Do we recognize the one on the left?

[Out_of_Bounds]

Originally Posted by Out_of_Bounds

Just a picture with some info. No real world info has been given. Just the same as if a provider with a showcase here has an alert posted by another member with a link to said showcase.
OP's the furthest thing from outing anyone in my eyes.
Besides I think they need to be a member here to be subject to the rules.

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Is this person a member here? If not then no protections apply. Eccie is unconcerned with protecting the privacy and anonymity of the world at large, just the membership. If she is indeed a member someone PM me the link to her profile.

BOO-YAAA!!!

[JustMeCLTXGG]

even if she is a member, I only see one person who actually linked the article in question.

how is that different from the group arrest linked previously by Kaitlyn? is it as simple as none of those girls were members? I know there was another issue with that article but I'm not questioning that issue.

[Hot to Trot Daphne]

Originally Posted by Out_of_Bounds

Besides I think they need to be a member here to be subject to the rules.

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Is this person a member here? If not then no protections apply. Eccie is unconcerned with protecting the privacy and anonymity of the world at large, just the membership. If she is indeed a member someone PM me the link to her profile.

Oh ok, this is why rule clarifications are great. I remember I got banned for something similar to this but I see the difference now. Thank you!
Sti
p.s. I'm not going to go looking for her profile if she has one. Didn't want the guy to get banned. Sticking up for her? -_-
I could give a shit about her thief or not, but especially not since she's a rob. More of a rules clarification for me. Again, thank you.

Originally Posted by H.Hardhat

Really?
.REALLY?

Yes, really.

[NOBODY60]

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Is this person a member here? If not then no protections apply. Eccie is unconcerned with protecting the privacy and anonymity of the world at large, just the membership. If she is indeed a member someone PM me the link to her profile.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv1kApvEPiY

Instead of talking shit about people outing these whores, you should be glad that members like Zed care enough to protect other members here to take the time and start this thread.

[Hot to Trot Daphne]

I wasn't talking shit about anyone. Get your panties out of a wad. I already stated my intentions above. ^^

If by off chance she was a member here, your ass would be outta here by now. Be glad you got this clarification also.

Carry on.

[SpiceItUp]

Originally Posted by JustMeCLTXGG

even if she is a member, I only see one person who actually linked the article in question.

how is that different from the group arrest linked previously by Kaitlyn? is it as simple as none of those girls were members? I know there was another issue with that article but I'm not questioning that issue.

Not really sure what you're asking here.

Even if no real names are mentioned in the article these portions of the guideline highlighted in bold would still apply if they were members. If they're not a member then no protections apply.

Keep in mind that "oops I didn't know they were a member" will likely not save you from the Impending Banhammer of Doom™. The bell cannot be unrung.



#5 - Outing or threats of outing are taken seriously. Membership here is anonymous and for the privacy of our members it will remain that way. That means any effort or attempt to connect a person's real world information to their username on this board will be dealt with swiftly and harshly. This includes real names, employment, medical info, addresses past or present, images, criminal or driving record, etc. We expect everyone who participates here to respect and go to great lengths to protect the anonymity and privacy of one another. Reckless disregard or accidental outing will also be taken very seriously.

[NOBODY60]

Originally Posted by Hottentot Venus

I wasn't talking shit about anyone. Get your panties out of a wad. I already stated my intentions above. ^^

If by off chance she was a member here, your ass would be outta here by now. Be glad you got this clarification also.

Carry on.

Busy tonight?

You bring the pussy and I'll bring you some Blue Bell.

[SpiceItUp]

Originally Posted by NOBODY60

Busy tonight?

You bring the pussy and I'll bring you some Blue Bell.

Heh that's funny...and also fucked up

[JustMeCLTXGG]

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Not really sure what you're asking here.

Even if no real names are mentioned in the article these portions of the guideline highlighted in bold would still apply if they were members. If they're not a member then no protections apply.

Keep in mind that "oops I didn't know they were a member" will likely not save you from the Impending Banhammer of Doom™. The bell cannot be unrung.



