A Reviewer's (and Board Member's) Responsibility

[cloudsurf]

in this case even going so far as to book an appointment for that primary purpose.

.

Assuming again ?

Wrong !
I saw her because I missed her. period.
I made that clear in a previous post on her thread.

Our briefe 20 second discussion of her negative time with you happened after she got dressed and was waiting for the driver.
You had already made it into a public discussion.

 

[CS Martin]

>>> EDITED BY MOD 11: attempt at provoking a reaction and to bring back old stuff that have nothing to do with this situation. <<<

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

CS,

I have no idea who you're speaking about and, of course, don't know how well documented the evidence is. That said, the precedent of allowing past trangressions to go unpunished, if what you say is true, is no justification for allowing current ones a free pass.

The question simply is this: is merb a place where one can write an honest review, positive, negative, or neutral without fear of vigilante reprisal? Or is it not? If it is not, than no review here is worth its weight in pixels.

 

[CS Martin]

I`ll be the guy in black wearing a gas mask

rumples, apart from the fact that you recently had a CSM moment, you are an OK guy and I love listening to you as you repeati your German FS experiences over and over.
As a peace offering I will also offer you a gift that will turn Nadia and Kerrera into DFK nymphos with you.....Listerine

Ah, the personal attack reference against me, this time memorialized before cloud decides to delete it as he did last time. Going to leave it up this time cloud??? or just offer to quit the board again??? or did you quit and come back already?? See you do have something in common with someone we both know.

 

[cloudsurf]

Happy 4th of July to all my American buddies.
Its time to make a splash...in my pool

 

[lgna69xxx]

Is Nadia gonna be there in a Bikini?

Happy 4th of July to all my American buddies.
Its time to make a splash...in my pool

 

[CS Martin]

The question simply is this: is merb a place where one can write an honest review, positive, negative, or neutral without fear of vigilante reprisal? Or is it not?

Answer: No, vigilatism is not in the control of either Fred or the Moderators. Non-board matters are just that non-board matters.

No, it's not If it is not, than no review here is worth its weight in pixels.

Answer: This is your opinion. The board continues, so it must have value to someone.

 

[Dee]

Why can't some folks understand... a bad review followed, not by a$$holes attacking the poster, but an indication by the original poster that all things are now well, ENHANCES the reputation of the agency in question viz. Satin Dreams and related agency. Continued attacks against the original honest, gracious poster which breach the (admittedly, selectively enforced) rules of the board do the opposite.


So Rumples while it is no doubt personally frustrating, your being attacked has rendered a service to the members of the Board. What I had at first taken to be an agency worthy of my respect for the way it handled a problem, may be less worthy then I thought. Can it be argued that it only pretended to solve the problem and took more money from you while the girl slandered you, passed on private information and had a sycophant attempt to tar you and perhaps hint at distasteful illegal activity by you?

One may be well advised to stay a long way away from such a lady and agency.

(PS. How long before some reason will be invented to close this worthwhile (to the members) thread?)

 

[CS Martin]

>>> EDITED BY MOD 11: Again, no relation to this situation, only trying to get a reaction. <<<

 

[CS Martin]

(PS. How long before some reason will be invented to close this worthwhile (to the members) thread?)

Soon Dee, very soon. Not good for the illusion of the industry. Maybe rumples will just delete his starter post.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

So Rumples while it is no doubt personally frustrating, your being attacked has rendered a service to the members of the Board. What I had at first taken to be an agency worthy of my respect for the way it handled a problem, may be less worthy then I thought. Can it be argued that it only pretended to solve the problem and took more money from you while the girl slandered you, passed on private information and had a sycophant attempt to tar you and perhaps hint at distasteful illegal activity by you?

One may be well advised to stay a long way away from such a lady and agency.

