Banacek...
- Thread starter Hollander
- Start date
- Status
Regarding you moving two of my posts to another thread and saying "I don't follow directions". I was responding directly to two posts in the thread. I can't control where the other person posts!
Get a clue and realize the world doesn't revolve around UG's precious little rule book.
Get a clue and realize the world doesn't revolve around UG's precious little rule book.
2. Email slinky - slinkybender@utopiaguide.com - if you don't like following the little rule book. I didn't make those set of rules. Slinky asked me to pitch it and watch that people follow them. That's what I and the other mods do.
.....Get a clue and realize the world doesn't revolve around UG's precious little rule book.
Here's the deal as I see it:
Slinky's responsibility: Slinky sets up the UG site, pays for the software, tech support, legal and any other expenses, keeps the site virus free, sets up volunteer moderators or himself as moderator to ensure an orderly site that posters can post and read w/o being bombarded by argumentative trolls.
UGer's responsibility: Following UG's precious little rule book, enjoy a site with a wide range of topics, post or lurk as desired — all for free.
I didn't watch the Superbowl, but from the reports about the game, the halftime show, and the commercials, I think the Lucinda thread was more entertaining. I just wish more guys had joined the fray. Not to stir up shit, but to clarify points. For instance, two guys reported getting photos from her. It would have been helpful if they confirmed whether they had to send her photos first, as she alleges. Especially when I asked for a show of hands.
Sometimes I feel naked in these threads fighting the battle alone. Because if you think about it, her whole argument was against the premise of UG. She stated as much. She doesn't want reviews and doesn't think guys should be allowed to do so. Would have been nice for someone to tell her to STFU. Guess I TOFTT in there. Wiggs did, too with the only actual review. Hope you appreciate that at least and give the guy due credit for going against her stance.
Sometimes I feel naked in these threads fighting the battle alone. Because if you think about it, her whole argument was against the premise of UG. She stated as much. She doesn't want reviews and doesn't think guys should be allowed to do so. Would have been nice for someone to tell her to STFU. Guess I TOFTT in there. Wiggs did, too with the only actual review. Hope you appreciate that at least and give the guy due credit for going against her stance.
I have a totally different take on Wiggs role in this whole thing.
First off, why didn't he jump in and speak up for himself? It's not like he's shy. I wanted to hear his version. Still do.
Does he change facts all the time in his reviews? So what good are they then? If that is true then every time I read one of his reviews from now on I'm going to be thinking which part of this true and which part is he making up so it can't be traced back to him. Totally useless.
About giving him "due credit for going against her stance".
Again, no credit is due here. One of two things happened here;
If she didn't mention that she didn't want to be reviewed, then how is he going against her stance? No credit due.
Or
She said she didn't want to be reviewed and he reviewed her anyway.
That doesn't make him a hero it actually makes him a bit of a dick, IF that's how it went down. But we don't know because Wiggs isn't talking.
In the last year and half I've had two ladies, both independents staying at nicer hotels ask me not to review them. Both times they brought up the subject. So I didn't review them. My take is I share enough with you guys so if a girl doesn't want to be reviewed so be it.
What I will do is if her name comes up in a ISO thread I will mention that I saw her and either say "don't waste your time" or "you should go see her and leave it at that'
All this is conjecture though because Wiggs isn't talking.
First off, why didn't he jump in and speak up for himself? It's not like he's shy. I wanted to hear his version. Still do.
Does he change facts all the time in his reviews? So what good are they then? If that is true then every time I read one of his reviews from now on I'm going to be thinking which part of this true and which part is he making up so it can't be traced back to him. Totally useless.
About giving him "due credit for going against her stance".
Again, no credit is due here. One of two things happened here;
If she didn't mention that she didn't want to be reviewed, then how is he going against her stance? No credit due.
Or
She said she didn't want to be reviewed and he reviewed her anyway.
That doesn't make him a hero it actually makes him a bit of a dick, IF that's how it went down. But we don't know because Wiggs isn't talking.
In the last year and half I've had two ladies, both independents staying at nicer hotels ask me not to review them. Both times they brought up the subject. So I didn't review them. My take is I share enough with you guys so if a girl doesn't want to be reviewed so be it.
