Slinky's announcement
- Thread starter LukeWarm
- Start date
To Hombre(my ex-brother)
This balkanization of PMB's is beneath us all. Old whore hounds like you and I have been around PMBs long enough to know some well established axioms:
1. Posters and lurkers are going to believe whatever they want irrespective of the proof waived under their noses.
2. The concept of a Private PMB with open membership is a oxymoron. Everyone knows what everybodyelse is doing, saying,where they are schtupping and when they are passing wind.
Wrt recruiting via another board's email facility,my .02(permit a brief digression):
Sean " P Diddy" Combs has been sending some of his dogs to movie premieres to hand out flyers for his new album and to hold up posters promoting it( they stand behind the star while she is being interviewed hoping to cop some free TV time). There is nothing illegal or immoral about that. But I think it's tacky .
This balkanization of PMBs is plain stupid and beneath any of us,who can tie our sneaker laces( I wear slip ons).
Here's to good commercial busts
'swope & mack(your ex-bro)
This balkanization of PMB's is beneath us all. Old whore hounds like you and I have been around PMBs long enough to know some well established axioms:
1. Posters and lurkers are going to believe whatever they want irrespective of the proof waived under their noses.
2. The concept of a Private PMB with open membership is a oxymoron. Everyone knows what everybodyelse is doing, saying,where they are schtupping and when they are passing wind.
Wrt recruiting via another board's email facility,my .02(permit a brief digression):
Sean " P Diddy" Combs has been sending some of his dogs to movie premieres to hand out flyers for his new album and to hold up posters promoting it( they stand behind the star while she is being interviewed hoping to cop some free TV time). There is nothing illegal or immoral about that. But I think it's tacky .
This balkanization of PMBs is plain stupid and beneath any of us,who can tie our sneaker laces( I wear slip ons).
Here's to good commercial busts
'swope & mack(your ex-bro)
Last edited:
Other boards "solicite" providers to advertize & post on their websites as a result of seeing them post on this board ... they often respond to your post, by sending you a "link" to post on their board as well
For example, take those 2 cancelations I posted in the "need something today" section... I recieved several responses from UGers (thanks!), but was also sent several links to post on "another" board as well
For example, take those 2 cancelations I posted in the "need something today" section... I recieved several responses from UGers (thanks!), but was also sent several links to post on "another" board as well
I think he is also referring to perhaps SP's sending e-mails to posters to recruit business. For example if I were to randomly e-mail posters my contact info with no valid reason for the contact in the first place. Not to mention that other boards do use UG as one method for recruiting members (paying members at that!) Funny even *I* recieve invitations to join this "no-providers" allowed paysite. ..........the irony of it all.
Let's bring the Great Posters back to JAG.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAG Member Discussion Board: Notes/Request/Alert to JAG: Let's bring the Great Posters back to JAG.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By MadMach on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:55 am:
I had a conversation with a very "influential" member of the hobby community and he suggested that I try my best to bring back some of the "old" great posters with an exception of few.
If you still talk to some of them, can you please let them know that we would like to welcome them back? If they want to join us back, can you please ask them to send me an e-mail at MadChaos@jaginfo.net ?
Thank you,
MadMach
if jag wants so bad to bring "the Great Posters back to JAG"....
then why did they chase them away with comments like this.....
By MadMach on Wednesday, September 13, 2000 - 07:47
pm:
Mr. Pitiful,
We are sick and tired of your bitching. If you don't
like what we are doing, just leave JAG and start your
own site.
One more complaint from you, we will disable you. This
is the final official warning to you.