Thanks for the post, Dee, but you're misinterpreting. First, the agency in question was Chloe's Playground, not Satin Dreamz. Second, Mike, the proprieter, did an excellent job of smoothing the waters. Third, I'm sure the lady slandered me in no way at all. Cloudsurf, fully aware by the time he rose this morning that he'd committed a serious transgression in booking a girl in order to conduct his own investigation, has been running for cover all day. Look at his posts: First, he pulls out his old "Listerine" canard, totally unaware that as I read the post I was having coffee with the last hobbyist he tried to pull this one on. Second, he follows this up with the ludicrous claim that he booked Nadia, whom he last met two years ago, because "he missed her." Third he makes the claim that he got all of his "information" from Nadia in "20 seconds" as she was waiting for the driver. Finally, as his head is going under and he begins having trouble breathing what with the bullshit filling his nostrils, he wishes his US buddies a happy 4th of July.

Here's the irony. After Nadia left Cloudsurf last night, she came directly to my place. We had a wonderful time together, macarons and lovemaking, what could be nicer. She showed no aftereffects from the interrogation she received earlier in the evening under the klieglights at the Cloudsurf abode. As for the 20 second claim, a fly on the wall, if questioned, would surely testify that Nadia hadn't even crossed the threshold before the questions started flying, so consumed was he with my difficult evening with the young lady.

As for the mods closing the thread, I'm surprised they've let it go on this long considering that it's been since way back on page one since the last on topic post. I can only assume the mods have better things to do on a beautiful day. Perhaps they're considering what kind of action to take against Cloudsurf for a) his continued flamewar and/or b) his invasion of both my and Nadia's privacy.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

Soon Dee, very soon. Not good for the illusion of the industry. Maybe rumples will just delete his starter post.

Why on Earth would I delete the starter post? While the thread went off topic long ago, it has been very instructive. Hopefully, the Mods will see what can happen when a Board Bully/Vigilante is allowed to run amok. In this particular case, he was not able to intimidate me, but in others, if he's allowed to continue unabated, he might. The damage to the credibility to the board if no action is taken will be palpable.

The worst thing that can happen to merb is that mods allow characters such as Cloudsurf to intimidate posters against posting honest reviews. Should they let that happen, the inmates over in Azure Pixelland will be proven right. They cannot let that happen.

 

[cloudsurf]

Rumples take a pill ....you are halluscinating and sputtering garbage.

Even your friends call you sewer- breath behind your back.

Forcing your tongue down a poor girls throat is classified as torture.

85% of the posts on this thread have been written by 3 pathetic clowns slapping each other on the back for getting away with board terrorism.

If anyone wants the truth then all they have to do is ask Mike.

Rumples...shame on your dishonesty and cowardice.

 

[Merlot]

Hello all,

So Rumples while it is no doubt personally frustrating, your being attacked has rendered a service to the members of the Board. What I had at first taken to be an agency worthy of my respect for the way it handled a problem, may be less worthy then I thought. Can it be argued that it only pretended to solve the problem and took more money from you while the girl slandered you, passed on private information and had a sycophant attempt to tar you and perhaps hint at distasteful illegal activity by you?

One may be well advised to stay a long way away from such a lady and agency.

(PS. How long before some reason will be invented to close this worthwhile (to the members) thread?)

She clearly did not want to be kissed and my attempts to kiss her were met with a cool response; lfk was allowed but for no more than 5-10 seconds at a clip before I was pushed back. I did manage to get an erection long enough to have sex with her for about two minutes before I lost it in my frustration with the whole affair.

Had I scheduled three hours with Nadia, it certainly would have ended much sooner.)

Repeat? She sure is tempting, but why risk it.

Looks: Oh boy.
Service: N/A
Attitude: Distant

Not quite. All girls are YMMV within the range of services offered. If a girl offers GFE, one expects GFE service and within that service the mileage may vary. To my mind GFE service begins with DFK, with the possible exception of cases where the client's hygiene is in question. Last night I did not get DFK. I barely got LFK and had to press (lightly) for that and received it briefly and reluctantly. Combined with her cat and mouse game, I found my level of excitement reduced to the point where, try as I might, I could not get aroused to the point of performance.

Let me add something here. I've inhabited this planet quite long enough that I've learned not only how to treat a woman, but how to charm and how to please one. I'm fully cogizant of the fact that GFE service is only enhanced by the return of BFE service. The service I get from girls offering GFE service is more often than not off the charts, to the point where I'm probably quite spoiled.

