Seeing as the norm is that pics are "fake" although they may be representative of the girl, and that demand is too high for mongers to meaningfully cause change through boycotting, wouldn't we be better served by pointing out when the pics actually ARE of the girl? Or better yet, acknowledge that they're fake, address whether they're representative, and move on.

That said, the "ethnic" agencies, mainly Asian and Brazilian agencies have always gotten somewhat of a pass on this for some reason as long as the guys where happy with the girls they saw.  

should be whether she was worse than what the photos represented.  This can easily be determined for looks, but not so much for service.  The fact that Kgirl service is pretty consistent is the reason Kgirls have gotten a pass over the years for excessive photoshopping.  I haven't seen a Brazilian girl in over ten years, so no comment on that part.  

I don't really understand why there's a dichotomy here.
Was there a call to boycott orgs for using fake pics?

Well, that just seems too reasonable for anyone to agree with!

I think there are battles that are worth fighting and those that aren't. I also think there are different ways to fight a battle and that choice also fits into the fight or not equation.

The notion of " largely expects the pics not to be reliable then calling that out is a bit like pointing at the sun and claiming it's daytime."

why dont we make a special section here for Fake Pics!

Oh man here we go again.

demarcation fall between a fake pic (not the same girl) and a pic that has been photoshopped to conceal her true identity and defeat the facial recognition software?  Many guys here already have the skills to find out that many of the photos being used have been highjacked from Korean models, musicians, personal trainers, etc.  To me, these are the ones that are fake.  I don't consider heavy photoshopping to be a fake pic if its the same girl, so I'm asking how you would propose making the distinction.

Are you suggesting a separate, dedicated thread to fake picture reporting or something like that?

A lot of things in life come down to managing expectations, one's own as well as those of other people.

You expect the body to look somewhat like the pics, great.  

the "number one thing."  I have only seen one Kgirl out of a thousand that I thought was too ugly to fuck.  What I'm mostly interested in is their service.  For me, Service is king.  When you get to be over 55, most girls in their 30's look hot enough to fuck, so I want to know how good the fuck is going to be, so reviews are more important to me than photos.  I DO pay attention to comments from reviewers on appearance, but I'm mainly looking to rule out fatties, which fortunately are not the common among Kgirls, but more often occur among Asian indies.  Like I said, I have only met one really ugly Kgirl, but I was new, and fucked her anyway . . . . . In doggy, of course, so I guess you could say her ass looked better to me than her face.   Lol       Just the perspective of an older gent who's seen my share of Kgirls.    

I said the #1 thing mongers want to know, as it pertains to pm quesrions Ive recieved being a monger on various sites.  

Why do we keep hearing what a shit hole the BA is from you?

I don't really have an approach. I simply say call a spade a spade. If you want to sweep bad behavior under the rug and reward good behavior, at least I expect you to remain consistent when it comes to bad behavior from the monger side. That isn't what Ive seen you advocate though.

joining TER, that was the standard in SoCal . . . . . real body pics with the face blurred out.  I'm totally happy with that as well.  Even though I'm not an expert, my understanding is that the technology has evolved to be able to defeat the blurring, so that would result in a real photo of the girl's face.  

is what draws me in when I'm searching for someone new to meet. I guess in our perfect world at this time, it would be real body shot (and relatively current or at least in the same condition) blurred or PS'd face so you get a decent idea of what the girl looks like and that would protect them, too! There are pics just like that out there, but I think they were taken at least a few years ago, so I guess that was the norm for the time and are still on ad sites. It's too bad the orgs don't use that model for their ad pics. I guess it's cheaper and easier to cut & paste then take pics, always about the money!

I feel like when most mongers ask about pics, they're really asking whether the pics are representative of the girl, or at least, that's what they care about more. If that's the case, it doesn't make much sense to me to make an issue out of a picture being "fake" if it's representative. I've even seen cases where the pics are clearly of the girl, with some slight PSing, and mongers think they're fake, which should give you an idea of the perceptibility of some mongers.

If the pic is fake, then it is fake. I don't see what's so hard to get about that concept. Some people can't tell one Asian face from another. So what? Just because of those people, we need to not engage in reporting factual information?  

I think that is what sunny was getting at as well with his comment about managing expectations. The goal is having a great time with, for most of us, an attractive woman. Fixating on the ad pic for who will open the door makes that difficult because disappointed expectations will always negatively influence our perceptions of what we're seeing.

So, wouldn't knowing that a woman is using a fake pic, and not having hopes for her looking like the pic, actually HELP to prevent such disappointed expectations?

was up and going strong 99% of the kgirls we're the ones when the door opened?

are not getting PM's from the same group of guys.  Lol

I don't get this post. You can show a real body pic without letting anyone know who you are.

A few weeks ago, I posted "Real or Fake" on the General board:
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/ter-general-board-12/real-or-fake-986070
.
Now there's a story about fake "influencers:"  
http://www.cnn.com/style/article/angie-douyin-virtual-influencer/index.html
This 'imperfect' virtual influencer is challenging beauty standards in China
.
I prefer the days of real or real-but-face-blurred pics.  
.
TER has already discussed to growing sex robot industry. And the days that will come when you answer an ad with fake pics, fake video and show up to meet a rubber coated realistic robot.

Instead of "real-but-face-blurred" pics we now have "fake-but-face-blurred" pics.  

...a lawsuit by the person whose photo they are using without permission.  Whether it's a model, actress or private citizen, putting their pics on an escort site is an invasion of privacy called "false light."  The women are being portrayed as something they're not.