#5 - Outing or threats of outing are taken seriously. Membership here is anonymous and for the privacy of our members it will remain that way. That means any effort or attempt to connect a person's real world information to their username on this board will be dealt with swiftly and harshly. This includes real names, employment, medical info, addresses past or present, images, criminal or driving record, etc. We expect everyone who participates here to respect and go to great lengths to protect the anonymity and privacy of one another. Reckless disregard or accidental outing will also be taken very seriously.

right. apologies for not being clear.

to try and ask more precisely, would posting the link to the article be the only violation or would posting the image also be? because that wording is very vague and members post images of providers all the time. would it be simply the fact the image appears to be a mug shot so that connects it to the criminal element?

the questions are posed as if the persons in question were members

edit:

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

.........
Keep in mind that "oops I didn't know they were a member" will likely not save you from the Impending Banhammer of Doom™. The bell cannot be unrung.
.........

it's the multi-use, multi-purpose official stamp of the Houston Mod Team.



or is this one only for Mojojo?

edit:
ok that's weird. the original post of yours I quoted was missing the above line I'm pretty sure. why I went and collected it. yet when I edited and saved my post it updated the quote?

[Out_of_Bounds]

So one was charged with theft and the other evasion. What kind of sentence does that carry?
Where's Lexuslover when you need him?
And why the fuck didn't they charge them both with solicitation?

[Hot to Trot Daphne]

Originally Posted by NOBODY60

Busy tonight?

You bring the pussy and I'll bring you some Blue Bell.

And I'll bring you some brownies

What's you addy? I'll Fex Ex em to you.

Why is it when someone disagrees , doesn't see exactly things exactly the way you do, or even just have a comment chests have to get puffed up, insults thrown, and enemies made? It's a conversation, not a dick slinging contest. Keep in mind I never once insulted you.

Were you robbed? That time of the month? Lighten up Francis.

[Out_of_Bounds]

Originally Posted by JustMeCLTXGG

right. apologies for not being clear.

to try and ask more precisely, would posting the link to the article be the only violation or would posting the image also be? because that wording is very vague and members post images of providers all the time. would it be simply the fact the image appears to be a mug shot so that connects it to the criminal element?

the questions are posed as if the persons in question were members

http://m.chron.com/neighborhood/pasa...-j-6219891.php
Here you go....

[GlobeSpotter]

I haven't looked for info

but hopefully these girls were set up. Their m.o. was predictable enough to trap them.

[Guest030816]

Thanks again Spice for attempting to apply some semblance to reasoning.
Take this hypothetical situation as an opposite of what happened.
High society hobbyist takes high end provider out to the Spring Gala, the two wind up on the society page as John X and his mystery date. Fellow hobbyist recognizes the provider and crops out John, posts pics saying "Betty Big Bucks spotted at the Spring Gala." As long as John is left out of the scenario, there's no Real World info out there, except that Betty was at the gala.
Same goes for the opposite, this time Betty was spotted in the back of the police cruiser. Betty still has her identity hidden until the police release it...
Even if the thieving BP whore has a handle/account here, where does she get protection from the guidelines? How is her protection more important that the guys she sees and then robs?
Tough question, but you're a bright young lad, I'm sure you've got a ready made answer all ready for us.

[SpiceItUp]

Originally Posted by JustMeCLTXGG

right. apologies for not being clear.

to try and ask more precisely, would posting the link to the article be the only violation or would posting the image also be? because that wording is very vague and members post images of providers all the time. would it be simply the fact the image appears to be a mug shot so that connects it to the criminal element?

the questions are posed as if the persons in question were members

It's vague because every situation is different and the context is key.

Assuming persons in question were members then...

Posting a link as an FYI to people that a bust has happened is entirely different than posting the link or someone's mug shot and saying "hey we know this person don't we?"

Moderator discernment comes into play and it is at our discretion whether to simply remove the link and perhaps issue a warning or bring down the Impending Banhammer of Doom™ for some period of time. Again, the specific situation and the context will dictate which option is most likely and what the length of suspension would be, if any.