That said, what happened last night was not a case of YMMV, but a case of a girl failing to perform basic services that she advertises. Frankly, I'd love to see her again and give her another chance; she's that good looking and there is something to the playfulness that intrigues. There is, however, a point where you have to move beyond the playful and get down to the serious business of pleasure.

A couple of notes about my date with Nadia this evening, and what a wonderful time we had.

1. Nadia loves those little French macarons from Point G in the Plateau. Following the suggestion of a friend, I picked up a six pack to share with her. Her eyes popped out of her head when she saw them.

2. Nadia dresses in a more enticing way than any SP I've ever met. She's shown up each time in a little print dress, different each time, that just exudes innocent sexuality.

And then, having fed each other the macarons, we made love, tenderly and passionately, your classic three condom date. No other hobbyists were discussed at any time.

Dee, that summation of the ladies character and the agency’s attitude is very interesting and in short shows a lady and agency that are unfulfilling and scheming to the point of slander as you indicate. It’s quite a harshly indicting assessment. Given your assessment how can any client ever go back to this agency or this SP??? I sure wouldn’t.

So here’s what is troubling. We have a gentleman with an obvious pride in his self-described skill with charm and pleasure giving, being treated coldly, “pushed back”, and being so discouraged by an incredibly hot woman that he can’t keep an erection. The encounter is so poor that the encounter is described as failure “to perform the basic services she advertises”. The meeting is so poor that the client says: “try as I might, I could not get aroused to the point of performance", and that he would have cut the meeting off had it been scheduled longer than it was. Then a couple of nights later despite the scheming of the agency and the lady, the slander on the boards and the general unfulfillment of the encounter, along with all the flaming to the point where this review and the following attack episode are being characterized as some sort of test case for Merb’s review credibility, we are given a fabulous account of a blissful tender and passionate love making encounter worthy of a “three condom date" between the same angry, prideful client and the same cold, devious SP from the same scheming agency.

As I said before in my post in the review thread on this subject, I have no issue with Rumples review at all. I took it totally at face value as genuine and honest because I saw nothing firm to contradict that perception. And while I also see nothing wrong with anyone giving a contrasting report of his experience with the same lady I have to say that any allusions of an improper agenda have no place without proof. But in view of the original highly negative review and your (Dee’s) damning assessment of the SP’s and the agency’s performance I am astounded that the client could go back at all...much less the description of the incredibly contrasting encounter that followed so shortly after. In view of all of this, how can anyone make this a test case for the credibility of this board’s review policies when the follow-up encounter contradicts every assertion of the first, and given the harshness of the confrontation that followed??? How can the relationship of the client and SP be so perfect after such a generally bitter episode all around, and how can anyone ask: “is merb a place where one can write an honest review, positive, negative, or neutral without fear of vigilante reprisal? Or is it not...when the contradictions here are so glaring?????

????????

Merlot

BTW...it's so gratifying to see the "blue boys" Dee and Roland, who practically never post here, arrive to stir the flames. Welcome anyway.

 

[Dee]

Why am I not surprised at what gets attracted to this thread.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

 

[Jman47]

Just getting caught up gents...

<-----Popped open a Sam Adams and a bag of pretzels....

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

Merlot,

For the most part you hit the nail on the head. Mike was surprised when I told him that I'd just had a date that was "among the most disappointing" in all my years hobbying. He spoke with Nadia. I scheduled a second date. Normally, I would have chalked it up to experience but there was something about her that said I needed to see her again if she were in better working condition. Maybe she's a Scorpio. Everything worked out fine...or would have except for the meddling of a certain board bully/vigilante deciding to take matters into his own hands.

You write, "How can the relationship of the client and SP be so perfect after such a generally bitter episode all around." There was no bitter episode. There was a date where a girl was not in a frame of mind to work and didn't perform. Her employer set things straight and the young lady and I have since had two fabulous evenings together. As I said earlier, I'm happy, Nadia is certainly happy, and Mike is happy. The only one not happy is the poor schmuck who decided to cause all the trouble.

You further write "“is merb a place where one can write an honest review, positive, negative, or neutral without fear of vigilante reprisal?" One would certainly hope so. While I imagine that Cloudsurf has bullied others into passing on writing honest reviews, he was unable to bully me. Whether or not the mods now decide to take action to protect the integrity of the board remains to be seen.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

Even your friends call you sewer- breath behind your back.

