Slinky's announcement

[Casper]

Observation from a *non JAG member:

From everything I've read about JAG, the main question should not be why would UG cares if it's memebers post on JAG, but rather why should ex-JAG members go back. If you do, then it's like rewarding them for pulling all the crap that apparently went down before UG started up shop. Yeah they say it's better not yadda yadda yadda, but like women, if you leave you're ex and now you're with someone else, why go back ?

My comment of course comes from a limited point of view since I'm not now nor *ever was a JAG member (*actually I was a member at one point but used it at most three times and was as now keeping mysaelf out of all the drama that's played out on the boards)

GOOD TIMES
PEACE OUT
C

 

[hombre]

Originally posted by slinkybender

And as long as we're asking questions:

Are you now JAG staff ? I think that's a valid question given the circumstances.

In other words, "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of JAG staff?"

No.

If everyone who got asked that question here was Jag staff, Jag staff would be pretty friggin' huge. I notice even Casper feels it necessary to pre-deny Jag membership. Does every discussion here have to devolve to that level?

And I can tell you that in at least two instances that I know of, the UG email system was used for JAG recruitment.

"was used for JAG recruitment" as in, someone actually and explicitly tried to convince an UGger via the email system? Or as in, there was some email traded and shortly afterwards the UG member showed up on Jag? Or as in, someone else told you he had it on good authority that it happened?

Well, if it's the first thing, then it's obviously impolite and dumb; the other ones aren't worth taking seriously. And "Anyone using UG email for this purpose will have their accounts terminated immediately and permanently" sounds like a pretty extreme response to impolite and dumb. So you're gonna go postal on someone for being rude, but banning dual membership is "absurd on its face"? Sheesh.

I notice you didn't actually deny it, though.

See how stupid this can get?

As far as the false advertising thing goes, I suppose I can see how it could be read that way. I will try to use my Gadfly-In-Residence status over there to get it rephrased. It would bug me to have someone go in with that impression.

Originally posted by Ozzy
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

Look, if I heard any of this stuff coming from someone who didn't appear to have a grudge as wide as the Grand Canyon, I'd take it more seriously. Until that happens, it's like one of those really ugly divorces where one party simply can't portray the other in anything but the worst possible light. You just tune that shit out, even if some of it may actually be true.

 

[Casper]

HOMBRE: I am not pre-denying JAG membership but I want TO BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE in relation to the title on my reply. In my case, you've read too much into my post. If I wanted to deny or pre-deny anything, I'd come right out and say it.

Peace Out
C

 

[Slinky Bender]

Originally posted by hombre


I notice you didn't actually deny it, though.

See how stupid this can get?

.

Yes, I certainly do, but only in your purposely trying to obfuscate stuff whch isn't unclear to begin with. I tell you what, I'll let everyone judge for themselves how unclear "And I can tell you that in at least two instances that I know of, the UG email system was used for JAG recruitment.", especially when compared to the previously mention 'mission statement' for Classic JAG.

As for "So you're gonna go postal on someone for being rude, but banning dual membership is "absurd on its face"? "... well that's just too far a stretch to even comment on.

As for "In other words, "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of JAG staff?"

No."

Fair enough, it's just hearing things like "Hombre Secreto
(who is using his newfound ability to influence JAG ....." and thinking that one seems to remember seeing that you have taken on the job of choosing and editing threads/reviews for posting on the non-members board leeds one to believe that that's not necessarily the case ( perhaps my memory is faulty ). However, if you could point out where "everyone ... got asked that question here was Jag staff", it might convince me a little more, since I really haven't seen much of that, much less making it "pretty friggin' huge".

 

[The Ghost of JAG]

Re: OK, let's do it...

Originally posted by hombre

Hard to take seriously coming from someone lacking the cojones to post under his actual handle

Maybe I should just call myself "anonymous" and reduce my post count by 75% for you to take me seriously.

Originally posted by hombre

A goof on "recruiting". Was it not clear that this was a joke?

This issue wasn't whether your post here was a joke. The issue is that you knew exactly what was being referred to, but "played dumb". It was shown to you, and your response is to ignore the evidence, but that seems to be what you are doing throughout the entire thread. The problem with playing dumb is that you run out of road very quickly, and people start to think you actually are dumb. I don't think that you are dumb, but I do think you insult us when you play dumb and assume we'll buy the BS.

But that's what "all of this" is about, anyway, isn't it ? When people assume that they can spew out all sorts of BS and that everyone will just believe it, and then when someone steps up and points out that the Emperor has no clothes, they get their head lopped off ?

 

[Ozzy]

if I heard any of this stuff coming from someone who didn't appear to have a grudge as wide as the Grand Canyon, I'd take it more seriously.

wait a second... you're not going to claim that *I'M * the only person you heard this from... are you? shit! i was one of the last to know about john b. same with candide (no one knew who she was). julies was/is pretty obvious though.

you know... there's this saying that an old puerto rican man once told me.......... i don't remember how it went in spanish but it's about this naive young boy who goes to the beach and all he see's is the water.

(and if you think my grudge is big.... you should hear from some of the guys you e-mailed.)