MadMach
aristotle, johnny k, hombre and anyone else who is currently attempting to restore jag to it's former greatness..... all the improvments and fixes in the world won't return "the great posters" back to jag nor return jag itself back to it's former greatness until you fix jags three major credibility issues. (julies, candide and john b). all three are on the inside or involved in some form and all three claim they aren't. also an apology to a few of those great posters wouldn't be a bad idea either. remember.... alot of those "great posters" didn't just stop posting or let their memberships expire.... they were basically chased off or had enough of these type comments as well as the shit you still need to fix and left with their middle fingers in the air.
aristotle... you're a wise enough man to know (and i don't need to tell you this) that you nor anyone else will never be able to convince those former "great posters" that the three issues above are 'non-issues' (the great ones don't have their heads buried in the sand). and i can't speak for all but, i also think that the comment "with an exception of few" should be reconsidered since it may be an all or nothing deal with some of those "great posters" and that should include rufus moses* (without whom there would be no jag). if your going to do this.... than do it right and do it honestly.
PS.... those classic threads are certainly a good thing to show and woo new membership hopefuls..... but the fact that most of the people who created those threads are no longer there...... strikes me as false advertising.
* even UG management considered bringing tankcommander back a few weeks ago.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAG Member Discussion Board: Notes/Request/Alert to JAG: Let's bring the Great Posters back to JAG.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By MadMach on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:55 am:
I had a conversation with a very "influential" member of the hobby community and he suggested that I try my best to bring back some of the "old" great posters with an exception of few.
If you still talk to some of them, can you please let them know that we would like to welcome them back? If they want to join us back, can you please ask them to send me an e-mail at MadChaos@jaginfo.net ?
Thank you,
MadMach
if jag wants so bad to bring "the Great Posters back to JAG"....
then why did they chase them away with comments like this.....
By MadMach on Wednesday, September 13, 2000 - 07:47
pm:
Mr. Pitiful,
We are sick and tired of your bitching. If you don't
like what we are doing, just leave JAG and start your
own site.
One more complaint from you, we will disable you. This
is the final official warning to you.
MadMach
aristotle, johnny k, hombre and anyone else who is currently attempting to restore jag to it's former greatness..... all the improvments and fixes in the world won't return "the great posters" back to jag nor return jag itself back to it's former greatness until you fix jags three major credibility issues. (julies, candide and john b). all three are on the inside or involved in some form and all three claim they aren't. also an apology to a few of those great posters wouldn't be a bad idea either. remember.... alot of those "great posters" didn't just stop posting or let their memberships expire.... they were basically chased off or had enough of these type comments as well as the shit you still need to fix and left with their middle fingers in the air.
aristotle... you're a wise enough man to know (and i don't need to tell you this) that you nor anyone else will never be able to convince those former "great posters" that the three issues above are 'non-issues' (the great ones don't have their heads buried in the sand). and i can't speak for all but, i also think that the comment "with an exception of few" should be reconsidered since it may be an all or nothing deal with some of those "great posters" and that should include rufus moses* (without whom there would be no jag). if your going to do this.... than do it right and do it honestly.
PS.... those classic threads are certainly a good thing to show and woo new membership hopefuls..... but the fact that most of the people who created those threads are no longer there...... strikes me as false advertising.
* even UG management considered bringing tankcommander back a few weeks ago.
Last edited:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAG Member Discussion Board: General Discussion: UG "Warning"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 08:12 pm:
Apparently UG is upset that some people from "another board" (JAGsters?) have been "poaching" their members. There is a threatening notice up on UG now with dire warnings of banishment for the poachers.
Setting aside for a moment the ridiculous belief that any board has some kind of claim on its members and can somehow keep them to itself, it would probably be best for anyone who was engaged in such poaching to be smart about it and assume that any communication that went through UG was being monitored. I'd also assume that if the "wrong" UG member was approached, the very next thing that would happen is the exchange would be immediately forwarded to UG management.
Naturally, nobody here is dumb enough to go about it using UG as the primary means of communication, but on the off chance that someone is....well, now you know.
By Aristotle on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 08:24 pm:
I can't recall anyone at JAG *ever* being bothered by MC or MM for posting at UG. (If you were, I'd like to hear about it.)
Why should UG -- slinky -- even care if frequent UG posters post here? Certainly no one at JAG ever cared about people posting at TBD or on any other board (which, in any event, is a necessary thing).
I would hope that nearly all the old JAGsters would start posting here again -- if only to take a breather from "the paranoid style of prostitution politics."
