First, a disclaimer. No, this topic is not about shitting on kgirls. I like kgirls. If you're looking to do that - you're in the wrong thread and I'd prefer not to have you here (you know who you are). And yes, chinese orgs especially those pimping younger ones, are guilty of this as well- this is not limited to korgs.

but the truth of the matter is, I would NEVER have seen the first linebacker you linked to Meagan, I don't care what the price was, even if it was fifty bucks.  

I have to ask here.  

Orgs have been publishing fake pics since back before the internet.  

Well, to be honest GaG DID answer your question, as has been done a bunch of times on this board.

...based on the photo he linked, as I understand it.  He described her as "chubby and chunky defensive tackle build."  That's larger than her photo, but the photo is somewhat representative.

He answered "because they can" . My question was what prevents one org from doing the same thing the other org did and which org is more trustworthy. Im not sure it's a relevant answer.  

I don't really think I made either of those assumptions. I simply asked why one org was able to advertise a true photo and the other one was not.  I also asked what org would you consider more trustworthy in such situation. Both of them are aamps.  

How is it that you are addressing my points?

You are now, perhaps deliberately, perhaps accidentally, are moving my argument into a strange direction..

The two orgs post the pics they want and that is not causing them any business issues. In other words they do it because they can.

If you've been keeping up with my posts you know I do not enjoy seeing chinese providers in most cases.

Just because someone is "honest" about having a substandard product doesn't mean I am going to patronize them because of their honesty. At the most I will be appreciative for them saving me the aggravation of refusing to go through with the session, but aside from that I still won't ever do business with them.

Only the willingly gullible will get taken in by an overly optimistic photo representation, because the second you see its not the girl in the photos, you have the OPTION to turn around and leave.  You haven't paid yet, so why are you stuck seeing her?  I will often continue the session like you did, providing the girl is not below average appearance as far as Kgirls go.  For me, service is king, and as long as a girl is at GND pretty-level, I will go through with the session.  If she is fat, I will not.  I do not take off points for fake photos.  Photo selection is the choice of the org, not the girl.  I will score her on the basis of what I actually get.  If she's at least average as Kgirls go, she gets an 8, if she's below average, she gets a 7.  If she is fat and I leave, she gets no review at all.  Its not complicated.  

So then the last time we discussed why wasnt the answer "because they can" ?

For someone who is claiming I'm misreading posts, you completely missed my point not once, but TWICE

I DID NOT miss any points here.  

This is correct. It's unfortunate that you have to be the voice of reason here, because you do hate kgirls and kmongers for some unknown reason, but at least I know I'm speaking English that is understood by some.

You missed my point too. Welcome to the club.  

I think a lot of bookers are just using whatever pictures they are given without any verification. It's unfortunate but this is where the knowledge gained from personal experience, reviews, and forums is so critical. This knowledge has allowed me to choose certain orgs because I trust them to deliver an experience that at least meets my minimum standards. Yes, once in a while I get very inaccurate pics or statistics and it is frustrating. I don't think it happens as much at my favorite org versus the region average based on my observations, but it has happened.  That said, the appearance has always been acceptable and I left with a smile on my face because the service was acceptable.  Choose quality orgs and you'll almost always have a quality experience.  

Happy now?

Where did I say I'm very unhappy? On the contrary, I love Asian women.  

So, would you consider lovelyangels and sexyangels not quality orgs for doing this?

I had great time reading your post

It's actually a lot more likely to get a well deserved "Go Fuck Yourself!!!" out of me instead.

So, according to you, I can’t be telling the truth unless I’m condemning someone or something?

Are you able to understand different contexts for discussions AND that most of the time things people do are for multiple reasons, not just one alone. This is way too tedious at this point.

I did not call you a liar.

I'm from the bay.

"because they can" is a copout answer.

I fuckin love the bay bruh

"You say you don't see orgs that lie yo you, but I'm sure you dont abide by your own principles."

You just said if you see a girl who doesn't look like the pics but you consider her attractive enough, you will not walk. You told me to walk every time you are lied to.  

Here's my approach:  

I think sa is a high quality org and I have visited them many times.  However, their picture quality is all over the map.  At one extreme there have been real selfies with little editing; but the other extreme there have also been cases where the picture was not only not the same girl but not even what I would consider representative. I was aware this could be an issue even before booking my first time because I had already seen many girls that moved there from a different group. Even at my favorite group, sometimes the pictures are real/good and sometimes they are fake/bad.  Is that what you wanted to hear?  That groups I and many others consider high quality sometimes have fake/bad pictures?  Ok, it happens.  Unfortunate but true.  Why does it happen?  Some reasons have already been explained to you many times ; whether or not you accept them is up to you.  

