my latest review

[saj1000]

Lonestar...you did nothing wrong...nobody ever said you did.

Was it CBJ too?

[knotty man]

very stand up post LS. i hope you dont think i was insinuating anything either way about either of you. i have never met or even communicated with you two. i was more concerned for future incidents. you sound like a stand up guy. hope to see you at a function some time

[Guest092815]

Very nice, Lonestar. No one was there but the two of you, so I reserve further judgement until such a time as neccessary

~Move along, folks.

Now the only thing we are waiting for is a final word from the OP, if she has a last thought.
peace and love to you both.
Crystal

[WyldemanATX]

This is what happens when a WK thinks he is helping a provider by sending a PM of ROS information. He did not even send out accurate info from what he read in ROS. He started a total cluster Fuck for the reviewer and the review e. Way to go WKs I hope all you WK feel warm and fuzzy now.

[bueller22]

Hey Lonestar...thanks for doing the review. Also, thanks for your clarification of things...makes you look like a reasonable and decent person.

[lonestar733]

thanks to all who responded with supportive comments to my post on this issue (that's presbytarian for clusterfuck!). especially you, crystal kitty, it means a lot to know that i am not instantly blacklisted by all providers.

i (hopefully) leave this thread with this song sounding in my head- walk a mile in my shoes- from the 60s or early 70s- who sang that? the chorus was something like:
walk a mile in my shoes,
walk a mile in my shoes,
hey, before you criticize, abuse, and choose,
walk a mile in my shoes

and i don't mean this about me. i just want to say to the hobbyists, consider what you're receiving. a woman of your choice agrees to meet with you knowing almost nothing about you and will have sex with you no matter if you are attractive or not. that is pretty amazing, and i really appreciate it. would you do it? even if the women who came to your place were all hot and paid you scads of money? be honest here. would you be ok with the secrecy, the double life, what would your family/friends/society think about you? do you think less of providers for what they do and demean them in the process? just think about it, is all i'm saying. and for the WKs, make absolutely sure you have your facts straight, and then pm the reviewer, stupid. at least verify what you think you know before you throw the grenade that you feel is your special right. for the providers, please try to figure out who is a user and who is or could be a valued client. that's all i will say about that, because i don't walk in your shoes.

i know that everyone here is here by choice and all actions are freely taken with individual responsibility attached, so please don't lecture me on that. i am just lobbying for some mutual respect and consideration. best wishes to all as you try to make your way in this world we live in.

[Yssup Rider]

So it remains -- who's the (feminine hygiene product) who leaked what he/she thought to be in the secure area to the provider? And why did you lie to her at that?

[guest040711-1]

Once again I am posting this message for ALL. It is not the private info you have, it is what you do with it. if you come across any private info, do not use it on ECCIE or we will enforce the rules and you will find yourself banned.

[maxieryan]

Originally Posted by Codybeast

Hi beautiful
Isn't this the exact same dilemma that the men have regarding women spreading malicious info about them whether it be true or false in the back channels or ladies room?
I recall commenting on a thread someone posted about this very subject some time ago. A reputable provider responded that some things cannot be controlled but the men should trust that the other providers have been around long enough to recognize BS when they see it. Should the same thing not apply to the men's locker room?

Thanks so much for the post, it really got me to thinking. You make a very valid point.

However, here is mine. Anytime a 'lady' goes into PIE and slams a 'gent', it is highly suspect. We all have highly evolved 'creep meters' and can smell Bullshit (pardon) a mile away. If she has not put the info in an alert, we usually raise an eye. The major players all know each other (have met, corresponded, talked on the phone) so it's usually not one of us. If we have something to say we put it in the right format. New people are easy prey, we all know that. But their character has not yet been established within the herd, we know that as well.

I do not mean to sound self-righteous and high-brow when I say this. But some of the low-down garbage that is rumored to be spread by 'some people' in 'private' on boards is simply frowned upon in PIE. Any girl who spreads trash is either hormonal, vindictive, or trashy. We like to be good stewards or the trust instilled in us by our 'male friends'. And we don't like looking like assholes (pardon) in front of our colleagues, even if we are HORMONAL.

Just my little 'ol 2 cents fwiw...

[Codybeast]

Originally Posted by SP Hunter

Once again I am posting this message for ALL. It is not the private info you have, it is what you do with it. if you come across any private info, do not use it on ECCIE or we will enforce the rules and you will find yourself banned.

So if I am understanding that correctly then you are stating that it is Not a violation to pass ROS info on to the provider but rather that the violation is her publicly using the info on Eccie. Is that interpretation correct?

[Spacemtn]

Originally Posted by knotty man

thanks space for the explanation. but what of the WK who let her know? is he to be punished. the reason i ask is if my atf were to have a review posted on her with activities that i KNOW are clearly not part of her normal menu, am i bound by this "guy code wall of silence" and let her suffer for what she clearly had nothing to do with and obviously has no knowledge of. or should i let her know so she can alert a mod and have me pointed or worse banned. where does a hobbyists loyalty lay. to seeking the truth in reviews or towards his brothers no matter the cost to the lady

If a lasy in this circumstance reveals the source, then he is punished. For the second part see SP's post below.

Originally Posted by SP Hunter

Once again I am posting this message for ALL. It is not the private info you have, it is what you do with it. if you come across any private info, do not use it on ECCIE or we will enforce the rules and you will find yourself banned.

Originally Posted by Codybeast

So if I am understanding that correctly then you are stating that it is Not a violation to pass ROS info on to the provider but rather that the violation is her publicly using the info on Eccie. Is that interpretation correct?

If you pass that info on to someone without access and we don't know it does the violation exist (Wow, now we are going all Nietzsche on this one). No. But say she sends the OP an e mail, text, etc letting him know she knows. He forwards that e mail, text, etc to a Mod and it can be verified then it is a violation.


Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

[Codybeast]

If you pass that info on to someone without access and we don't know it does the violation exist (Wow, now we are going all Nietzsche on this one). No. But say she sends the OP an e mail, text, etc letting him know she knows. He forwards that e mail, text, etc to a Mod and it can be verified then it is a violation.


Spacemtn
AustinModStaff[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the clarification.

[Natalie Reign]

I think what Philosopher Space is saying is that, YES, it is a violation, but without verifiable proof (i.e., an email, text or PM to the OP from the recipient of the information), the Mods cannot rightfully punish someone for a violation. A violation is a violation. But a perceived violation cannot be punished; only a provable one can.

Am I on the right track?

Originally Posted by Spacemtn

If you pass that info on to someone without access and we don't know it does the violation exist (Wow, now we are going all Nietzsche on this one). No. But say she sends the OP an e mail, text, etc letting him know she knows. He forwards that e mail, text, etc to a Mod and it can be verified then it is a violation.

[irishlad]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

So it remains -- who's the (feminine hygiene product) who leaked what he/she thought to be in the secure area to the provider? And why did you lie to her at that?

Wellllll then...maybe there was no violation after all, seeing as nothing that was in ROS was actually leaked, just a false statement about something that wasn't.

See what happens when you invoke existentialism.

[WyldemanATX]

irishlad yes there was something from ROS leaked she did state something directly from ROS in her post.