P.S. Of course, it's possible that slinky is simply kidding, in which case I'll have to retract my previous remark about how he's no longer funny.
By carlk on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 09:47 pm:
ari -- luv ya. got balls? in your case -- yeah.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 09:51 pm:
Exactly so.
I can't imagine UG actually having some sort of policy that forbids membership anywhere else; that would eliminate several of their members. And publicly acknowledging such a policy would undoubtedly bring them (or ANY board that did it) more ill will than it's worth.
By Prophet on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 10:29 pm:
Ivan, the Wonderful, who achieved more than Peter, the Great, early in his reign, eventually ended up as Ivan, the Terrible, due to his own paranoia, by killing his son.
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:20 pm:
I have said it before, but I will waste some more band width by saying it again . . . This is why I don't post on any other boards. Too much Bullshit. I know we have had our moments here, but it is ALWAYS kept in the family. Hence the luxury of a non-public board.
No offense to any of you guys who are prolific posters on other boards. Just my personal policy. BTW, I did join UG in the initial flurry of action over there. I soon got bored and had no patience for the in-fighting that I could barely follow much less understand. I also had the foresight to join using another handle. I just didn't feel right using my Pat persona on another board.
Pat, who is just depositing his two cents whether they are wanted or not.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:30 pm:
If I'm gonna post there, it's going to be under my own handle. Anything I couldn't say under it probably shouldn't be said.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:33 pm:
And: I don't post very often there; it's just not worth it. I think my unwillingness to accept the Evil Jag Rant at face value makes me suspect, 'cause if I'm not against Jag, then I must be against UG...right?
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:38 pm:
HS,
Maybe Slinky put that Evil JAG rant out as a "Red Herring" to smoke out any potential anti-UG/Pro-JAG faction. Kind of pre-emptive strike before a mass exodus from UG.
Pat!
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:41 pm:
I haven't looked at UG, much less posted there in such a long time I can't remember. I found the discussions to be "too inside" and really hard to follow. JAG takes some getting used to, but I seemed to get the hang of it after a short period.
Pat!
JAG Member Discussion Board: General Discussion: UG "Warning"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 08:12 pm:
Apparently UG is upset that some people from "another board" (JAGsters?) have been "poaching" their members. There is a threatening notice up on UG now with dire warnings of banishment for the poachers.
Setting aside for a moment the ridiculous belief that any board has some kind of claim on its members and can somehow keep them to itself, it would probably be best for anyone who was engaged in such poaching to be smart about it and assume that any communication that went through UG was being monitored. I'd also assume that if the "wrong" UG member was approached, the very next thing that would happen is the exchange would be immediately forwarded to UG management.
Naturally, nobody here is dumb enough to go about it using UG as the primary means of communication, but on the off chance that someone is....well, now you know.
By Aristotle on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 08:24 pm:
I can't recall anyone at JAG *ever* being bothered by MC or MM for posting at UG. (If you were, I'd like to hear about it.)
Why should UG -- slinky -- even care if frequent UG posters post here? Certainly no one at JAG ever cared about people posting at TBD or on any other board (which, in any event, is a necessary thing).
I would hope that nearly all the old JAGsters would start posting here again -- if only to take a breather from "the paranoid style of prostitution politics."
P.S. Of course, it's possible that slinky is simply kidding, in which case I'll have to retract my previous remark about how he's no longer funny.
By carlk on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 09:47 pm:
ari -- luv ya. got balls? in your case -- yeah.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 09:51 pm:
Exactly so.
I can't imagine UG actually having some sort of policy that forbids membership anywhere else; that would eliminate several of their members. And publicly acknowledging such a policy would undoubtedly bring them (or ANY board that did it) more ill will than it's worth.
By Prophet on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 10:29 pm:
Ivan, the Wonderful, who achieved more than Peter, the Great, early in his reign, eventually ended up as Ivan, the Terrible, due to his own paranoia, by killing his son.