Who said it's complicated? Question was whether lovelyangels org practice was conductive to trustworthiness and what prevented them from doing the same thing as Asiancat for a girl who looked similar.  

But that was back on other boards.  It was me who started the classification of girls who played Dodge the Pickle. It was also me who got people started talking about DT in terms of inches rather than a binary classification. If you only saw her take 6 inches, you should state that she can DT at least 6 inches.  

The difference being I view LA as more of a system but the bay merely as a series of connected cities.

I never said you can't be telling the truth unless you're condemning someone. What are you on?  

distilling bullshit down to the essence of the issue.  Well stated, and a sound policy.  For me, I will add fat to the ugly threshold, as far as sticking my dick into her, but other than that, we think the same way.  Pretty sure GaG does, too, but he will also add old to his DNS list.  I'm okay with Kgirls up to about 45.  Some of the all-time best service I have gotten were from older Kgirls that still looked hot.  Something about the maturity is an additional turn-on for me.

That's... fair. You do have a point. I would still prefer you'd answer my question about this particular instance. But thank you for a real response for once. I appreciate it.

See GaG, a person who considers this org to be of decent quality, even though they can offer a linebacker under guise of a young slim girl . So your logic is highly flawed. It's not that simple.

Wait, you think a reputable org advertising a girl as 40 pounds lighter than she actually is, as bullshit?

GaG is the perfect example of what the K-girl board is like.  This board is like North Korea or Oceania in "1984."  It's a totalitarian state and you better toe the party line.  If you deviate from the K-monger mantra that K-girls are the greatest thing since sliced bread and their farts smell like perfume, you will be mercilessly attacked and told to "go fuck yourself."
That's how you go from "rocketbro" to "RocketBoy."*

and come to think of it I believe it was FM who hung the BPOS label on you. It appears he is better at this than you give him credit for.  

There is nothing totalitarian about this board., but you do have to have a positive interest in Kgirls to be welcomed here.  Since you don't, and even denigrate Kgirls at every opportunity, you are pretty much despised, which should not be a surprise.  There is a free exchange of ideas here, but we all have one thing in common . . . . we love our Kgirls.  Its the glue that holds us together even though we may have differences of opinions on the details.  

I already have "Distilling Bullshit" listed as a skill on my resume. Maybe I should add it to my P411 profile as well. :p  

If you’re talking about distilling feces..

When I first scanned the list of topics I wondered why we cared about the paternal ancestry of MILFs. I may need a new prescription for my reading glasses.

I'm dedicated enough to keep it going.

"Walk out of a bad service session."  Do you mean to suggest if she's blowing you, but you don't like the way she is doing it, you get up, put your pants back on and walk out?  I've never heard of anyone doing that.  You're trying to change your narrative now from looks to service.  

I have come to the conclusion rocket's entire rhetorical style is very similar to the rather crass technique of using compound questions in debates and interviews.

How am I changing narratives? Looks don't matter to me, but they matter to other mongers on this board, other mongers who complain about quality of looks. And other mongers who judge girls based on looks.

It's called a loaded question, Jensen, and that's not really what I'm doing.

I posted this by mistake. I really don’t want to waste any more time on this discussion.  

I made my point multiple times in this thread.

You must have issues with the vast majority of pictures of models and actresses then, too. Since they are all photoshopped. Have you ever met any of them in real life?  

...just looking at their photos, you're not shelling out money to fuck them.  Any provider's photos should be as close as possible to what they actually look like.  Provider pics vs. actress/model pics = apples vs. oranges.  Bad comparison.

"It's called a loaded question, Jensen, and that's not really what I'm doing.
 
 
I really don't like liars and hypocrites. You can say that in an illegal business it's tough to not be a liar, and yeah it ain't easy being gangsta, I get it. However, there are instances of not lying and they contrast so much with lying, that the latter makes me pissed off.
 
I merely try to turn attention to bullshit and anti-consumer behavior and those who choose to condone it.  "

A double barreled (or double direct) question is a compound question that touches upon more than one issue, but allows only for one answer. It is what is called an informal fallacy. And, yes, Rocket has clearly demonstrated his proficiency in its use. Or, perhaps more accurately, his fondness of the technique.

-- Modified on 9/25/2020 11:38:40 AM

I have not paid a single dollar to an artist or an actress. Or a model.  

