get you incarcerated, robbed, beaten or killed (and/or a combination of those things and other/more . . . ).

Of course, there are degrees of suspicion, and there is a distinct difference between having or showing a healthy cautious distrust and allowing circumstance(s) or situation(s) to cause one to have the idea or impression that something or someone is of questionable, dishonest, or dangerous character or condition. Both define "suspicious" (as in via the dictionary), however one isn't very healthy, IMHO.

As I have mentioned previously in this thread, I don't find anything here to be overly suspicious.

Also, I would bet that after a year or two of moderating, your definition may change . . .

Kisses,

- Jackie

well then, the first step and the biggest.
who is going to do it.
only about 5 people here i would trust to organize it.
they are all busy people that know its a lot of work.
finding people that have references, understand professionalism of discretion and decorum, and that are members of the community in good standing, is not as easy as it sounds.
because le isn't the worst thing out there, it's the crazies. Originally Posted by jeff one086

+1 also. I'd trust Jeff and maybe one or two other people . . . where on Earth he gets five, I don't know . .

But, I will say I trust Jeff enough that if he says those five are golden, they're golden.

There are few people (as in I can count them on one, possibly two hands) in this endeavor that carry the clout and have the integrity that Jeff does . . it really is unfortunate - it really is everyone's loss - that he doesn't have time to moderate or administrate a national forum.

Kisses,

- Jackie

well then, the first step and the biggest.
who is going to do it.
only about 5 people here i would trust to organize it.
they are all busy people that know its a lot of work.
finding people that have references, understand professionalism of discretion and decorum, and that are members of the community in good standing, is not as easy as it sounds.
because le isn't the worst thing out there, it's the crazies. Originally Posted by jeff one086

+1 I am new,but I would only expect either a well trusted provider, or someone who has been around that numerous Providers would vouch for. Lets face it, Providers on a whole put their ass on the line more often than hobbyists and should/would tend to be way more leary, cautious, and if someone wasn't able to be verified then take it just like a review and it is something to work one. Trust works both ways. I still would like to just meet though.

I was regularly invited to a meet and greet by a provider who organised them out of town, I never attended but I am sure it was well planned . It can work!! Hell!! Its just a meeting. Whom ever wants to PM me I will brain storm with. Omahan you know.

*Puts down the popcorn* Well damn, just about everyone in this thread gained a bit more of my respect, but I lost my entertainment for the night, lol. But on a serious note, there are some serious notions and implications something like this could have for people, as so many others have already said much better than I am. And just to be clear, my popcorn comment is nothing more than a sorry attempt at humor, it's not meant to discredit anyone in any way. Glad to see there are plenty of sound minded people here.

There's not a lot for me to respond to from Redwolf except that if you don't have much of a hobby past, then the chances of you passing my screening are zero to none. So KC1 was right on that one.

I actually agree with a lot that KC1 had posted and that scares me.

Capt., I do disagree with your post about being paranoid. I'd rather be "overly paranoid" than not. It keeps me safe, keeps other providers safe and keeps my clients safe.

Bubba made some good points.

Jeff........+1 and hopefully I'm one of the five.

DD, you hit the nail on the head AGAIN!!

So, basically everyone agreed with me totally or to a point....but, yet I'm sure I'll be the bitch in the locker room and/or back channeling for saying it first. But hey, I always seem to say what others want to say, but are afraid to say it.


I am curious though, who would/would've been planning and screening this lil M&G?


PS. Kaboom, can I have the popcorn? I need a snack.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance and plausible deniability."

PS. Kaboom, can I have the popcorn? I need a snack. Originally Posted by MsElena

If you can handle all that butter, then have at it lol.

+1 also. I'd trust Jeff and maybe one or two other people . . . where on Earth he gets five, I don't know . .

But, I will say I trust Jeff enough that if he says those five are golden, they're golden.

There are few people (as in I can count them on one, possibly two hands) in this endeavor that carry the clout and have the integrity that Jeff does . . it really is unfortunate - it really is everyone's loss - that he doesn't have time to moderate or administrate a national forum.

Kisses,

- Jackie Originally Posted by jackie@sintropolis

I agree with you totally Jackie. I don't hobby as much as I'd like to, and I've probably hobbied more than I should, but there are certain individuals we run across that deserve this kind of trust because it is well earned and not simply because of post count.

I was regularly invited to a meet and greet by a provider who organised them out of town, I never attended but I am sure it was well planned . It can work!! Hell!! Its just a meeting. Whom ever wants to PM me I will brain storm with. Omahan you know. Originally Posted by Smokes

i agree it can work, and they are lots of fun.
there are just lots of very new people talking about doing it.
if somebody can get one going, great.

but it does remind me of skydiving,
not exactly something you can learn by trial and error
if no one knows how to pack a parachute,

...things end up bad...