Review rant

[Hobby_Bobby]

Oh ... And make sure you review the correct provider hahaha ... This will take some effort on your part when every forth provider's stage name is some variant of queen or Lexi ... But if it was easy ... Welfare idiots would be doing it.

[Guest013121]

Ppfftt! I woulda been hella pissed. Not kidding. He even used her name in the title of his review!!! Babahahaha

[AlbusMilitis]

Originally Posted by Gemma34

usa- you also see providers with their children present.

Gemma, I'm surprised that somebody as 'seasoned' and 'discrete' as yourself would violate a forum guideline.

#10 - Topics regarding children, and certain images depicting children are not material for an adult-themed board.

Maybe that probationary period for providers should include a remedial phase for seasoned providers who don't know the rules, eh? Maybe some of th BP hookers can help you out. I'm serious. Newbies are expected to make mistakes...but by your own account, you've been hooking for a very long time and still persist in insulting people, threatening people, and now talking about the young ones. Isn't that even worse.

Oh, and to the OP - real classy using the Special Olympics as a pejorative term (btw thats kiddos too).

To everyone else - keep posting. You don't need the peanut gallery's permission....reminds me of the two old grouches on the Muppets.

[Guest013121]

Are you seriously trying to tattletell and get me kicked off?? I know I've specifically ask that you not address me. You are a sick fuck and you need to leave me the fuck alone.

[AlbusMilitis]

No Gemma the only time I have ever tattled on you (ie hit the RTM button) was when your oh so dicreet self THREATENED TO OUT ME...twice.

Now here we are....I have pointed out that you violated a forum rule, and you call me names (again). Besides being an admission that you were indeed wrong, that is a violation of yet another forum rule. Seriously, the guidelines are on the left sidebar. You should look at them.

Now you have made some accusations of me (no fair throwing it up there and editing it out a few minutes later). Soooo....since you brought it up, I'll link to the trainwreck of a thread you are referring to. It gives the reader an 'essence of Gemma', in case they are new.

Notice I only pop up in your world when you try to tell other people what they can or can't post? Want me to go away, quit acting up.

The link:

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1352803

[Guest013121]

Are you stupid?? Who have I told what they can and can't do?? "Quit acting up and you'll go away??!!" Wtf.

You really need to leave me alone. This is stalker type shit now and I've asked you numerous times to leave me alone. I shouldn't have to ask more than ONCE.

[AlbusMilitis]

Originally Posted by Gemma34

You are a sick fuck.

Yes. Gemma you are personally attacking me.

No. Gemma you can't just call me names and demand I go away.

[Guest090920]

Originally Posted by AlbusMilitis

Gemma, I'm surprised that somebody as 'seasoned' and 'discrete' as yourself would violate a forum guideline.

#10 - Topics regarding children, and certain images depicting children are not material for an adult-themed board.

Maybe that probationary period for providers should include a remedial phase for seasoned providers who don't know the rules, eh? Maybe some of th BP hookers can help you out. I'm serious. Newbies are expected to make mistakes...but by your own account, you've been hooking for a very long time and still persist in insulting people, threatening people, and now talking about the young ones. Isn't that even worse.

Oh, and to the OP - real classy using the Special Olympics as a pejorative term (btw thats kiddos too).

To everyone else - keep posting. You don't need the peanut gallery's permission....reminds me of the two old grouches on the Muppets.

Originally Posted by AlbusMilitis

No Gemma the only time I have ever tattled on you (ie hit the RTM button) was when your oh so dicreet self THREATENED TO OUT ME...twice.

Now here we are....I have pointed out that you violated a forum rule, and you call me names (again). Besides being an admission that you were indeed wrong, that is a violation of yet another forum rule. Seriously, the guidelines are on the left sidebar. You should look at them.

Now you have made some accusations of me (no fair throwing it up there and editing it out a few minutes later). Soooo....since you brought it up, I'll link to the trainwreck of a thread you are referring to. It gives the reader an 'essence of Gemma', in case they are new.

Notice I only pop up in your world when you try to tell other people what they can or can't post? Want me to go away, quit acting up.

The link:

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1352803

Originally Posted by AlbusMilitis

Yes. Gemma you are personally attacking me.

No. Gemma you can't just call me names and demand I go away.

From my view in the cheap seats, I see no violation of guideline #10. However, what I do see is you approaching ever so closely to the line drawn by this guideline:

#17 - "Cyber Stalking" is a term that refers to the act of following another member around online. This may include persistent PMing of the other party, repeated ISOs about the other party, or excessive bumping of reviews or posting in threads about the other individual, whether it be positive or negative information posted. In any of these cases, whether staff deems that the behavior has crossed the line into cyber-stalking, or the "stalked" party complains to staff about the alleged behavior, staff will take the necessary steps to make it stop. Please avoid becoming involved in this type of conduct.

Yes, she lost her patience and resorted to name calling and by this note I am warning her not to do that again. However, you seem to follow her around regularly, question her experience and knowledge seemingly with the intent of riling her up to the point of calling you a name.

So, guess what, this is your warning also. Don't cyber stalk Gemma.

Now, back to the discussion...

[AlbusMilitis]

Well sir, we disagree I thought claiming that a member was engaged in sexual acts with a provider in the presence of a child was a textbook example of what not to do.

My last post about Gemma in a public forum was in June, months ago. And I explained at the time that I was responding to a positive review of her with my own experience with her. I think I did it in a level headed and dispassionate manner.

Your sandbox, your rules. But I really ask that you consult with fellow moderators about the appropriateness of discussion of children and provider play in the same sentence. Just about every LE assault on the hobby is predicated on mis-deeds involving children...mention children on this board too much, and the feds (who regulate banking) tell the credit card companies not to do business with ECCIE. No more membership fees or payment for banner ads - poof the whole board is gone. That is the existential threat that comes with carelessly mentioning children, and precisely the reason for that rule....same reason backpage can't charge for provider ads anymore.

[Hobby_Bobby]

Originally Posted by AlbusMilitis

Oh, and to the OP - real classy using the Special Olympics as a pejorative term (btw thats kiddos too).

When I want your opinion, I'll ask for it. Your reviews are well crafted. Be proud of yourself ... And be gone.

I like the way you shut this nonsense down Scorpio.

[AlbusMilitis]

Hobby Bobby,

Don't start hiding behind the teacher just yet. Scorpio didn't say anything about me and YOU.

So for now I can still point out that you use the Special Olympics as a juvenile term to insult people - and should be condemned for it.

[Guest090920]

Originally Posted by Hobby_Bobby

Incredibly - some of you dumbshits really have a hard time getting the required information populated. Ultimately - I have to read Scorpio being overly diplomatic with your dumbass. Scorpio - how many repeat offenders do you have?

I don't have a count of repeat offenders. I will say it seems likely there are more reviews being posted from smartphones than ever before. The users find it exceedingly difficult to navigate to find phone numbers, proper links to showcases, websites or ads and write coherent sentences or even provide a decent ROS at times and their numbers are growing exponentially.

There are a number of official reasons reviews are rejected and that is because it is not too much to ask that the review writer do the reviews correctly and complete the form fully in order to receive FREE PA credit.

[Dkayz]

Hey, let's all not forget that 90% of these silly guys are only "dreaming" when they write reviews... LOL. Dumbest shit I ever see and it annoys me every time I see it.

[bobbylite64]

I agree with dkayz

[Hobby_Bobby]

Originally Posted by bobbylite64

I agree with dkayz

Holy shit dude! You did ol' Hot Lotto ... And gave her a yes!? You've got some balls ... I'll give you that!



Look forward to hearing about more of your dumpster-diving adventures.