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:20 pm:
I have said it before, but I will waste some more band width by saying it again . . . This is why I don't post on any other boards. Too much Bullshit. I know we have had our moments here, but it is ALWAYS kept in the family. Hence the luxury of a non-public board.
No offense to any of you guys who are prolific posters on other boards. Just my personal policy. BTW, I did join UG in the initial flurry of action over there. I soon got bored and had no patience for the in-fighting that I could barely follow much less understand. I also had the foresight to join using another handle. I just didn't feel right using my Pat persona on another board.
Pat, who is just depositing his two cents whether they are wanted or not.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:30 pm:
If I'm gonna post there, it's going to be under my own handle. Anything I couldn't say under it probably shouldn't be said.
By hombre secreto on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:33 pm:
And: I don't post very often there; it's just not worth it. I think my unwillingness to accept the Evil Jag Rant at face value makes me suspect, 'cause if I'm not against Jag, then I must be against UG...right?
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:38 pm:
HS,
Maybe Slinky put that Evil JAG rant out as a "Red Herring" to smoke out any potential anti-UG/Pro-JAG faction. Kind of pre-emptive strike before a mass exodus from UG.
Pat!
By Pat McGroyne on Friday, June 14, 2002 - 11:41 pm:
I haven't looked at UG, much less posted there in such a long time I can't remember. I found the discussions to be "too inside" and really hard to follow. JAG takes some getting used to, but I seemed to get the hang of it after a short period.
Pat!
The reason for the anouncement is evident from reading the subsequent JAG conversation ( above ). The ostriches don't have ( refuse to have ? ) the "moral compass" to acknowledge that there is a difference between telling the members of your club that they can't patronize any other club, and telling the management of other clubs that they shoudln't use your facilities to engage in a membership drive ( pswope thinks this is merely tacky, I think a little worse than that ).
OK, let's do it...
Hard to take seriously coming from someone lacking the cojones to post under his actual handle, but for the sake of argument let's pretend it means something. Let's look at my "stupid" posts:
1. A goof on "recruiting". Was it not clear that this was a joke?
2. In response to the posters stating that "even *I* recieve invitations to join this "no-providers" allowed paysite" and "Other boards "solicite" providers to advertize & post on their websites as a result of seeing them post on this board ... they often respond to your post, by sending you a "link" to post on their board as well", I asked whether either of those happened via UG's messaging system. Well, did they? Was UG's messaging system used for either of those things? This strikes me as a valid question, because the tenor of the discussion makes it seem like that's the case, and I'm pretty sure it isn't...but please feel free to interpret this as "playing you".
But enough of that; let's drag the rest of this crap out into the open where the light of day may do it some good.
Yeah, Jag seems to be interested in getting some of its old members back. This is hardly a secret, and I've never waffled about my personal belief that the old Jag was better for its posters, a number of whom are here today. I've said this here and on Jag, and that continues to be my belief. I think there are a number of former members who would be welcomed back; for whatever reason, Jag management seems to have gotten a bug up its collective butt about making some changes. IMHO, this is a good thing.
So...you were railing against Jag for being stupid enough to get rid of former members or let them leave, but now it's stupid to want them back? Yeah, that makes sense.
It would be stupid to openly use UG's messaging system for recruiting. If anyone from Jag is doing that, they ought to be educated.
But more to the point:
1. Is this actually happening? Have Jag members been openly using UG's email system to recruit members? Or is this just a suspicion?
2. Does UG have a policy against UG members being Jag members as well? That would seem kind of dumb, but the implication appears to be there.
...because there's no way a new member will ever be allowed access to old posts? Because it's simply not possible for the quality of discussion to ever rise to that level again? It's time to get off that high horse. Yeah, a number of those people aren't there anymore, but the unbelievably self-serving assertion behind the "false advertising" claim is that no current members or future members will ever again say anything that interesting, and that's just a stupid thing to believe.