What I will do is if her name comes up in a ISO thread I will mention that I saw her and either say "don't waste your time" or "you should go see her and leave it at that'
All this is conjecture though because Wiggs isn't talking.
I totally disagree with some things you've said and I can clear up others.
I told him not to comment. Believe me, he wanted to. And now he is free to do so because that furor has died down and she probably couldn't find this thread even if she wanted to. (If she did, though, would that be proof that one of the scumbags here led her to it? After all, she claims she found the site by googling her number and her number won't lead her to here.) Anyway, I thought that having those two battle directly would not end well.
Plus, since I was privy to the whole affair, I felt fully qualified to comment for him. Why? Because he texted me when the post was up and said he had just met her and done a car date, She can deny it all she wants - and she has - but the scenario he laid out for me in that text made perfect sense. He subsequently texted me about a second date. He didn't say in the text where he took her. As for the obscuring aspect, that was an assumption on my part that it could account for the hotel discrepancy.
We discussed the problem that providers can identify you with too many details a long time ago when Heather of a thousand names caught me by surprise by appearing in the same hotel room as another provider I was seeing, the little blonde. I had posted a review with some negatives about Heather about a month before that and detailed that I visited with her at a friend's apartment. Because I included that detail, she was able to place my face to the review and she started shit with me at this date. Fortunately for me, the need for her GF to earn money outweighed her desire to continue berating me and so the date went on. But for me it was a lesson learned. Either leave out the details or obscure them. Wiggs and I talked about that, so I assumed that is what Wiggs did with Lucinda. But, again, he could tell you.
Also, Wiggs mentioned in that first text that she was a blonde and went on to describe her looks and age and then added that she told him she started stripping young. You will recall that someone else in her thread echoed that later. In the text about the second date, he made a comment that she loved talking about her younger days but he didn't make it sound as bad as it looked in the review that appears here. But even that echoes what some other guy said and it certainly echoes what she showed us.
And he did say that she wanted to stay UTR and so he knew the risk in reviewing her. And that is where I differ with you. I appreciate that he showed an allegiance to the board by doing that and I firmly believe that qualifies as a TOFTT. No one else had reviewed her, though they did mention seeing her. So, I think it took balls because of the risk and we can see the result right here. Because not only did he suffer her wrath but he now has your criticism leveled at him. Furthermore, I believe it goes against the spirit of the board to encourage members not to review girls if they ask that. And I do believe that at least some of the UG mods will agree with me. I think this falls in line with what Slinky and Waterclone have gone on record as saying. I'm not sure how lightweight would weigh in - pun intended - on this and unbeknownst to most of you, there are two other mods on the crew that I have no idea of their position on matters like this.
My disagreement with you would also extend to his being a bit of a dick for the same reasons that I think he should be applauded. He stepped up and reviewed her, which is the purpose of this board. And I'm not saying this because I'm friends with the guy. I would say it about anyone else here and I have certainly complimented other members for what they have said and done.
The bottom line is that we saw enough of her behavior for everyone to make their own judgement. She rambled on after saying she was done. She rambled on after I stopped when she made the "last word" comment. She changed her story. She never answered me about why she didn't take issue with Mord for starting the thread and posting her number and Mr. Joyboy for posting her photo. And please understand me, guys, I mean no criticism for saying that now or in her thread. It was merely a comparison. I see no wrong in what you two guys did either. She also flat out disparaged everyone here on this site with her comments about the board in general and extended it all the way even to the guy who made the board software. She fired away here with a scatter gun in the end. But initially, her venom was at Wiggs and then me as I took the heat.
In fairness to her, I could see her confusion if the date did not happen at the motel. But she could easily have asked for her phone number and photo to be removed either in the thread, nicely, from the start or even in a report. I've always been fair to providers in allowing them to refute posts by approving them and putting them through. And maybe that's how I wind up in these messes to begin with. This wasn't my first rodeo. You've seen me go at with many providers in here that I think were proven wrong. And if you don't believe me, ask Carlito. So what went down with Lucinda had nothing to do with Wiggs as far as my doing anything different. The only factor that differed was that this time I had privy info.