Seems to have a number of names, and (unsurprisingly I suppose) some like to fine tune the definition for variations on the same basic theme. All are based on attempting to force an answer to one question that carries with it one or more related aspects that have either not been clearly included or are in dispute themselves.

1.perhaps I'm wrong on the loaded question. Then I apologize for using the wrong term. I always thought it was called that. If so, I was wrong and my bad.  

And regarding tactics that I use. What I do is ask questions that would expose hypocrisy and lying

The ‘there are only two sides” argument is yet another fallacy. Though I appreciate that your intent is pure. I just believe you’ve got a lot to learn.  

Wait. Really?

Doesn't that make YOU part of the problem?

I can touch and feel a product in a store, or if I'm buying it online, I can see it photographed without photoshop.
In rare instances Id buy clothes online, that's what I'd do. I'm an old school dude, I don't buy too much shit online when I care about how it looks (which isn't that often, admittedly)

Oh my god

Is it really a false equivalency?  

YOUR issue was the dishonesty of the agency that Lisa worked for, You were completely lied to about her appearance yet you went through with the session anyhow all the while LECTURING to us about standing up to the orgs.

"or if I'm buying it online, I can see it photographed without photoshop. "

To make me a hypocrite, I would have to

Yes, false equivalency. And Just to note- I was NOT the one who started this comparison, because some poster will inevitably come in and accuse ME of objectifying women or being a slave owner or some other horseshit.

Like I've already mentioned, if I order steak and get a big mac, I can sue and leave without paying, instigating a scandal and I will be right. Oh and I will be able to post whatever review I want without being harrassed by the restaurant's employees

NOT "objectifying" women.  Not doing something is a negative.  You can't objectify a negative.  On the other hand, just looking for a pussy that can "take a pounding" is the classic example of objectification.  it doesn't matter what she looks like (you keep saying this) and it doesn't matter if she has a good social game.  For you, its all about how long she can take a pounding.  Nice try, but you're not even close on this one. Its apples and oranges, my friend.

Um, yes it is ? Youre looking for a thin body, which falls into the same category. I look for skills and you look for eye candy. Where is the difference ? If anything, Id argue that yours is worse. I look for a quality service, while you purely evaluate your decision on her outside appearance and form.

Just why do the two need to be mutually exclusive. You sound like the OTHFBC and their fans who constantly try to convince us that only old and fat broads really know how to fuck. Or the "quality vs quantity" crowd who think you can't have a LOT of "quality" and that by definition (their definition, not mine) that if you are fucking a lot of women they must by necessity be of lower quality, which is complete bullshit.

Those things aren't mutually exclusive, correct. I never said they were. Frankly you are putting words in my mouth here.  

history that my position is that service trumps looks, but I still have a minimum standard.  She must be at least "average" as far as Kgirls go on looks.  The average Kgirl is slender with a few curves.  The more slender they are, it enhances the look for me, but the threshold for seeing her is that she just has to be at least average as Kgirls go.  GaG and I both agreed that neither one of us would fuck your girl Megan at ANY price, so there is a lot of disparity in are relative standards for how low we are willing to go.  You probably heard that with all of the that extra padding she can take a 45 minutes pounding and that makes her YOUR kind of girl, but not ours.  

Cdl, I have zero issues with your preferences. Zero.
Like what you like, life is short.  

tried the glory-hole scene.  With the glory-hole, you know there is a whole woman attached to the pussy, but you don't have to even acknowledge the rest of her.  You just stick your dick into the pussy and pound away, similar to a typical session for you.  Would you agree that is an objectification of women?  I hear those women can take a pounding, and it doesn't matter if they're even too ugly for YOU, its just a pussy.  Sound familiar?

-- Modified on 9/28/2020 6:04:08 AM

". I look for a quality service, while you purely evaluate your decision on her outside appearance and form."

No, it doesn't sound familiar. I have sex with human beings, women, not objects. And if I want to be serviced one way or the other, that does not mean I treat them like objects. If I want a skillful deep throat I want a skillful DT. If I want a skillful cmt level massage I want a skillful cmt massage. You still not getting it.  

OK, sorry for misunderstanding then. I don't think there are mutually exclusive at all. I don't see what we have to argue then, we agree  

Most often even when we agree on something you still manage to disagree with me by either misunderstanding and/or misquoting me.

No argument from me there Clarity is important and being on the same page is vital. Let's try.