Hard to take seriously coming from someone lacking the cojones to post under his actual handle, but for the sake of argument let's pretend it means something. Let's look at my "stupid" posts:
1. A goof on "recruiting". Was it not clear that this was a joke?
2. In response to the posters stating that "even *I* recieve invitations to join this "no-providers" allowed paysite" and "Other boards "solicite" providers to advertize & post on their websites as a result of seeing them post on this board ... they often respond to your post, by sending you a "link" to post on their board as well", I asked whether either of those happened via UG's messaging system. Well, did they? Was UG's messaging system used for either of those things? This strikes me as a valid question, because the tenor of the discussion makes it seem like that's the case, and I'm pretty sure it isn't...but please feel free to interpret this as "playing you".
But enough of that; let's drag the rest of this crap out into the open where the light of day may do it some good.
Yeah, Jag seems to be interested in getting some of its old members back. This is hardly a secret, and I've never waffled about my personal belief that the old Jag was better for its posters, a number of whom are here today. I've said this here and on Jag, and that continues to be my belief. I think there are a number of former members who would be welcomed back; for whatever reason, Jag management seems to have gotten a bug up its collective butt about making some changes. IMHO, this is a good thing.
So...you were railing against Jag for being stupid enough to get rid of former members or let them leave, but now it's stupid to want them back? Yeah, that makes sense.
It would be stupid to openly use UG's messaging system for recruiting. If anyone from Jag is doing that, they ought to be educated.
But more to the point:
1. Is this actually happening? Have Jag members been openly using UG's email system to recruit members? Or is this just a suspicion?
2. Does UG have a policy against UG members being Jag members as well? That would seem kind of dumb, but the implication appears to be there.
...because there's no way a new member will ever be allowed access to old posts? Because it's simply not possible for the quality of discussion to ever rise to that level again? It's time to get off that high horse. Yeah, a number of those people aren't there anymore, but the unbelievably self-serving assertion behind the "false advertising" claim is that no current members or future members will ever again say anything that interesting, and that's just a stupid thing to believe.
Last edited:
hombre...
UG doesn't have any rule against it's members being jag members.. thats a rediculous comment. and yes, new members can access those threads. thats not the same as expecting to have an open dialog with "peter" or "mark" as some might expect. thats what i meant by false advertising. thats not a major issue but you should know that i like to throw little jabs (ask mike tyson, they do add up during a fight).
hombre... don't know how good your memory is but if you remember enough, i never had any disagreements with jag staff as long as i was there. i didn't like what they were doing but unlike mr P i was relatively silent (yes people, Ozzy was a quiet type once) about those changes. most of my bitterness towards jag only occurred over the last few months, long after i let my membership expire and that anti semitic thread (which btw mysteriously dissappeared last week) thats been tossed around as a reason for some prominent members exits. most of that bitterness has been because of the whole julies april war. a war that was instigated by some higher-up's in jag. now you can say that i'm biased because of my ties to april and i'm honest about that (which is more than i can say for others), but it's the fact that they absolutely show favoritism towards julies to such a degree that they would pull that shit and jag not even try to reign any of them in. they all come here and scream about how "april can post and april has ads"... well of course she does! she pays for those ads just like anyone else. if any of you know slinky you know he's not giving anyone anything for free. and those few who also have ads are also entitled to post as they wish. thats not a secret deal... it's been posted on the board before. if you pay for an ad or banner than you’re more welcome to post than those who don't. so there is no proof whats-o-ever of any other connection between UG and april.
Now jag/julies is a whole different story…. with jag it's been proven that they share servers with julies as well as tons of speculation of other wrong doings that I won’t get into because it is mostly speculation. but thats my beef with jag... they're not being honest to it's members. and normally i could care less if a web board is honest with me…. like with bigdog, but the difference is....I'M NOT PAYING TO BE ON BIGDOG LIKE I AM WITH JAG. i am an easily forgiving person. but you have to show me something to regain that trust. hey.. i offered tank commander an olive branch here on UG... but he turned it down thru his actions on the board. if i can offer it to him i can offer it to anyone. but you gotta show me something first.
