I'm impressed

[Mod 8]

It is not my board, it is Fred's board. We simply moderate it. As has been said many times, moderators have nothing to do with advertising other than ensuring that advertisers follow the rules that are in place on MERB. Advertising is Fred's domain.

No board is perfect, no community is perfect. All we can do is try to make it the best it can be.

M8

 

[Net Profit Margin]

That's why here on merb, we should ask SP's consent before posting agency's ad showing their faces.

Yet you didn't bother asking permission before posting such pictures on another board therefore you are just as much part of the problem as agencies and review boards, including this one, are. There is no excuse for second hand irresponsibility.

To all,

If someone subscribes to the principle that posting such pictures poses a risk to sexworkers then that someone should not post such pictures. As simple as that.

There is no circumstance that makes posting such pictures acceptable, no difference based on which, between agencies and random posters, controls the image, no "I took it from merb/agency website", no "I'll remove it if she asks me to", no after the fact excuses, nothing. You either post such pictures or you don't and if you do, I'm not impressed.

 

[man77777]

You should take your real handle, it would be more courageous... But I think if you did, you would have been already banned...

My opinion is that in a board and in life, we have to be courageous and defend our point of view during the battle and where the battle is, even if you sometimes do mistake. That's why :

- In the board we are talking about, I tried to avoid non-escorting pic to be published and defended KIM's right in his matter. That's also why I deleted all the pic I published when I understand this board policy. I probably made a mistake at first, but I learnt very quickly (that's what I meant by "nobody is perfect" in my first post).

- In the blue board, I went to bring the contradiction to their paranoiac way of seeing others boards (and I was banned even if i was 100% nice and respectful)... Anyway, I tried...

- In this board, I wrote that no board is perfect, and that self-satisfaction about pics policy is improper in here, as SP's consent is not needed to publish their face in ad.

 

[Net Profit Margin]

This is my real handle and I need no lesson of courage coming from you. You're at fault, not me, therefore it's your duty, not mine, to repair your faults. If I pick on you it's because, one, you're here not to bring something to the table but to justify yourself, two, you're speaking from both sides of your mouth. On the one side you blame merb for posting pictures without the consent of SPs, on the other side you did the exact same thing on that other board. Now you're trying to save face with excuses.

As I said before, there's no excuse for second hand irresponsibility. You're in the wrong, deal with it.

 

[man77777]

Be a man, take your real handle mister Blue Board, then we could have a real discussion.

Anyway, it's clear that you didn't follow and understand what happened. You didn't do anything to defend the girls on the other board and then come here to give lessons of morality. You act like a coward.

You're a Post-War warrior trying to lead a Witch-Hunt...

 

[Net Profit Margin]

Oh, gratuitous accusations and name calling. Now, I'm really impressed...

To conclude, I hope Fred Zed and other board owners where applicable will take the time to ponder this key issue and review their policies for the benefit of all. Safety is key and it starts with safeguarding sexworker's identities.

 

[Mod 8]

Man77777,

There is nothing to suggest that Net Profit Margin is anything other than what he claims to be and nothing that connects him to any other handle, past or present. If you have claims or accusations to make, contact a moderator. Anymore insinuations will be met with a suspension.

As for your claim that SPs have not given permission to the agencies to post their full image here on MERB in their advertising is concerned, do you have proof to back this up also? We have never received any contact from any SP stating that they did not give such permission and requesting that their image be removed. Not one. MERB is an advertising medium for agencies and like any other, we do not have the time or the resources to verify if every advertiser has the proper permissions to use the images they use. That is the responsibility of the advertiser and we must assume that all advertisers have such permission.

We have been contacted in the past when an agency has used a photo that belongs to another agency or individual and have intervened and removed such images. We would do the same if contacted by any SP regarding any image that posted on the board without their permission but as I have indicated, this has yet to happen.

As for joining the board in question and fighting the issue there, there is no point in anyone doing that. Those who run that board have already made their position clear and there is no point in boosting their membership numbers to fight a battle that can not be won there. The best thing to do is to ignore that board completely and they will soon fade into obscurity.