I told him not to comment. Believe me, he wanted to. And now he is free to do so because that furor has died down and she probably couldn't find this thread even if she wanted to. (If she did, though, would that be proof that one of the scumbags here led her to it? After all, she claims she found the site by googling her number and her number won't lead her to here.) Anyway, I thought that having those two battle directly would not end well.
Plus, since I was privy to the whole affair, I felt fully qualified to comment for him. Why? Because he texted me when the post was up and said he had just met her and done a car date, She can deny it all she wants - and she has - but the scenario he laid out for me in that text made perfect sense. He subsequently texted me about a second date. He didn't say in the text where he took her. As for the obscuring aspect, that was an assumption on my part that it could account for the hotel discrepancy.
We discussed the problem that providers can identify you with too many details a long time ago when Heather of a thousand names caught me by surprise by appearing in the same hotel room as another provider I was seeing, the little blonde. I had posted a review with some negatives about Heather about a month before that and detailed that I visited with her at a friend's apartment. Because I included that detail, she was able to place my face to the review and she started shit with me at this date. Fortunately for me, the need for her GF to earn money outweighed her desire to continue berating me and so the date went on. But for me it was a lesson learned. Either leave out the details or obscure them. Wiggs and I talked about that, so I assumed that is what Wiggs did with Lucinda. But, again, he could tell you.
Also, Wiggs mentioned in that first text that she was a blonde and went on to describe her looks and age and then added that she told him she started stripping young. You will recall that someone else in her thread echoed that later. In the text about the second date, he made a comment that she loved talking about her younger days but he didn't make it sound as bad as it looked in the review that appears here. But even that echoes what some other guy said and it certainly echoes what she showed us.
And he did say that she wanted to stay UTR and so he knew the risk in reviewing her. And that is where I differ with you. I appreciate that he showed an allegiance to the board by doing that and I firmly believe that qualifies as a TOFTT. No one else had reviewed her, though they did mention seeing her. So, I think it took balls because of the risk and we can see the result right here. Because not only did he suffer her wrath but he now has your criticism leveled at him. Furthermore, I believe it goes against the spirit of the board to encourage members not to review girls if they ask that. And I do believe that at least some of the UG mods will agree with me. I think this falls in line with what Slinky and Waterclone have gone on record as saying. I'm not sure how lightweight would weigh in - pun intended - on this and unbeknownst to most of you, there are two other mods on the crew that I have no idea of their position on matters like this.
My disagreement with you would also extend to his being a bit of a dick for the same reasons that I think he should be applauded. He stepped up and reviewed her, which is the purpose of this board. And I'm not saying this because I'm friends with the guy. I would say it about anyone else here and I have certainly complimented other members for what they have said and done.
The bottom line is that we saw enough of her behavior for everyone to make their own judgement. She rambled on after saying she was done. She rambled on after I stopped when she made the "last word" comment. She changed her story. She never answered me about why she didn't take issue with Mord for starting the thread and posting her number and Mr. Joyboy for posting her photo. And please understand me, guys, I mean no criticism for saying that now or in her thread. It was merely a comparison. I see no wrong in what you two guys did either. She also flat out disparaged everyone here on this site with her comments about the board in general and extended it all the way even to the guy who made the board software. She fired away here with a scatter gun in the end. But initially, her venom was at Wiggs and then me as I took the heat.
In fairness to her, I could see her confusion if the date did not happen at the motel. But she could easily have asked for her phone number and photo to be removed either in the thread, nicely, from the start or even in a report. I've always been fair to providers in allowing them to refute posts by approving them and putting them through. And maybe that's how I wind up in these messes to begin with. This wasn't my first rodeo. You've seen me go at with many providers in here that I think were proven wrong. And if you don't believe me, ask Carlito. So what went down with Lucinda had nothing to do with Wiggs as far as my doing anything different. The only factor that differed was that this time I had privy info.