1) fess up about candide...... slinky posted an e-mail from candide where she admits to being jag staff. she also posted obviously fake reviews as infobooth to gain access, and if she didn't, than that proves that jag staff definitely knew of HER and allowed her to have premium access and to attack their members (me for starters). i also know she still gets preferential treatment on the non-members board because i saw with my own eyes a few posts get edited and deleted because someone said something only slightly negative about her this past week.
2) fess up about john b........... hasn’t julie told enough people that mm/mc and john b are the same person. where do you think that rumor came from? every time she's pissed at him she rants to her clients about him. She’s told no less them a dozen people that I know of about mm/jb. Now I could care less if mm goes to julies and wants to post his review under an assumed name (I do it all the time), but don’t use that assumed name for deceitful reasons.
3) fess up about julies..... it's now a known fact that julies and jag have common interests. they share servers for one, and anyone with any knowledge in this field can check that for themselves. do you think i'd lie about something like that if it weren't so easily proven? i'm sure there's more than enough people on this site who possess the know how to check for themselves. see rufus's thread on that topic where he explains it better than me.
hombre... i'm only bringing this up with you because i know your not one of the foolish people, you know I always highly regarded your reviews and comments on jag. and i honestly believe your one of the few who has an open mind enough to hear me out and give me a reasonable response (I’d pose these questions to Aristotle but he’s heard it all before (and not from me either) and I don’t think we’ll be hearing from him around here anyway). but any flat out denial of these things when there is so much hard evidence is just not something *I* (or others) are willing to except…. And when it comes to convincing those great posters that this stuff doesn’t exist, it’s not going to happen… they’re a lot smarter than those who wish to bury their heads in the sand and Aristotle knows that very well. You want to rebuild jag, that’s fine, as I said months ago in one of rufus’s threads… I thought it could be saved and returned to a useful source of information… but you just can’t do it until you right the wrongs that have been done, or even admit that they have been done. i may seem to take this a bit harder than some but you have to understand that i was there before most and even before the current jag staff was. i go back to the rufus days as Mad Chaos and before they had a numbered IP as their web address, so for me it's a little more than just another board war.... i really havn't started any discussion about jag, i have commented but only to inject the truth.... this is one war that i prefer not to fight.
btw... having candide representing jag in any fashion is a huge mistake. just read some of her non-sense that she's posted of late. being involved with her serves jag no purpose other than to make them look bad. and her constant attacks of jag members or former jag members while serving as jag staff is reprehensible. her conduct on jag was one thing.. but once i relized that she was jag staff while doing it, was one of the main reasons i choose to leave. not to say that posts like the one directed towards mr P (above) as well as the anti semite thread didn't add into my decision.
UG doesn't have any rule against it's members being jag members.. thats a rediculous comment. and yes, new members can access those threads. thats not the same as expecting to have an open dialog with "peter" or "mark" as some might expect. thats what i meant by false advertising. thats not a major issue but you should know that i like to throw little jabs (ask mike tyson, they do add up during a fight).
hombre... don't know how good your memory is but if you remember enough, i never had any disagreements with jag staff as long as i was there. i didn't like what they were doing but unlike mr P i was relatively silent (yes people, Ozzy was a quiet type once) about those changes. most of my bitterness towards jag only occurred over the last few months, long after i let my membership expire and that anti semitic thread (which btw mysteriously dissappeared last week) thats been tossed around as a reason for some prominent members exits. most of that bitterness has been because of the whole julies april war. a war that was instigated by some higher-up's in jag. now you can say that i'm biased because of my ties to april and i'm honest about that (which is more than i can say for others), but it's the fact that they absolutely show favoritism towards julies to such a degree that they would pull that shit and jag not even try to reign any of them in. they all come here and scream about how "april can post and april has ads"... well of course she does! she pays for those ads just like anyone else. if any of you know slinky you know he's not giving anyone anything for free. and those few who also have ads are also entitled to post as they wish. thats not a secret deal... it's been posted on the board before. if you pay for an ad or banner than you’re more welcome to post than those who don't. so there is no proof whats-o-ever of any other connection between UG and april.
