My science experiment with blakeonback .

This whole scenario reminds me of the story about the old lady that saved the dying snake and nursed it back to health. After the snake was better he bit the old lady and injected a fatal dose of his poison. While she lay dying she asked the snake, "why did you bite me? I saved your life!" and the snake replies, "Look bitch, you knew I was a snake."

Exact. Same. Thing.

Is it too late to take back what I wrote back in #66? I'm thinking my whole premise was shot to hell in subsequent posts.

Keep Bobbing the Nailer Bob you'll figure it out soon Originally Posted by blakeonback

Personally, I think it's high time you went outside and played hide and go fuck yourself! PM me if you want to hear what I really think.

Is it too late to take back what I wrote back in #66? I'm thinking my whole premise was shot to hell in subsequent posts. Originally Posted by TinMan

Twas a noble premise-- but he already had a thread full of people in the past telling him he was "doing it wrong". So... he was aware.

Is it too late to take back what I wrote back in #66? I'm thinking my whole premise was shot to hell in subsequent posts. Originally Posted by TinMan

Twas a noble premise-- but he already had a thread full of people in the past telling him he was "doing it wrong". So... he was aware. Originally Posted by GracePreston

Probably still a good premise to discuss (if it hasn't been done before) about what to do when you two don't 'click' and/or need to make the other aware of something that would impact future hobby actions/etiquette. A primer on different methods and their practicality when dealing with someone new vs someone you're familiar with.

Don't abandon your #66 thought Tin man. It does bear some discussion. I think this type of issue should remain between the provider and the client. As to warning other providers, I believe they have their own site (ladies lounge) for such alerts. They also have an opportunity to pass this along when giving references. So to bring this on the public forum is bad form...
As to Blake being a snake or not. I don't know. Attacking Bob the Nailer doesn't help his cause.
I do know Ze has a number of provider friends that I suspect disagree with this public flogging of Blake. Ask them Ze... They're not going to sell you out here.

I do feel this is a discussion worthy topic. My thoughts:

1. I do feel Ze's actions are perfectly justifiable in the case that BOB was warned and advised against his behavior. In this case, Ze is confirming that this guy is indeed someone who doesn't take heed to wise council.

While I do feel that this could have been posted in the ladies only section. I do see a possible benefit in that fellow hobbyists could scold and give their feedback on what is considered acceptable behavior. BOB may consider his actions coming from the hobbyist community. So, either way, if the first post stands true Ze would be justified in my book.

2. If the hobbyist was in fact oblivious to the fact that his behavior was offensive in this scenario, however. The retaliation, in my opinion was rather mean and unjustified.

I guess a good rule of thumb would be to give the hobbyist/provider a chance to correct said behavioral issues. If, by their actions, they communicate they have no intent to change and/or mitigate said behavior, flame them in an open forum.

Okay, now we are having an intelligent discussion. I respect your opinion, but have a different take on the issues.

(1) I do not think Ze was justified in bringing this on the public forum. There was no alert worthy infraction here. This man does not represent a threat. He may be a jerk, but I doubt we could list all the jerks.

(2) I don't think it is a function of this board to publicly chastise or punish any member. For Ze to put him
out to be scolded by the gallery seems out of line.

(3) Weather he was or was not aware of previous provider complaints is not relevant. As I already mentioned there are ways to handle this behind the scene.

In summary it is my position problems of this nature should stay between the provider and the client.
I further would ask again; is this treatment you as a client would feel is ok if it was you "called out" on a public board??

I have been reading this thread as it caught my attention. No one will know all the facts but I wanted to give my opinion as well. I haven't posted an opinion in Coed in a long time

First, this was not a science experiment. She needed cash. Providers provide to make money. She stated she knew he was a problem client. Science experiment? Yea right

Second, somewhere in the middle is the truth but why post the drama? A provider starting a thread to bash a hobbyist? She said that he was a problem client and she said it was known in the community. Why not post the issue in the power room?

Third, and most important, WHITE KNIGHTS, PLEASE STOP!!!! Saying it was admirable for her to see him or you applaud her?? Really?? You respect her for posting this??? Some of you stated this. Gentlemen, think about what you are posting. Read back through the comments. You can see who posted. I would expect most providers to come to her defense but hobbyists? Hobbyists, you don't know what happen. Why would you bash another hobbyist until you know all the facts?

Now some hobbyists on this post did make good points. Read through the thread. You can see who is making the white knight comments and who is making valid points.

Bottom line she needed the cash, she knew the risks, she saw him and it turned out like the risks had indicated. She tells her side, he tells his and nothing is accomplished. It just makes me firm up my belief to avoid providers that post in coed, who needs the drama

FUCK YA!!!!!!!!!!!
SLUTS UNITED!!!!!!!!!

People always ask why Ze is generally selective about who she sees. This thread is pretty indicative as to why. Not in regards to the OP, mind you-- in regards to some of the comments.

As to the mention of provider friends disagreeing with her actions? Dude, she is her own person. She and I may be very good friends, but we are VERY different people. Or.. the condensed version... "Cain't tell that bish nuthin". I know her well enough to know WHY she would be compelled to post this-- and contrary to the above person's beliefs... money has nada to do with it.

Dude, she is her own person. Originally Posted by GracePreston

This is exactly why I commended her, because she made her own independent decision and did not concede to the thoughts and opinions of others. I like people who "don't drink the kool-aid". This is my perception of her. Also, such independent thinking is good for hobbyists and providers alike. I wouldn't want someone to dismiss a session with me based on the opinions of other providers.

I am not defending or denouncing her actions in any way, however I do want to look at this from an objective standpoint and not immediately side with one party. Because, let's face it, some hobbyists are more bitch than man!

She knew the risks associated with him, but saw him anyway. This is ALL on her. Why take the chance? It's been said a million times over, not all money is good money and this guy is known for BS. She states that his personality rocks. That's indicative of him being approachable, yes? Then why not pm him rather than bring it to the open boards? If the desired result wasn't achieved, then perhaps put it in the ladies area. I don't see this as alert worthy. Just another threAD in a day in the life of a working girl. Win some, lose some.

his behavior is inapproperate, 45 min overstay ? Hey Ze, will you do that for me too ? kidding.... and the cider before noon ? he's a cheap MF for shorting you your donation inho... he needs his arse kicked ~! Not right at all period, I mean have some respect.

It really doesn't matter if you're $5, $10, or $20 short with the donation, that is the ultimate in Douchebaggery. Try that with your attorney, accountant, or bail bondsman and see what happens.

For those criticizing Ze, I think when a hobbyist deliberately overstays by 45 minutes on an hour session and deliberately shorts the provider (both by his own admission), he forfeit the implied warranty that they won't be called out publicly and shamed for his. actions.

In more legalistic terms, once the first party breaches the contract, the second party is under no continuing obligation to perform their end of the contract.

In short, dumb assets loose the benefit of the doubt, especially when their behavior is intentional, rather than through ignorance.