Where it comes to civvies at least. I fully agree about K-Girls, they have to at least be "average" body wise for me to go through with a session. I have gone through with sessions with a couple of "butterfaces" because their bodies were as advertised and since their faces were blurred I could hardly claim "bait and switch" I guess that's why they invented dim lights and doggie style. lol

some of your "precautions" are already in place for me.  I rarely fuck civvie girls that live in my part of OC.  I usually end of up with civvie girls that are in LA County, or the north end of OC about 25-30 minutes away.  This makes it "inconvenient" for them to get attached to me from a proximity standpoint.  

"You doubt anyone else here would want to fuck,"  but then you saw her anyway, but said the org lied about her photos.  BUT YOU SAW HER ANYWAY.  How does this help a Newbie?  It just makes you look duplicitous.  How does that help a Newbie to know what to do.  As Jensen once mentioned, there are guys that don't like to share their hidden treasures, even though, not to do so, is a disservice to the girl.  How does a Newbie reconcile your statement that they are lying, but that you saw her anyway?  There must have been some redeeming value, or you would have walked.  This is the type of post more likely to confuse Newbies than to help them.  

It helps a newbie because I can explicitly say "she's a fugly grandma, but if you love a great rim for half an hour straight and a fuck that is great, and can stomach her looks, you will get great service".

Now, if your ratio of forum contributions was at least 20 parts the above type of content vs 1 part one of your sometimes difficult to decipher walls of rant, I’d be willing to bet very few of us on here would be arguing with you as much as we do.

Don't lie, you like to argue (as do we all) because you have nothing better to do 😂

Where are your forum contributions like these?

Your definition of “like these” is going to be different from mine. And clarifying it is not worth all the arguing, misreading and poor logic you’ve brought to every other argument so far.

1) You have seen me RESPONDING to a question from a guy that was unsure what to do. My response was that I would probably not write the review and depending on just what I though the problem was I might go back (IIRC she was good looking and the issue was more about chemistry/connection than services offered) and see if that was better. He was asking because he was unsure if part of the problem was him.

Lol at these falsehoods

You didn't ask for anything, you are correct. I have no issues in admitting it.

off of this site.  Every board needs a fool.   Unfortunately, you are slowly becoming ours.   You're getting a cred problem, because you keep sounding off about exposing misleading ads about girls and orgs, but other than the ONE org that was already known to be discredited that you proudly "exposed" several months ago, and the two MILF's you described in detail recently, but only one had misleading photos, I'm having a hard time seeing where you are putting all of this "info" you claim to have uncovered about orgs and girls.  There was no review of Megan OR Lisa, but you mentioned them here,  so this begs the question, where are you putting this info so that you help the Newbies you claim to champion, or is what we have seen the limit of your help so far?

You break not illusions for me. You've also provided no particularly useful information for me ether. Nor, when it comes down to actual solutions have you suggested anything that I or others here have not already suggested, including directly to YOU.

You really hate reading, don’t you? A little reading and a little thought and you could answer a lot of the questions and issues you bring up. Even the superficial reading that allowed you to come up with your idea of my position on reviews. You expect others to extrapolate a bit and read between the lines so that they will understand you. But, so far, we haven’t seen any of that from you other than to come up with things like the ridiculous idea that there are a bunch of “VIP mongers” (a term for which you have a humorously off the mark definition) here who can’t possibly be regular mongers or they’d agree with you.

Yes, sure -and your view is to place all blame on the "idiot mongers". Which youve demonstrated multiple times. Instead of sympathizing with mongers who got hustled, you laugh at them. Surely I didn't expect you to have sympathy for mongers who get swindled by fake pics.  

Wow. And now a persecution complex, too? Since when does criticism - even including statements saying that, if you don’t like it, look elsewhere - equate to wanting someone to leave?

I love reading. I've learned how to read when I was three years old.

Jensen has mentioned it before that I should change my behavior or leave. Do you want the exact quote?

I think you've managed to create a brand new class of logical error. I will leave you with your blend of ad hominen and straw man and simply label it as the ad straw man attack.

"But sure, when in doubt put all the blame on the provider. You're like the idiot that sued, Sears/Craftsman I think, because he chopped his fingers up when he attempted to use the lawnmower as a hedge trimmer."

I read all the comments. I think you’re overreacting. It’s looking like you’re trying to make yourself a martyr for your cause.