Now jag/julies is a whole different story…. with jag it's been proven that they share servers with julies as well as tons of speculation of other wrong doings that I won’t get into because it is mostly speculation. but thats my beef with jag... they're not being honest to it's members. and normally i could care less if a web board is honest with me…. like with bigdog, but the difference is....I'M NOT PAYING TO BE ON BIGDOG LIKE I AM WITH JAG. i am an easily forgiving person. but you have to show me something to regain that trust. hey.. i offered tank commander an olive branch here on UG... but he turned it down thru his actions on the board. if i can offer it to him i can offer it to anyone. but you gotta show me something first.
1) fess up about candide...... slinky posted an e-mail from candide where she admits to being jag staff. she also posted obviously fake reviews as infobooth to gain access, and if she didn't, than that proves that jag staff definitely knew of HER and allowed her to have premium access and to attack their members (me for starters). i also know she still gets preferential treatment on the non-members board because i saw with my own eyes a few posts get edited and deleted because someone said something only slightly negative about her this past week.
2) fess up about john b........... hasn’t julie told enough people that mm/mc and john b are the same person. where do you think that rumor came from? every time she's pissed at him she rants to her clients about him. She’s told no less them a dozen people that I know of about mm/jb. Now I could care less if mm goes to julies and wants to post his review under an assumed name (I do it all the time), but don’t use that assumed name for deceitful reasons.
3) fess up about julies..... it's now a known fact that julies and jag have common interests. they share servers for one, and anyone with any knowledge in this field can check that for themselves. do you think i'd lie about something like that if it weren't so easily proven? i'm sure there's more than enough people on this site who possess the know how to check for themselves. see rufus's thread on that topic where he explains it better than me.
hombre... i'm only bringing this up with you because i know your not one of the foolish people, you know I always highly regarded your reviews and comments on jag. and i honestly believe your one of the few who has an open mind enough to hear me out and give me a reasonable response (I’d pose these questions to Aristotle but he’s heard it all before (and not from me either) and I don’t think we’ll be hearing from him around here anyway). but any flat out denial of these things when there is so much hard evidence is just not something *I* (or others) are willing to except…. And when it comes to convincing those great posters that this stuff doesn’t exist, it’s not going to happen… they’re a lot smarter than those who wish to bury their heads in the sand and Aristotle knows that very well. You want to rebuild jag, that’s fine, as I said months ago in one of rufus’s threads… I thought it could be saved and returned to a useful source of information… but you just can’t do it until you right the wrongs that have been done, or even admit that they have been done. i may seem to take this a bit harder than some but you have to understand that i was there before most and even before the current jag staff was. i go back to the rufus days as Mad Chaos and before they had a numbered IP as their web address, so for me it's a little more than just another board war.... i really havn't started any discussion about jag, i have commented but only to inject the truth.... this is one war that i prefer not to fight.
btw... having candide representing jag in any fashion is a huge mistake. just read some of her non-sense that she's posted of late. being involved with her serves jag no purpose other than to make them look bad. and her constant attacks of jag members or former jag members while serving as jag staff is reprehensible. her conduct on jag was one thing.. but once i relized that she was jag staff while doing it, was one of the main reasons i choose to leave. not to say that posts like the one directed towards mr P (above) as well as the anti semite thread didn't add into my decision.
Last edited:
Re: OK, let's do it...
The only place where there is/was any "implication" of this is over at JAG, ( and now caried over here by you ) where some members seem to want this to be the "implication". I sincerely don't understand how anyone with half a brain would translate "It has come to our attention that another board is "recruiting" members of UG using the UG email function. If you are contacted in this manner, please inform us immediately. Anyone using UG email for this purpose will have their accounts terminated immediately and permanently" into "you can't be a member of UG and JAG". It's just nonsensical. But then, it is coming from the "Slinkybender turned me into a newt" crowd. Considering that the vast majority of JAG members are UG members, it's just absurd on its face. However, you seem to want to trot out this scarecrow so you can knock him down.