You just tune that shit out, even if some of it may actually be true.


you can't be serious? you seem forget that I'm paying them for honest info.




casper..... i'm there when i want to be there, i've only posted twice in the last year or so (and that was on the non members board last week) so i don't know if i'd ever post there again. the info on girls there isn't anything that isn't available anywhere else especially with *** and the A report. with the exception of a once in a blue moon case like janelle or mandie, both of whom have very little or no info available anywhere else. but the same could be said for just about any site. UG has it's patricia's and lisa's, every site has a few of their own home growns. basically the only thing worth anything over there besides the reviews (which are the same as ***) is the conversation.... and for one, it's not that good which is why they're dragging out old threads and commenting on them 2 or 3 years later.. and everyone i used to chat with or want to chat with...... is already here on UG. and with the exception of one or two... none of them are on jag right now. so like i said... they have a very tough sell and there's guys who won't even consider going back there to post now..... even if they threw them a freebie. (they might look though)

 

[hombre]

Insomnia sucks.

Originally posted by slinkybender

"So you're gonna go postal on someone for being rude, but banning dual membership is "absurd on its face"? "... well that's just too far a stretch to even comment on.

Are you saying with a straight face to a board full of whoremongers that there aren't real-world examples where both the person making a proposition and the person accepting it are both considered guilty?

I'm asking again: "was used for JAG recruitment" as in, someone actually and explicitly tried to convince an UGger via the email system? Or as in, there was some email traded and shortly afterwards the UG member showed up on Jag? Or as in, someone else told you he had it on good authority that it happened?

Fair enough, it's just hearing things like "Hombre Secreto (who is using his newfound ability to influence JAG ....." and thinking that one seems to remember seeing that you have taken on the job of choosing and editing threads/reviews for posting on the non-members board leeds one to believe that that's not necessarily the case ( perhaps my memory is faulty ).

Yeah, you caught me: they accepted a couple of my suggestions. So yes, I did jokingly refer to "newfound ability to influence JAG". Sadly, this ability does not include the ability to persuade Jag to exclude questionable reviews, but even I have my limits.

Was I willing to help get old discussion threads up? You betcha -- but as it happened, that task didn't fall on my shoulders. You follow the most minute details of the board, but just kinda forgot that part? How does that happen?

Originally posted by Ozzy

wait a second... you're not going to claim that *I'M * the only person you heard this from... are you?

I believe Rufus may have mentioned something, but I'm not really sure where he stands on the issue.

(sorry, couldn't resist.)

I'm more than willing to discuss it with anyone who *doesn't* have a bug up their ass about it, but I don't believe it's possible to have a productive conversation of that sort here. I'd welcome anyone who wants to msg or email me and is free of the aforementioned bug.

you seem forget that I'm paying them for honest info

Like there's a way to guarantee honest info? I'd be willing to pay for that.

 

[pswope]

(can't joke about such serious stuff)

 

[The Ghost of JAG]

By hombre secreto on Sunday, June 16, 2002 - 10:12 am:

I didn't say the dual-membership ban was happening, but I can see the potential for it. People (or boards) that feel threatened don't always have the best judgement. There are a couple of subjects on UG that seem to be impossible to discuss rationally there, and Jag is number one with a bullet.

 

[The Ghost of JAG]

I'm glad to see you are admitting that the only place where it occurred was in your mind. But that's not what you implied here. You want "rational discussions" of JAG here ? It's hard when you come on and turn them into irrational one's with the crap you've spewed in this one. It's getting hard to separate which stuff is you simply trying to play word games, and which stuff is outright lying.

 

[Ozzy]

"Like there's a way to guarantee honest info? I'd be willing to pay for that."



of course there's no gaurentee of anything... but the management should at least be honest about their agenda's if i'm paying them.

hombre... you seem unwilling to discuss this with someone who appears to have a bug (which is a cop out if you ask me), yet i'm trying to discuss it with someone who's in total denial. i'm only asking the questions because they need to be asked. there's plenty of people here who have no bug who would like to know, and who deserve to know the truth before they shell out $120.

at least i came here and tried to make some dialog. for someone who gets accused of going off on tangent's all the time, i came here and i think i was pretty reasonable with you in this thread, i told you i was willing to pass an olive branch if you would be willing to discuss a few issues that i and others had........ for my willingness to even go that far and do it without any rants.....it got me no where.


you know... it's not even about jag management anymore... it's about the people who are there now like you and littleguy and all the rest who want to tell me to basically stick my head in the sand or look the other way about what jag management is doing. it's thinking like that, that makes me miss jag even less. because that seems to be what jag is all about now...... a bunch of guys who are in denial and prefer to say nothing about it, and seem very content with that. well you're in there for free as well as a bunch of others who have the nerve to come here and attempt to convince people to pay $120 a year join or return and be lied to in exchange, so it's no big deal to you. maybe you should try shelling out the $120 a year and perhaps you'll start thinking differently. not only did you push me even further away from ever returning to jag but you probably just convinced a whole bunch of membership hopefuls not to waste their money as well. too bad cause if you would have been willing to even discuss this stuff and had convinced me and gotten me interested in returning, i'd bet you would have gotten a shit load of UG'ers to join jag...... you may think that no one listens to Oz because of all my rants and fights that i've had in the past, but people seem to ignore all of that bull shit when it comes to parting with their hard earned cash..... because i've learned recently that in the end, it's my honesty that really infuences people. and if you don't believe me, just ask patricia, brenda (BPC) and any other girl i've truthfully discussed here and what guys tell them was their final decision in seeing them.


