Well it's better to have the suspicions come out in the open rather than have them spread by backchannel methods. At least this way she had the chance to clear her name. If it had stayed backchannel, it could have been weeks before she realized what had happened and maybe the truth would never have come out and the damage to her reputation would have been beyond repair. This way, it's over and done with in the span of a couple of days. At least it would be if people stopped leveling accusations around. It's time to move on.
A few words from FKS Society about recent events
- Thread starter Mod 7
- Start date
- Status
Discussion
So Giselle of FKS warns members of a std problem says its a sp that hasn't advertised with them for a couple of months, possibly got it from private life ie SO.
Giselle is not known as a alarmist and pretty straightforward.
So it leaks to this board and everyone jumps on its Lilly.
Mods get involved
Lilly comes on after a delay and defends herself admirably.
So, I think the question that needs to be asked is which other sp fits that profile ie left FKS at least a couple of months ago, etc, etc?
So Giselle of FKS warns members of a std problem says its a sp that hasn't advertised with them for a couple of months, possibly got it from private life ie SO.
Giselle is not known as a alarmist and pretty straightforward.
So it leaks to this board and everyone jumps on its Lilly.
Mods get involved
Lilly comes on after a delay and defends herself admirably.
So, I think the question that needs to be asked is which other sp fits that profile ie left FKS at least a couple of months ago, etc, etc?
Maxima said:Yeah I agree. FKS web site is a backchannel.
It's time to move on.
Where did I say that the FKS web site is a backchannel? If you don't understand I will spell it out for you...it's better that the accusation/suspicion was posted on either/both boards, FKS and MERB, rather than it spread by backchannel, pm - e-mail - telephone gossip - instant messenger - talking over beers in the sc, methods. Is that better? Do you understand now? Should I post it in a larger font in multiple colors?
Who, what, where, why?
Do you really want to start a witch hunt? What will it give you? Chances are, if we were talking about a curable STI, it has already been taken care of. It is as relevant than trying to figure out who has caught a flu in the past 6 months.
Since many have assume the worse, the reason why I have not been advertising with FKS in the past few months is because I went to travel a lot and started focussing on other things in my life. My not monitoring emails anymore was starting to backfire at Giselle so we agreed that it was better if I took a break off FKS.
I do not blame Giselle nor FKS for spreading a rumor about (me?) a girl with an STI. She posted a message for prevention. At the time she posted it, I was not with FKS anymore and some other girls had left as well.
In her message, she never said the girl was blonde, it was all assumed by the readers. She never said it was me, it was all assumed by the readers. She mentioned what the other gone girls future was going to be but didn't mention anything about me since she had no news from me. She never said who got tested and who didn't. And siphilis was also just an assumption because nowhere did I read in Giselle's notice which STI she was talking about.
Giselle might have posted a warning which is nothing bad and is a responsible thing to do to prevent an outbreak if there is an STI or not.
People should take it for what it really was (a reminder to stay healthy) and be happy that someone had enough class and showed enough respect, actually cared about other's health to say it. Chances are, even if there was an STI outbreak elsewhere, the owners wouldn't even care to post about it (or wouldn't have time to even aknowledge that sort of thing might be running in their agency).
That is my last post on this subject. I need to catch some sleep.
Lilly
gtadick said:
Do you really want to start a witch hunt? What will it give you? Chances are, if we were talking about a curable STI, it has already been taken care of. It is as relevant than trying to figure out who has caught a flu in the past 6 months.
Since many have assume the worse, the reason why I have not been advertising with FKS in the past few months is because I went to travel a lot and started focussing on other things in my life. My not monitoring emails anymore was starting to backfire at Giselle so we agreed that it was better if I took a break off FKS.
I do not blame Giselle nor FKS for spreading a rumor about (me?) a girl with an STI. She posted a message for prevention. At the time she posted it, I was not with FKS anymore and some other girls had left as well.
