TBD on Nerve.com
- Thread starter justbill_redux
- Start date
something odd
The article refers repeatedly to posts left by a particular provider, Faye Desiree. In fact, the author says that she was the author of "the first note I saw." At the end of the article, the author explains that the police busted TBD "last June." This makes it clear that the article was written pretty recently.
The odd thing is that Faye Desiree was one of the most legendary providers ever, based in the Silicon Valley area south of San Francisco, and very close to San Jose.
About a year ago, while on vacation in Hawaii, the car she was in was caught in a flash flood and she was tragically drowned. Lots of discussion about this was on TBD, and the SF-based board "the red room," or something very similar) was completely full of lots of tributes and personal remembrances.
(BTW, from her website and her reviews, it was widely assumed she was in her mid 30s, but the press reported her actual name and age. She was 51, and left a 19 year old daughter. There was a collection taken up for the daughter, and I believe a sizeable amount was collected.)
Bottom line: there is no way the author, writing recently, could have seen a Faye Desiree post. Perhaps the author is an old time TBD'r, and using an example of someone who can no longer face any legal troubles. Or perhaps something else is happening.
The article refers repeatedly to posts left by a particular provider, Faye Desiree. In fact, the author says that she was the author of "the first note I saw." At the end of the article, the author explains that the police busted TBD "last June." This makes it clear that the article was written pretty recently.
The odd thing is that Faye Desiree was one of the most legendary providers ever, based in the Silicon Valley area south of San Francisco, and very close to San Jose.
About a year ago, while on vacation in Hawaii, the car she was in was caught in a flash flood and she was tragically drowned. Lots of discussion about this was on TBD, and the SF-based board "the red room," or something very similar) was completely full of lots of tributes and personal remembrances.
(BTW, from her website and her reviews, it was widely assumed she was in her mid 30s, but the press reported her actual name and age. She was 51, and left a 19 year old daughter. There was a collection taken up for the daughter, and I believe a sizeable amount was collected.)
Bottom line: there is no way the author, writing recently, could have seen a Faye Desiree post. Perhaps the author is an old time TBD'r, and using an example of someone who can no longer face any legal troubles. Or perhaps something else is happening.
Re: something odd
Not true.
You can search posts in the archives.
Originally posted by donquixote04
Bottom line: there is no way the author, writing recently, could have seen a Faye Desiree post. Perhaps the author is an old time TBD'r, and using an example of someone who can no longer face any legal troubles. Or perhaps something else is happening.
Bottom line: there is no way the author, writing recently, could have seen a Faye Desiree post. Perhaps the author is an old time TBD'r, and using an example of someone who can no longer face any legal troubles. Or perhaps something else is happening.
You can search posts in the archives.
This is silly.
The author makes clear he's been reading TBD for a while. So he didn't have to see the Faye Desiree posts recently.
There's nothing ominous about writing now about posts that appeared a while ago. Maybe he wrote the first part of the article a while ago, put it aside for some reason or couldn't find a publisher, added the last part about the bust once that happened, and finally got it published now. Maybe he started taking notes a while ago but never got around to writing it until now (you can see why he'd think the Faye Desiree stuff he quotes is more interesting than what's appeared on that board recently). Maybe any of a million other innocent things happened.
But I don't see anything odd or suspicious about it.
The author makes clear he's been reading TBD for a while. So he didn't have to see the Faye Desiree posts recently.
There's nothing ominous about writing now about posts that appeared a while ago. Maybe he wrote the first part of the article a while ago, put it aside for some reason or couldn't find a publisher, added the last part about the bust once that happened, and finally got it published now. Maybe he started taking notes a while ago but never got around to writing it until now (you can see why he'd think the Faye Desiree stuff he quotes is more interesting than what's appeared on that board recently). Maybe any of a million other innocent things happened.
But I don't see anything odd or suspicious about it.
Last edited:
What would have made this article better, and I guess beyond "fantastically great", would have been if the writer actually did some investigation beyond simply skimming what is easily found on web postings. In particular, the stuff about OFC that is mentioned almost in passing, such as Kelly's relationships with providers and the various kinds of demands he made, would be a great target for an energetic investigative reporter. As it stands the article is merely fun. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Re: Re: Re: something odd
Is not!
Search function is available to anyone who registers. Thats different than joining -- no cost.
Originally posted by donquixote04
Is too!
The author of the article makes it clear he doesn't want to join TBD, but only go through the discussion board.
The search function is limited to those who have joined.
QED
Is too!
The author of the article makes it clear he doesn't want to join TBD, but only go through the discussion board.
The search function is limited to those who have joined.
QED
Search function is available to anyone who registers. Thats different than joining -- no cost.