maybe it's time Ari steps up to the plate to explain away jags issues, since he seems to be the only open minded person who's there. but after seeing his take on that anti semite thread (of which he claims not to have seen it) i'm afraid he's fallin head first into that same patch of sand. it's too bad that he's stuck in there alone now because that mind of his, is a terrible thing to waste on a bunch of people who choose to close theirs so willingly.




PS.... what's really funny is that here we are discussing returning to jag and trying to get people to join jag when jag isn't even there anymore.... mr Pitiful, mack, slinkybender, JC/TJ, justme, rufus, Hot4chicks, fletch, mrny and practically everyone else who made jag what it was aren't even there anymore, throw in thorn(who's till on jag), wsb (if he ever returns) as well as straightshooter, Social Register a few others who are here under different names now.... and they're all here on UG. so whats missing? a few thousand reviews that are upwards of 5 years old. we all know that any review over 6 months to a year is pretty much completely worthless since contact info changes and girls move to different houses or agencies or retire completely.

 

[pswope]

Originally posted by The Ghost of JAG
By hombre secreto on Sunday, June 16, 2002 - 10:12 am:

I didn't say the dual-membership ban was happening, but I can see the potential for it. People (or boards) that feel threatened don't always have the best judgement. There are a couple of subjects on UG that seem to be impossible to discuss rationally there, and Jag is number one with a bullet.

Hey why don't you guys set-up a PMB summit in a chatroom and work this out.


(anything to get Uncle Bob and NYClust back together)


This PMB Crossfire isn't going to get the job done.

 

[justme]

Ditto 'swope.

Now playing on a website near you... Whoreboardwars 2002: And you thought cat fights between thorozine addled prostitutes were ridiculous.

 

[Ozzy]

yes..... lets not talk about whore boards on a whore board.

 

[Rufus Moses]

let's return to first principles...

It is ironic that JAG is using "classic JAG" threads to try to revive that board. A huge recounting of details loses the forest for the trees. To understand this situation one must return to first principles...

JAG management wants to regain its old membership for good reason. But they still don't get it. The individuals they seek back didn't join JAG randomly, and it wasn't a random process that led to some being thrown out and some deciding to leave.

The "classic JAG" was the result of a carefully planned and constructed social order. The "classic JAG" culture was guided by some simple rules...

no supply side membership or posting
no "e-mail me" posts - share with all or not at all
no lurkers - everyone has to post reviews as a form of dues
no easy membership - you can't just buy your way in, you have to participate
reviews come first, discussion groups are just a nice bonus
management is honest with members and follows the same rules as everyone else

etc.

An attempt to bring back the old membership without the old *culture* is a non-starter. Because the root problems will remain.

So as important as the membership is, JAG's problems are not due to either the members who have stayed or the members who have left. The current management changed the "classic JAG" social order...the culture...and from this all the other problems took root. The problem isn't the membership, it is the leadership.

Want to restore JAG to "classic JAG"? Restore the old culture! And that has to start at the top with JAG management admitting its past failures and deceptions, and vowing to never again deceive its members. And then it has to reinstate the old culture, the old rules, and make sure that everyone, MC & MM & Aristotle included, follows them.

It is both as simple and difficult as that...

 

[justlooking]

Nyah nyah nyah.

 

[Ozzy]

to the guys on jag who are debating on whether to re-instate me and others who left jag....



let me make this clear... you have to have been banned to qualify for re-instatement... and since "VV" was never officially banned, it's more a matter of trying to convince "VV" to return (and collect his $120), not to re-instate.


i think it's quite hilarious that while jag is trying to bring back certain former members, that the posting membership (which is mostly in there for free) is in there casting their votes (as if they had any) for as to who jag should collect that $120 fee from.

 

[Slinky Bender]

speaking of irony........

Originally posted by Rufus Moses
It is ironic that JAG is using "classic JAG" threads to try to revive that board.

Why is it that I'm not surprised that the boys over on JAG fail to see the irony in that if they showed 1/5 the concern for the JAG posters who were run off of JAG for merely exressing concern over what appeared to be some questionable practices by JAG management, that they are now expressing for JAG members being thrown off of UG for doing something which is actually wrong*, then they wouldn't need to be consternating over "how to attract back" the "old JAG posters" who are no longer there, or engaging in the Sub Rosa use of UG email to effect that end, to begin with ? (i.e. because they would still be there ).

*Although this appears to be mostly a Red Herring, anyway. Why such concern over UG keeping it's members ? JAG is so concerned about UG getting rid of people that it feels it should go recruiting them using UG email ? Well, I guess it's to be expected considering the current state of affairs over there. But this certainly is not over any real concern for those, or any, posters.