Hmm, Lindsay. And just what is IT that you agree TO? If one only read the message subject titles, they would conclude that I am now on your "shit list" for giving up many of the "lurid goods". However, when one reads the messages they can readily see that you agree about the AWOL individual. But then again, I suppose it could be BOTH! Well hey, if you don't want the juicy press, I can always shaddup....
~~/
I originally posted a "Preliminary Report" of last Tuesday's party in this location. My intent was to give an entertaining "feel" and "flavor" of what parties like this are like and about. All of the responding posts are to that initial post.
As you can see, the initial responding posts seemed to indicate that I had accomplished my objective. However, a series of posts were presented which asserted that the "report" was actually a graphic "review" and was not only of the providers present, but a couple of the hobbyists as well (one of whom was identified by handle and the other by a first name). If one checks the rules for the discussion boards, posts are not supposed to be of a review nature since one can read them in their entirity without VIP access. Hence, some could find the rather graphic content objectionable. The hobbyists in question also objected to being identified in the post, along with some of their "activities". In such matters, I usually use the "test": "would I have minded if the tables had been turned?". Well, actually not since I am very open about myself, and don't really mind if others choose to be in a non-malicious fashion. Nonetheless, I concurred that the report was actually a review of sorts. Also, I acknowledged that each individual's sensibilities should be respected. Hence, I apologized where I felt it was appropriate. However, the TER software did not allow me to do any editing since the 24 hour limit had long elapsed.
After I was "called to task" on the board, there were some posts which offered their support. I received many pm's in the backchannel as well. I wish to say here that NOT a SINGLE one of them was negative, in any way. Virtually all were supportive of me, personally. About 30% of them were also supportive of what I had originally tried to do and how I tried to do it. The majority, however, agreed that one or more mistakes had been made, but that everyone has made mistakes (themselves included). One pm asked if I would consider an edit of the original post. When I answered that the software wouldn't LET me, the sender replied that perhaps I should have the moderator assist in an editing effort so that no more people could read the original graphic content. Sleeping on that, I pm'd the moderator who agreed that such a revision might be a good idea, even though over 650 people have all ready read the original post. Hence, this revision.
-- Modified on 3/14/2005 12:48:40 AM
-- Modified on 3/14/2005 12:48:56 AM
Sounds like you had a great time -- which is exactly why we got these things going. Once everyone is 'comfortable' it is quite a blast.
Yeah, how can I get in on this event? I would love to join in on the fun.
Email me if interested, we had a couple cancellations.
In a way, these parties always seem to work out.
In this case, I am glad I was snowed out and couldnt make it.
It sounds like everyone had a good time.
However,the news report on the party is really a turn off.
I hope the guys will tend to keep the graphics to their reviews and not their posts.
Which brings up another interesting question:
How do you do a review on this kind of gathering?
Or maybe a little discretion is on the order here.
I am really not too keen in having every one know about my whereabouts or goings on
TR
As I now understand it, unlike reviews which require VIP membership to read "the juicy details", posts apparently do NOT. Although I doubt that this reached any "family audiences", I suppose that one never really knows, on the net. This may unfortunately have placed RCPro in a very tough position which was not of his making, or deserving. It is possible that he may be forced to remove this whole thread, as well as to reprimand me. RCP, for potentially placing you in this most awkward position, I am sorry, and I sincerely apologize.
TR, you raise another valid point, which I was wrestling with. How does one "review" a party? With the first party, jeep set the example of one method, which was to try to do it conventionally IN A REVIEW, where at least some limitation DOES exist with regard to potential readers. He also tried to limit his review to the providers, and not include particulars regarding the participants. Although I feel that such limitation may not portray an actual representation of the party or its true "flavor", at least it may be closer to the prudent choice. You also suggested something to the effect of: If in doubt, leave it OUT. Probably also very good advice for us all, even if it does "tie our hands behind our backs". Unfortunately in my enthusiasm and desire to entertain, I apparently made the mistake of missing what should have been regarded as "doubts". You have made it apparent that I offended you and/or your sensibilities. I can assure you that was NOT my desire. I am truly sorry for that, and I apologize. This apology is not only for you, but for ANYONE and EVERYONE who has similar feelings and may have been hurt. Clearly many DID enjoy this thread, but that is NO excuse. Perhaps there is NO way to properly review a party, as such. A harsh lesson for us all, to be applied to how to handle future parties.