That's a fair answer, however I'd point out that many orgs DO use unblurred pics of other people and don't care much for the possibility of being sued. Often the same orgs that then blur out the faces of models.

If sued, they'll simply close up shop and open under a different name.  But lawyers are clever and will "pierce the corporate veil" so to speak (orgs are not corps).  The lawyers will find out who owns the org and sue him or her directly.  
 There's a good chance the org owner has "deep pockets" which would make it worthwhile for a lawyer to go after.  

If say you're pretty naive thinking it will even get to lawyers. Half of online ads are fake scams, and three fourths of other half are using free sites with different names.

responding to knows little about the law except what he can look up in a few short sentences on the internet.  If you sue someone individually and you cannot PROVE that they are an alter-ego (and there are specific standards for that) of the corporation, you can, in turn, get sued for malicious prosecution, and then YOU end up being the ones that pay them.   Don't accept legal advice from keyboard jockeys.  Talk to a real lawyer with a real license.

...whacked it and has a satisfied client.  That's all that counts.  Who cares if the org changes pics - that's the next client's problem.  It's also more business for the lawyer:    

CDL: "I didn't say that.  All I said was 'Talk to a real lawyer with a real license.'"
That's your weaselly, waffling way of pretending to be a lawyer but still having semi-plausible deniability that you're not a lawyer.

in dozens of alter-ego cases.  A lawyer does NOT have to establish alter-ego as a "fact" before filing a case alleging it.  He just has to have a reasonable basis to make a claim.  That's why I said there are several "badges" leading to alter-ego  liability in California under which an alter-ego theory of liability can succeed.  You are completely wrong in your assessment.  Did you look this up on Law for Dummies?  Alter-ego is ALWAYS proven later on in the case, usually at trial (bench or jury), and AFTER the plaintiff has had time to do discovery.  A demurrer CAN ONLY address deficiencies in the pleadings or jurisdiction, NOT facts in the case, such as alter-ego.  An MSJ will not usually be entertained by the court until it is "ripe", which means both sides have completed the discovery they wanted to do on the issue.  If, after discovery, the Plaintiff does not have the requisite proof to make its alter-ego case, they can simply dismiss that cause of action, making an MSJ on that cause of action moot.  That will usually foreclose a malicious prosecution action.  For malicious prosecution, you need to go all the way to trial and lose.  Then the other side can bring this action.  My company has been the defendant in ONE of these, but we successfully defended because there was no malice, a necessary element, shown by the other side.  

into a corner and then runs away like the little bitch he is.  This is his version of self-flagellation for being such a reprehensible human being.  Lol

I originally made a simple statement:
"orgs are illegal entities & don't care about lawsuits...If sued, they'll simply close up shop and open under a different name.  But lawyers are clever and will "pierce the corporate veil" so to speak (orgs are not corps).  The lawyers will find out who owns the org and sue him or her directly.  
There's a good chance the org owner has "deep pockets" which would make it worthwhile for a lawyer to go after.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/k-girl-113/youre-right---orgs-are-illegal-entities--dont-care-about-lawsuits-27142?page=

"It's not something that is PROVED by the plaintiff later on in the case.  

"THE LAWYERS WILL FIND OUT WHO OWNS THE ORG AND SUE HIM OR HER DIRECTLY."

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/k-girl-113/youre-right---orgs-are-illegal-entities--dont-care-about-lawsuits-27142?page=1

Why did you cut off the relevant part of the sentence, dumbass?  "SO TO SPEAK" means that the phrase "pierce the corporate veil" is a metaphor; the phrase is meant to be taken figuratively, NOT literally.

stop digging.  You're only making yourself look like more of a loser when it comes to this topic, but go ahead, keep repeating yourself over and over and trying to twist what you originally said.   I'm sure I'm not the only one enjoying a troll meltdown.  

You are a Certified Dick Lover.

...repeating it because YOU are twisting what I said.  Here it is again:

"If the defendant is not an alter-ego, he will file a demurrer."   Do you stand by this statement, or did you lie?

-- Modified on 8/30/2021 5:09:35 AM

Most of us are here to share info on KGirls, not to watch BigPapasan get bitch slapped across the forum in a losing legal debate…

Agree, but it is fun to watch the Big Piece of Shit get his ass kicked.

Any discussion of corporations after I said that is superfluous.  It's merely you trying to compensate for your little dick.  That's why you like K-girls...they like little dicks.  

Do you stand by your statement about demurrers being used for alter-ego or was it a lie?  Simple question.  Each time you dodge the question you're accepting another bitch-slap.  its it was superfluous, then why did YOU feel compelled to bring it up?  You're the one who put your lack of knowledge of the law on full display for everyone here.  Now you are trying to walk it back.  Don't you realize how weak that makes you look.  Take the "L" and go home.  Maybe you will not embarrass yourself so much next time.

Mrs. CDL the 4th has reached out and asked me to inform the TER members of his limited privledges now that you are on the ZERO BENEFITS plan at home.  With nothing except ridicule in your former home (she now owns 50% of all assets per a pre-nuptual agreement.  

its time for the big reveal.  like most times the answer is right in front of you!   he enjoys the process of shrink therapy.   this break-through gave cdl thr courage to let cks wrap his sore covered  mouth blow him.  and cks  loves the EASY ARRANGEMENT as "cdl IS SO SMALL I can't gag."                            

The dimensions of a baby carrot!