"Given that I my response would be no review and then decide if it would be worth trying again in case it was a case of bad timing (her dog just got run over by a car while walking in that morning, just a low energy day for her, just had back to back difficult clients or even first day on the job type situation) and things just did not click. If she was incredibly DDG with a body to kill for I might go back just to confirm. If same results then a review might be in order if you like reviews. As others have mentioned you might also just do some back channel reporting instead.  "

It’s interesting that you seem to deliberately avoid being able to understand reasons to not write a review. I’ll leave the exercise of figuring them all out to the student. But here’s one I have experienced myself.

"For me, other can decide for themselves, rocket is a net negative on this board and I really wish he would leave -- or change his behavior."

jensen said: "rocket is a net negative on this board and I really wish he would leave -- or change his behavior."
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/k-girl-113/re-sorry-i-would-love-to-play-your-little-game-20654?frmSearch=1#20654

"Ad hominem attacks" . . . . These were justified responses to some of the stupid shit he has posted.  I thought someone that's a professional troublemaker like you would know the difference.  Apparently, you are dumber than previously thought.  

Yes, I’ve had teenage kids who do speak English as a native language interpret statements such as that one the same way you did. But I’ve found it unusual in adults.

...his first language?  English is not MY first language; I didn't learn to speak English until I was 5 but I seem to be doing well, TYVM.  I'm sure there are many K-mongers who are not native English speakers and some are more fluent in English than others.

Are you really going to say that "I really wish he would leave" is somehow misinterpreted by me ? And is not the same as someone wanting me gone?  

So let me get this straight.  

This is really tiring.

PTSD?

Interesting.

Keep digging deeper and getting more and more agitated. You're fitting the model of all the people that are not thought well of and end up being alienated from these boards who then turn into the trolls and targets of ridicule for amusement. But, I know, that is really OUR problem and mistake, not yours. You are still the savior of all the innocents and all this is just the cross you happily bear for them.

It is definitely time to post the train vid.

You really are running with this whole PTSD trolling nonsense and being facetious. Lol. Whatever works for you.  

What would work for me is if you actually stopped pretending to be something you aren’t and using fallacy after fallacy to establish your claims.

Oh? Who am I pretending to be that I'm not? Do tell.  

Even though you attempt to deny it, everyone else has read it and only one person is sticking up for you.  

you come off as I have not problem with you. If you can accept that most here, and certainly me, approach things differently than you AND that does not mean we are aligned against other mongers or in the pocket of agencies. If you can stop demanding (and yes you do by virtue of ALWAY arguing back if someone has not just agreed with you) that we all acknowledge and support YOUR cause I think you will find most here, including me, more than welcoming to you and fully accepting of your pain points -- we don't accept them as OUR pain points though.

Completely accurate assessment, I think.  

OK thanks for your answer. Jensen confirmed that indeed, he meant thst he wants me gone,in his statement, if I'm unable to change how I approach things. I rest my case, useyrhead.  

LOL

You: "But that doesn’t mean we... want you gone."  

By saying you will not change you were saying that you refuse to do the following:

Ad populum? Well, at least you did a little reading to look that up. Good work. But you misused it. I didn’t say you were wrong because other people argued with you. I said you won’t listen or ever admit someone else may be right, too. Because, the reality is, there frequently is more than one right answer.

I normally defend Rocket, but can't say much here as even in "Flat" mode the formatting of these long threads sucks donkey ass.

You are now completely trolling me.

If you were actually reading my posts, I admitted to you having a point about review writing just last night. Were you too busy trying to pick holes in my posts to notice it?

Lol, the format does suck dick for these. I have to use flat, and then switch to tree to make sure I reply to the right thing.  

This is the first thread in YEARS that has actually run completely off the right side of the page.

Thanks for your kind words. It was a fun little training exercise.  

Well, I think the "EVERYONE" and "NOBODY" was probably a bit too inclusive. Still, I fully agree (so go fuck yourself) AND I recognize my own contributions. Not really where I wanted to be but....

I prefer to be in charge of my own destiny.  Having the walk-out option means its my choice, and only my choice whether to go through with the appointment.  Even with an honest photoshoot, you often can't tell from a two-dimensional photo whether she is 10 pounds or 30 pounds heavier than stated in the ads.  Sometimes, girls can pull it off and don't look that bad with some extra poundage, so rather than decide from the photos, if I find her otherwise attractive, I want to see the goods, knowing I have the option to walk if it deviates too much from the representations. That are many girls that I COULD have walked out on, but stayed, and to my surprise, had a good session despite the discrepancies in the photos.  Make the decision once you get there.  The booker will not BL you because he knows the photos are not right.  He is counting on more guys going ahead with the session than walking out, but he knows a certain percentage will walk. I like to take a look first.