Last edited:
I didn't see any other guys jumping on her. Just me and that one comment hardnslick made when she started in on him. But I certainly agree that she might have started on you also if you commented. And I fully understand and respect that you don't want to talk to a woman like that. But maybe when you've been on the receiving end as much as I have, you might see it differently. It depends on the girl. Take Sophia. I scolded her pretty much from the beginning. I never told her to STFU, but I did call her out. She took it and corrected herself and did what she had to do to become a productive member and it has served her well. I try to work with what I've been given. Kelly Kegan is another example of an advertiser that needed to be dealt with at times for various problems. And even after she stopped advertising and went beserk on us, I still treated her in a respectful manner and did my best to explain the situation.
As I told billy, had Lucinda approached us in a calm manner and simply explained her issue at the beginning, I would have asked Slinky if we could take down her number and photo. As you know, Slinky doesn't usually agree to do that. So, ironically, maybe Lucinda's outburst served her well by forcing my hand to do that.
As I told billy, had Lucinda approached us in a calm manner and simply explained her issue at the beginning, I would have asked Slinky if we could take down her number and photo. As you know, Slinky doesn't usually agree to do that. So, ironically, maybe Lucinda's outburst served her well by forcing my hand to do that.
I'm not sure why everyone is getting twisted over a provider that said that she would NEVER visit the Island again.
Besides she seems a bit off.
Someone gassed her up and she was targeting wiggs because of it.
Why would he lie? It makes no sense.
Lots of crazy people in this game. (both sides of the fence) If I sent my pic to a random provider than I would be one of them.
The famous Deanna asked for my pic the second time I saw her. I said I don't do that.
She saw me anyway
Besides she seems a bit off.
Someone gassed her up and she was targeting wiggs because of it.
Why would he lie? It makes no sense.
Lots of crazy people in this game. (both sides of the fence) If I sent my pic to a random provider than I would be one of them.
The famous Deanna asked for my pic the second time I saw her. I said I don't do that.
She saw me anyway
@Banacek , actually she can find this without the help of her accomplice because you placed the link to this thread at the bottom of her thread.
As I mentioned I have encountered ladies who specifically ask not to be reviewed and it's NOT because I ask them if it's okay, they bring it up first.
So you're saying it is the board policy to ignore their wishes?
I think my solution of granting their wish and then chiming in if someone does an ISO on her satisfies the boards need.
I don't disagree with you on sometimes disguising a review so it doesn't come back on you. I just disagree on the method. Changing facts only serves to confuse other members.
My method is to use a sock puppet if they already know who billyS is and then delay the review a few days. This way I can keep the facts straight.
An example would be Holistic Nirvana.
Karla pinned me out via the details in my review and I didn't get extras the next time. She wanted to make sure I didn't review her. After that she was cool when she saw I kept my word and the extras got better and better. But what I did was review the other girls % honestly with a sock puppet and disguised when I saw them.
As I mentioned I have encountered ladies who specifically ask not to be reviewed and it's NOT because I ask them if it's okay, they bring it up first.
So you're saying it is the board policy to ignore their wishes?
I think my solution of granting their wish and then chiming in if someone does an ISO on her satisfies the boards need.
I don't disagree with you on sometimes disguising a review so it doesn't come back on you. I just disagree on the method. Changing facts only serves to confuse other members.
My method is to use a sock puppet if they already know who billyS is and then delay the review a few days. This way I can keep the facts straight.
An example would be Holistic Nirvana.
Karla pinned me out via the details in my review and I didn't get extras the next time. She wanted to make sure I didn't review her. After that she was cool when she saw I kept my word and the extras got better and better. But what I did was review the other girls % honestly with a sock puppet and disguised when I saw them.
I don't recall saying that, and if I ever did, I have changed my opinion. I have no issue with a woman saying she doesn't want to be reviewed, as a rule. Generally, I wouldn't review a woman who asked me not to do so. The exception being if I felt she was a rip off, a truly bad experience that people needed to be warned against. But if it's anywhere close to an average session, then I'll respect her wishes.
I think having reviews is good for business, but it's her business and her decision to make.
I think having reviews is good for business, but it's her business and her decision to make.
Thanks for the reply. My apology if I remembered incorrectly. Just to be precise, this is what I said that I thought you agreed with, "I believe it goes against the spirit of the board to encourage members not to review girls if they ask that." You have made it clear here that you personally would honor the requests of providers, so thanks for clearing that up for me, but what I specifically meant was should members be telling other members to honor that?
Last edited:
- Status