This has been on my mind since I saw a topic posted about a certain bust. All though some details would have been ok, I think the poster went a too far by linking to the article. The article had a lot of detail that shouldn't be shared. If something contains a persons 'real' name, it should be left off of the boards. Yes, I understand it's public knowledge, but we here are closer to the situation. Once a persons 'real' name is out there, their privacy and safety is shot. Would anyone really want there 'real' name used on here?

The recent post tried to unsuccessfully skirt the rule.  As best I can tell, all you can do these days is generally describe what happened and mention that it was a story in the paper.

providers are purely fictional and intended for entertainment only.

For better or worse, TER has to draw the line there, and not admit "reality" into the boards.  

Some time ago, another provider website was charged with promotion of illegal activities.  As long as everything is fantasy and fiction, no such charge can be made.   TER has to protect itself as well.

I saw your post that got pulled. I happen to think that it would have passed muster on other boards but with all the drama associated with local providers, their white knights, drama queens and kings it seems that a different standard applies to the MN board.

A popular way on other boards to deal with this issue of what outing an individual constitutes is this.

1. Copy the article from the website

2. Paste into your message box

3. Remove all identifying information including real name, work name, addresses, websites etc and replace with xxxxxxx.

4. Submit the post.

It has worked a lot on the east coast and TER has allowed such posts to stand, I don't see a reason why TER would not allow such posts to stand on the MN board. I am of the opinion that as much information and all information I get is good. It helps me make decisions and judgement based on the quality of information I receive.

Could you send to me as well

Not VIP. Please email link to [email protected]

Please send to me as well

Please feel free to PM me......

Thanks

-- Modified on 2/22/2013 9:21:03 AM

You mean like the thread that was just above this one?  Funny how the sometimes just disappear overnight.

...the one started by Cayden Vaughn that morphed into a thread about downtown skyways, separation of classes and the Twin Cities' finest eateries? Now THAT was a good thread!

It's supposed to be a discussion board and yet the policy seems to be that certain very important topics should not be discussed here.

Please PM me.  Thank you.

If your allegation is spot-on, it still does not negate a serious screening mistake by a provider who failed to sufficiently protect the greater hobby community. She is not a rookie at this game.

The removed message thread was great fun while it lasted.

The Erotic Review allows a little bit of fun on this discussion board. However, a hobbyist almost has to visit the site several times a day in order to read the informative threads prior to their removal.

The truth interferes with too many hobbyists' idealized visions of their favored providers. Thus, the record must be purged of any messages that corrupt the fantasy.

If it's not white knights being irrational in their protections.  It's aliased trolls that drone on and on and on again.

I think everyone got the point, this horse has been beaten beyond dead.

I would be a little bit grumpy too if I paid a provider for a session in which you rated her a "3/2".

While I don't advocate a posting free-for-all, I'd rather err on the side of allowing discussion (including keeping the threads up), even though that does invite a certain amount of WK and Trollish behavior.

Really?  That's the best you could come up with?  

Yes, I have had a 3/2... And yes I would have probably even went through fucking her.. Your point?

Little help on this one -- is the "serious screening mistake by a provider", a separate misdeed from that of her having "failed to sufficiently protect the greater hobby community"?  Or is it really just one misdeed (i.e., screening mistake) expressed in a tendentious, hyperbolic way?

Pardon me for yawning about the insufficient protection I suffered b/c of the provider's screening mistake -- the last I heard, there is nothing illegal about hiring or visiting an escort.  If I am incorrect about this, I welcome correction from anyone in our hobby community.    

the mob hereabouts to whip themselves into a self-righteous frenzy over stuff like this.  I worry about the less mentally stable ones that read this stuff, and what they might do.  The combination of too much information and an unchecked mob mentality concern me.  

It would take much better and light-years faster moderation of the board to filter and control the discussion.  Useful information information is one thing.  But the endless venting of the spleens of a handful of alias trolls has no redeeming value.  

I think the reason entire threads get pulled is that they just don't have the manpower to sort it all out.  

I don't remember seeing mngopher on that thread. What makes you bring them up?

But if this is who I think it is, its fairly obvious to most who have been here a while who you are now.

Because I don't think TER will allow the link to be sent via pm

Please send. Thanks