A particular mention to the gals involved, particularly Lissa and Jordan. Although I jokingly said otherwise, you ARE truly ladies of distinction, with unique and rare talents. Jordan, you were a very "good sport" about it. You, of all people realize that I never meant to hurt you. I have nothing but the upmost regard and admiration for you (as I am sure you are aware). The same applies to Lissa. Although neither of you gals have said so, I fear that I may have offended you (in one or more ways) as WELL. If so, I truly regret it, and I apologize.
For jeop, I kind of singled you out (again jokingly), since we had been long standing "posting buddies", even though we never had really met until yesterday. From your post, it is quite apparent that I offended you (although your remarks correctly indicated that was NOT my intent). I apologize to you as well.
There are several ironies here. First, I normally DO go much further than the extra mile to "touch all the bases" in the backchannel, before posting anything like this. There was another thread which I thought about exploring, but found out the better of, as a result of my prior contact with Lindsay. I guess it is too bad I didn't do that with THIS thread as well. Second, I just recently received some considerable praise (including from jeep himself) concerning my extensive prior posting tact and talents. I guess I just "couldn't stand prosperity", for I clearly blew it here, BIG TIME. Apparently I don't make many mistakes, but when I do they are REAL DOOSIES. Third, in yet another thread, Yasmine Greek suggested that I might be in need of a break, from all of this. Clearly, I should have listened to her. Fourth, in the backchannel, many have suggested to me that posting and reviewing do present many challenges and potential risks. They too were also suggesting that I "give it a rest", for a while, if not indefinitely. Too late apparently, I have discovered just how accurate their assessments were. Fifth, I even suggested that I would be either willingly or unwillingly be taking a hiatus from all of this. Clearly, I didn't even listen to MYSELF, in this matter. The lesson is that just like hobbying itself, posting and reviewing provide a "high" and can be an "addiction" of their own. Sometimes "entertainers" start taking themselves too seriously, when the real truth is that perhaps they should have quit while they were on top and ahead.
Those who really know me realize that there is truly not a "malicious bone in my body". My intent was actually to (in an offbeat way) PRAISE all the folks who I originally mentioned, drum up support for Lindsay's parties (which she has gone to such great lengths to create and foster), and to entertain. Unfortunately, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". It greatly saddens me that I have apparently hurt so many innocent victims. Now, I must "learn from experience" and eat huge portions of the very foul tasting "humble pie". I believe there are many good lessons in here, for us all. I hope that my many good compadres can learn from these lessons. I assure you all that I wouldn't wish this situation (which I have placed myself in) on my worst enemy.
Ponzone, please don't feel bad, just reading your posts one can tell of the kind of guy you are - one who considers those on these boards comrades. It's a shame that Jeop felt the need to say this to you on the board and make you feel bad. He should have done it privately if he feels so strongly about privacy. Personally I think he needs to get over himself in the worst way; in this instance anyway.
However, please don't dump on brother jeopcon. He may have been "sucked down to my level" just a little bit by posting a reply out here, however I certainly know how easy it is for that to happen. After all, I was guilty of it FIRST. We all have to constantly keep track of exactly where we are placing our written words, why, and what harm they may cause. In jeep's case, he was well within his rights to feel "hurt" and somewhat offended, and I appreciate his honesty to have said so, and stood up for his principles. Few of us have had to "walk a mile in his shoes" in a case like this.
Message boards like this one tend to form communities of people who regularly post to them. This is the first week I've been checking out this forum, but I'm a regular on several others. Under normal circumstances, you would congratulate a friend (real or virtual) when they have attained an accomplishment. This is completely appropriate.
However in this hobby, we are constrained by the need for keeping a certain degree of privacy. Its easy to see how this can be a fragile balance at times. Obviously it was a honest mistake and was not done with malice.