M8

 

[man77777]

Discussion was over before NPM attacked me... He just wants to make the shit as he already done in the past.

This guy claims to know everything that happened on every boards, talk about january and february facts and is just on merb since march 2012... It's clear if you read him that he know very well the 3boards for a long time... Of course 100% proof don't exist, but that's clearly enough to understand that this is not his first handle.

Feel free to suspend me if you think I went to far with this Blue Board mole, I will respect your decision.

 

[Net Profit Margin]

I'm asking you, Man77777, to take back your foolish accusations.

I never said that NPM is my first handle or that I'm not aware of other boards but this is my only active handle. I am also very aware of the Montreal escort scene, being originally from Montreal now living in the GTA. I was a very active hobbyist before your time who retired at some point, now making a come back.

I am under no obligation to disclose my inactive handles but, if you were to check my old profile on merc, you would get this:

Last Activity 08-21-2010 10:16 AM

For the record, I don't have sufficient privileges to access my old profile page and I didn't bother to register a new handle therefore I had to ask a fellow hobbyist to check this information for me.

My last activity here with that same old handle dates back to May 2009.

I am here to post reviews and express opinions. As far as I know, I have neither broken any rule nor made use of foul language against other members therefore I do not accept being called a "coward" or a "mole".

I will erase this post once I see every false accusation made by Man77777 erased.

 

[man77777]

You accused me, I accused you. If you're too sensible to be attacked, don't attack the others. Moreover you really chose the wrong target. I'm a frank and honnest guy, you won't find anybody here to tell you the contrary.

I won't ask you to delete your foolish accusations, nor made a delete exchange, cause I'm 100% clean and serene about what I did on the 3boards, so your accusations are like an accarien on my skin. All I have to say about me is here :

- In the board we are talking about, I tried to avoid non-escorting pic to be published and defended KIM's right in his matter. That's also why I deleted all the pic I published when I understand this board policy. I probably made a mistake at first, but I learnt very quickly (that's what I meant by "nobody is perfect" in my first post).

- In the blue board, I went to bring the contradiction to their paranoiac way of seeing others boards (and I was banned even if i was 100% nice and respectful)... Anyway, I tried...

- In this board, I wrote that no board is perfect, and that self-satisfaction about pics policy is improper in here, as SP's consent is not needed to publish their face in ad.


The goal of your last post is to make me suspended... It shows how machavellian you are... Let see if you manage to manipulate Mods.


All this story starts to be a bit childish in my opinion. That's what I would think about us if I just read our discussion. See girls, enjoy your life and post reviews...




"Ziggy, il s'appelle Ziggy, c'est mon seul ami... C'est un garçon pas comme les autres.." I love this song...

 

[Mod 8]

Hello everyone,

We could easily make a rule preventing agencies from using full face pics in their advertising but that would accomplish nothing as long as the images are posted on the agency's own website. We would also require the power to prevent agencies from posting such images on their own site and that is something we do not have, nor do we wish to. As long as those images are posted on an advertiser's own website, they will be seen by every person who goes to their site for further information. Preventing them from being posted here, or on any board which accepts such advertising, is useless.

The key to this situation is who has control over these images and such control should remain with the agencies and the ladies who work for them. On MERB that is exactly where such control lies, not with the board or the members of the board, but with the agencies who have the right to post their advertising. They have the ability to remove them at any time or to request that they be removed.

No advertising medium, be it websites, television, newspapers or magazines, has the time or resources to ensure that every individual pictured in any advertising has signed a release for the use of their image. That responsibility lies with the advertiser. It must be assumed that the advertiser has such permission and it is their responsibility to obtain it.

As it seems that everything that needs to be said on this subject has been said and MERB policy on such images is very clear, I see no reason for this thread to remain open much longer. I will give members time to make any final points they wish to make and later today this thread will be closed.

Mod 8

 

[sweetwater]

I'll get in here before the thread is closed. IMHO it should be between the individual and the agency for whom they work for whether or not to post pictures of their faces. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I like to look at the lady's face if I can prior to booking, but if I can't, that isn't going to keep me from booking. If other reviewers find the lady attractive, then I probably will, too.
Sweetwater

 

[gugu]

Before this closes, I want to express my sincere appreciation to NPR for his huge selfless contribution to the security of Montreal sex workers. I truly loved the preaching.

 

[Siocnarf]

In a perfectly perfect world, being recognized as a prostitute (or client) would not cause any problems. In the present times I think its good not to encourage face pictures too much. If there is too much demand for those pictures, girls might get convinced to give their consent even if they don't like it.

Personnaly, I prefer not knowing exactly how the woman looks beforehand. The satisfaction of a good surprise outweights the eventual bad surprises. Makes me feel like a kid before Christmas

 

[Merlot]

Yet you didn't bother asking permission before posting such pictures on another board therefore you are just as much part of the problem as agencies and review boards, including this one, are. There is no excuse for second hand irresponsibility.

To all,

If someone subscribes to the principle that posting such pictures poses a risk to sexworkers then that someone should not post such pictures. As simple as that.

There is no circumstance that makes posting such pictures acceptable, no difference based on which, between agencies and random posters, controls the image, no "I took it from merb/agency website", no "I'll remove it if she asks me to", no after the fact excuses, nothing. You either post such pictures or you don't and if you do, I'm not impressed.

True mostly. I object to any board members anywhere posting photos of any lady regardless of circumstances. Although we can presume agencies aren't doing so without permission, one never be 100% sure. There have been cases where ladies had their agencies take photos down indicating discomfort, if not a lack of agreement in having it posted in the first place.

However, it is difficult to lay so much guilt a board member for posting faces that are already posted by the agency. The cat is out of the bag when the agency does it, so please direct us to your prosecution of the actual cause...the agency. Have you gotten to it yet? Is the secondary poster your only target? Don't you worry about the source of the offense without whom there would be no offense???

As for your post theme on consistent principle, there is no circumstance that makes posing as a prosecuting moralist acceptable if you have been a skulking flaunter of principles on other boards .

Anyway, it's clear that you didn't follow and understand what happened. You didn't do anything to defend the girls on the other board and then come here to give lessons of morality. You act like a coward.

You're a Post-War warrior trying to lead a Witch-Hunt...

Funny how the characteristic finger prints can become so vivid so fast.

Cheers,

Merlot

 

[Mod 8]

Hello Merlot,

The problem lies not so much with the posting of images that are present on advertiser web sites as with the refusal of the posters as well as the board they are posted on to remove those images upon request. Besides the problem of personal safety, those images are the property of either the agency, the lady in the photo or the photographer who took them. At the very least, re-posting them on any site without permission of the owner is a violation of copyright as is copying posts from one board and posting them on another without permission.

Mod 8

Reminder: This thread will be closed at 10 PM

 

[lgna69xxx]

Totally agree with you.

Personnaly, I prefer not knowing exactly how the woman looks beforehand. The satisfaction of a good surprise outweights the eventual bad surprises. Makes me feel like a kid before Christmas

 

[Merlot]

Hello Merlot,

The problem lies not so much with the posting of images that are present on advertiser web sites as with the refusal of the posters as well as the board they are posted on to remove those images upon request. Besides the problem of personal safety, those images are the property of either the agency, the lady in the photo or the photographer who took them. At the very least, re-posting them on any site without permission of the owner is a violation of copyright as is copying posts from one board and posting them on another without permission.

Mod 8

Reminder: This thread will be closed at 10 PM

Hmmm,

In this case, because of the complicated legalities and many risks of all sorts, the control of what is photographed, what is published, when and for how long, should remain with the escort absolutely. I was a freelance photographer for quite some time, so I have some understanding of the legal rights of each party. But escorting is a unique situation where only she should decide how everything is handled...in my view.

As for an offending board, boards, or persons refusing to safeguard the escort, it is an act of cold-blooded selfishness. One can only hope there are legal processes and outcomes that make a real lesson against that...STING!

BTW... a few escorts have sent me highly personal and intimate photos. One was especially generous. But no matter what anyone is given freely, keep in mind you have no right to put her at risk regardless by posting or transmitting, or selling that generosity to anyone else. In my view, she put her trust in me not to abuse it.

vraiment,

Merlot