In her message, she never said the girl was blonde, it was all assumed by the readers. She never said it was me, it was all assumed by the readers. She mentioned what the other gone girls future was going to be but didn't mention anything about me since she had no news from me. She never said who got tested and who didn't. And siphilis was also just an assumption because nowhere did I read in Giselle's notice which STI she was talking about.
Giselle might have posted a warning which is nothing bad and is a responsible thing to do to prevent an outbreak if there is an STI or not.
People should take it for what it really was (a reminder to stay healthy) and be happy that someone had enough class and showed enough respect, actually cared about other's health to say it. Chances are, even if there was an STI outbreak elsewhere, the owners wouldn't even care to post about it (or wouldn't have time to even aknowledge that sort of thing might be running in their agency).
That is my last post on this subject. I need to catch some sleep.
Lilly
Last edited:
Techman said:
I completely agree. It's time to move on rather than rehashing the same accusations.
It serves no purpose to identify who the afflicted SP was at this point, and I am willing to bet that she has seeked medical treatment and recovered by now.
Thanks Giselle and Lily for reminding us of one of the inherent risks in this hobby. I would like to assume that we hobbysts and SPs are adult enough to understand and accept the risks involved, and to take proper actions to minimized that risk.
Ziggy Montana said:
Well said!
I wonder what would the reaction of FKS be if somebodyelse felt an ethical obligation to post a similar vague STI notice somewhereelse about an alleged member of FKS?
Last edited:
Subliminal Message
A statement making reference to the situation of another SP, Melanie Cherie, only to conclude that, "in her case, the accusation was totally false" logically raises the following question: "in her case as opposed to which case?". No answer is provided but the textual proximity of this opposition with the statement made earlier flashes (without saying it) the following: "Lilly (we didn't say it was Lilly, only gave out a few elements of information pertaining to her) contracted a STD (not because we said it, in fact we made a commendable effort not to say it, but because "Melanie Cherie was falsely accused" and Melanie Cherie's case is opposed to Lilly's).
The word "accusation", in the reader's mind, operates to bring the whole statement outside the sphere of neutrality. Since when do we "accuse" someone of having contracted a STD? Is it a crime?
Subtle stuff.
Again, not prejudging of FKS management's intentions, this annoucement was either poorly written, in which case consulting is in order, either very well written, in which case we must conclude that the annoucement served some other purpose, possibly a malicious one.
Double standards? Possible. The public annoucement had an awkward formulation, which made it open to interpretations. Not disclosing the name of the suspected SP while providing sufficient details for the readers to identify the said SP can be interpreted in various ways, hence the reaction some members expressed here and elsewhere.Maxima said:
A statement making reference to the situation of another SP, Melanie Cherie, only to conclude that, "in her case, the accusation was totally false" logically raises the following question: "in her case as opposed to which case?". No answer is provided but the textual proximity of this opposition with the statement made earlier flashes (without saying it) the following: "Lilly (we didn't say it was Lilly, only gave out a few elements of information pertaining to her) contracted a STD (not because we said it, in fact we made a commendable effort not to say it, but because "Melanie Cherie was falsely accused" and Melanie Cherie's case is opposed to Lilly's).
The word "accusation", in the reader's mind, operates to bring the whole statement outside the sphere of neutrality. Since when do we "accuse" someone of having contracted a STD? Is it a crime?
Subtle stuff.
Again, not prejudging of FKS management's intentions, this annoucement was either poorly written, in which case consulting is in order, either very well written, in which case we must conclude that the annoucement served some other purpose, possibly a malicious one.
Last edited:
Lilly summarized the situation very well. Giselle might not have been using perfect words to express herself, leaving things open for some interpretation, but the end result is simple: everyone is now aware of the situation. Some girl(s) was(were) infected, all girls were checked (and cured), everyone who met an FKS girl know (via FKS and this board) they should get themselves checked.
Everything else is only assumptions and witch hunts, and doesn't serve any purpose.
THREAD CLOSED
Everything else is only assumptions and witch hunts, and doesn't serve any purpose.
THREAD CLOSED
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