How many of the posters that you've bullied have you tried this one on? You seem to forget that you were called out on this a few hours ago and walked it back. Is this really the best you can do? I hate having a battle of wits with an unarmed man. You really are pitiful

 

[Mod 11]

Thread closed TEMPORARILY until I can make head-and-tail of it.

If any suspension, those on the receiving end might be surprised to get hit...

 

[Mod 11]

Here we go. I've spent over 3 hours going trough this mess, review thread included.

NOT HAPPY THE MODERATOR!!

And now today, more time distributing the rewards...

---

Rumple, Anon_vlad is right, how can you say you didn't tell Mike or Nadia what was your MERB handle? You didn't say it directly but besides this, the only thing you didn't do was to send them a registered letter to let them know.

CloudSurf, you're in the same boat, it's impossible they don't know who you are.

---

Rumple, your accusation of Cloud having an agenda or booking Nadia expressly to discuss yourself are only your opinion, nothing more. If you can prove it, please do so but, I suspect you can't.

I am still looking for the vigilantism you are talking about. Everybody can give it's opinion, as long as it's done without insults. If it happen to look like bullying to you, I'd say you have a very thin skin. The trouble started at post 214 of the review thread, where Cloud poked at you (not that hard) and, from there, things turned ugly from both side. I see insults flying from both side from that point. Insults aren't accepted on MERB.

Here's the tally: There's so many infractions, I probably missed some. This is only on the ground of RULES, as I think everybody is allowed to express themselves, as long as it's respectful. What's happening outside of MERB, impressions, suspicions and hearsay, none of it is MERB business.

...you're more full of shit than a 12 hole outhouse in a provincial park the day after Labor Day weekend. >>> insult. That's a suspension.

...Note that this little review was not created using Cloudsurf's ShillGenerator® app... >>> unproven accusation. That's a suspension.

...is clear evidence a) of your continuing agenda and b) what a total schmuck you are. >>> unproven accusation, insult. That's suspension stuff.

...it makes you one sick motherfucker and a stalker to boot.... >>> insults. That's a suspension.

...Rumples had an agenda >>> unproven accusation. That's a suspension.

...you recently had a CSM moment, >>> insult (Not that being referred to as CSM is an insult, just a matter of context.) That's a suspension.

...I`ll be the guy in black wearing a gas mask
...I will also offer you a gift that will turn Nadia and Kerrera into DFK nymphos with you.....Listerine >>> unproven accusation by insinuation, insult. That's a suspension.

Even your friends call you sewer- breath behind your back. >>> unproven accusation by insinuation, insult. That's a suspension.

He wrote a real review , ya dumbass ! >>> insult. That's a suspension.

---

1 week suspension for the following members, in no particular orders:

rumpleforeskiin: insults and unproven accusations.
cloudsurf: insults and unproven accusations.
Dee: as usual, taking cheap shot at MERB and it's Moderators.
Roland: insult.

---

Sadly, even if this discussion could have been healthy to the board, it turned to shit as it often do. I'm asking everybody, no matter if you got involved or not, to carefully think before you submit a reply. This isn't a threat, this is a request to be responsible and civil when you post.

I will leave this thread open, as-is, since, I repeat, I think something good can comes-out. Nobody should be afraid of getting bullied when posting a review and reviews should be done truthfully, with the good and the bad, in a respectful way. Opinions are just that: opinions.

Keyboard bullies are just that: keyboard bullies. Keyboard bullies won't punch you in the face. They might hurt your feelings, hurt your MERB personae but they can't touch who you are in real life. Some people use offending tone without even noticing it but, that can be "cured" by a bit of thinking before hitting the "submit" button. It doesn't mean either they INTEND on being bullies. Sometimes they come-out that way and politely letting them know mostly help. Replying to a harsh message while doing it's bets to escalate and show you have bigger balls isn't the way to do things in life in general and won't be tolerated here. This is why both protagonists in this debate are suspended.

Thanks.

P.S.: I'm asking members to keep the discussion on what's said in the original post. Discussion on the behavior experienced in this thread will not accomplish anything. I will delete off-topic posts without further warning.

Thanks again