It's funny that JAG staff feel free to come to UG and post, but when anyone deemed by JAG to be "UGers" comes to JAG ( the non-members board ) most of the time their posts get deleted. Why is that ?
And I can tell you that in at least two instances that I know of, the UG email system was used for JAG recruitment.
I also have to say that I think you are off base in your last paragraph. I don't see where your assertions are being made by anyone but you ( i.e. "no current members or future members will ever again say anything that interesting" ). If the discussions are being held out as "this is what you can expect to be involved in if you join", then having discussions which are mainly populated by folks no longer there is misleading. If it's labelled as "this is how things used to be around here, and we're trying to get back to what it once was", that would be more accurate. But which one is the "average guy" going to take away from :
The purpose of the Classic Jag threads is to give you a "glimpse" behind the curtain. When you become a Premier JAG member you will have access to the most up to date provider reviews and an archive of over 40,000 reviews dating back to 1997. You will also have access to the Premier JAG member discussion board. As these threads will demonstrate, we have an entertaining, informative and lively discssion board.
All member names and providers have been changed to protect their privacy. We have also edited some "personal" information and content as well. Since these are discussions that have run their course we ask that you do not post to the thread, but rather post to the corresponding thread that bears the name "Comments on (discussion)". We welcome your opinions and comments and look forward to all potential new members. Please also note that these discussions will be rotated regularly and will only remain on the non-members board for only a week after the thread is complete. Enjoy Classic JAG.
Maybe I'm reading wrong, but this sure looks like "present tense" to me. I'm sure that you can twist it, knowing what actually is inside to have the proper meaning, but that's cetainly not what comes across.
And as long as we're asking questions:
Are you now JAG staff ? I think that's a valid question given the circumstances.
The only place where there is/was any "implication" of this is over at JAG, ( and now caried over here by you ) where some members seem to want this to be the "implication". I sincerely don't understand how anyone with half a brain would translate "It has come to our attention that another board is "recruiting" members of UG using the UG email function. If you are contacted in this manner, please inform us immediately. Anyone using UG email for this purpose will have their accounts terminated immediately and permanently" into "you can't be a member of UG and JAG". It's just nonsensical. But then, it is coming from the "Slinkybender turned me into a newt" crowd. Considering that the vast majority of JAG members are UG members, it's just absurd on its face. However, you seem to want to trot out this scarecrow so you can knock him down.
It's funny that JAG staff feel free to come to UG and post, but when anyone deemed by JAG to be "UGers" comes to JAG ( the non-members board ) most of the time their posts get deleted. Why is that ?
And I can tell you that in at least two instances that I know of, the UG email system was used for JAG recruitment.
I also have to say that I think you are off base in your last paragraph. I don't see where your assertions are being made by anyone but you ( i.e. "no current members or future members will ever again say anything that interesting" ). If the discussions are being held out as "this is what you can expect to be involved in if you join", then having discussions which are mainly populated by folks no longer there is misleading. If it's labelled as "this is how things used to be around here, and we're trying to get back to what it once was", that would be more accurate. But which one is the "average guy" going to take away from :
The purpose of the Classic Jag threads is to give you a "glimpse" behind the curtain. When you become a Premier JAG member you will have access to the most up to date provider reviews and an archive of over 40,000 reviews dating back to 1997. You will also have access to the Premier JAG member discussion board. As these threads will demonstrate, we have an entertaining, informative and lively discssion board.
All member names and providers have been changed to protect their privacy. We have also edited some "personal" information and content as well. Since these are discussions that have run their course we ask that you do not post to the thread, but rather post to the corresponding thread that bears the name "Comments on (discussion)". We welcome your opinions and comments and look forward to all potential new members. Please also note that these discussions will be rotated regularly and will only remain on the non-members board for only a week after the thread is complete. Enjoy Classic JAG.
Maybe I'm reading wrong, but this sure looks like "present tense" to me. I'm sure that you can twist it, knowing what actually is inside to have the proper meaning, but that's cetainly not what comes across.
And as long as we're asking questions:
Are you now JAG staff ? I think that's a valid question given the circumstances.
Last edited: