Your first post back after a ban shouldn't be self-promotion, even in jest
- Thread starter Sophia Belle
- Start date
Mods pick and choose who posts they wanna delete and who they wanna keep. Mods tell us to follow rules, yet the let certain people post what they want and nothing happens. She should have been banned when she posted her e-mail and contact in for in her own thread. Pretty sure thats why Sophia Belle thread is locked im guessing. But once again the fuckery with the mods picking and choosing what they keep whay they lock and who they ban. Lmao.... Now i understand why Mr. Wiggly has not come back yet. She should be ban 2nd or 3rd time myself i observe her not follow rules and nothing has happend. Smh.....
I wasn't advertising, I was totally just playing around. Lighten up some.
I was banned for posting email. That was totally innocent and never meant to break any rules. I'm not advertising on here. If y'all put as much energy in to your careers as you do into worrying what I post on a website and whether or not I get banned, you probably would be a millionaire retired at 25
#MindYourOwn #FocusOnYou
I was banned for posting email. That was totally innocent and never meant to break any rules. I'm not advertising on here. If y'all put as much energy in to your careers as you do into worrying what I post on a website and whether or not I get banned, you probably would be a millionaire retired at 25
#MindYourOwn #FocusOnYou
And just so y'all know, she is a great girl. I happen to think that the public trash talking is really unwarranted and if you have a problem with her performance, practices, or personal life choices, it would be much more tactful to pull her aside and voice your concern and opinion. She has no way to censor or defend all of this fairly. For all those who live perfect, honest, and respectable lives - this is not directed at you.
I understand your stance and I totally support sites that help the hobbyist be safe and comfortable. By all means, your privacy and safety are priority and the risks you have to assume personally are tremendous. But speculation, false accounts of details, and excessive trash talking is not warranted.
I just want to clarify something... I do not at all condone or support the behavior that everyone is upset about. That being said, just like I would do most anything to ensure your privacy, I just want you to consider the safety risk these conversations make her a target for. Losing good clientele is a hard blow to accept, but being front page news of the "creepy guys" newspapers is something that could potentially endanger any chances she has to turn things around personally or professionally. I'm not one to really get involved if it doesn't affect me, but I know her and I know that no matter what choices she makes that we don't agree with, she still deserves a fighting chance to change.
~Sophia
~Sophia
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and put my two cents in, but in an unofficial role for the moment, in order to clarify what just went down here beginning with Sophia's reentry on UG.
First off, Sophia, you are correct that you were banned for posting your email. That is a rules violation, because it is considered self-promotion, an unauthorized form of advertising:
The ONLY people who are allowed to post promotional posts of any kind are paying advertisers. This includes doing the public service of pointing out that someone has placed an ad somewhere else.
So, in essence, you were banned for advertising. Given that history, I can certainly understand why AHF jumped on your post immediately. because to him and probably others it looked like you were going down that road again. But you quickly explained yourself by basically dismissing it as a bad attempt at humor. Still, based on your past track record, can you blame the members for becoming alarmed that you were promoting yourself again or even just hijacking the thread? Your comments in your thread led us to expect more from you as to your level of understanding about the business and life in general. I think your zeal to get back in our good graces again led you astray here. Let's hope Slinky is forgiving enough to overlook this faux pas, too, lest you find yourself banned again or suspended.
Secondly, strongisland, she was banned, as she and I just explained. Therefore, you are wrong in your surmising that she got away with violating the self-promotion statute. Conversely, by questioning the moderators, you yourself are guilty of a rules violation:
Badmouthing this site, arguing with moderators, complaining about the rules of this site, etc.
So, in a "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" manner, you should also be careful about what you post. Yes, I realize that you were just as alarmed about her behavior as AHF, but you stepped over the line when you made the issue about the mods. Especially since, the APM himself had already dealt with this.
Thirdly, as to the concerns being bantered around about the Bombshell, I see no reason why the members should not be made aware of risky behavior. Providers with drug issues can cause a myriad of problems for clients, not the least of which is dying or even just ODing in their presence, as kbeemer speculated. Plus, there's also the possibility of a client being caught up in a possession charge. Then there's the chance that the provider might pull a dash with the cash, as another girl has been reported doing. At the least, there's the issue of the quality of the session with a provider that's high. So, I think that discussions of this type are totally valid and with serious merit. On the other hand, I do not see how it is the responsibility of anyone on here to have to worry that this type of speculation is somehow going to interfere with the provider getting better as you propose, Sophia. I think that task is way above our pay grade. That said, if you want to throw in a good word for another provider and vouch for her, even to the point of asking us to back off, that seems okay to me.
Lastly, this thread has really gotten off topic this last page. Usually when that happens, the thread would be closed. That will be up to one of the mods or Slinky himself. But for everyone's sake here, please let this be the last word on this particular issue regarding Sophia in this particular thread.
First off, Sophia, you are correct that you were banned for posting your email. That is a rules violation, because it is considered self-promotion, an unauthorized form of advertising:
The ONLY people who are allowed to post promotional posts of any kind are paying advertisers. This includes doing the public service of pointing out that someone has placed an ad somewhere else.
So, in essence, you were banned for advertising. Given that history, I can certainly understand why AHF jumped on your post immediately. because to him and probably others it looked like you were going down that road again. But you quickly explained yourself by basically dismissing it as a bad attempt at humor. Still, based on your past track record, can you blame the members for becoming alarmed that you were promoting yourself again or even just hijacking the thread? Your comments in your thread led us to expect more from you as to your level of understanding about the business and life in general. I think your zeal to get back in our good graces again led you astray here. Let's hope Slinky is forgiving enough to overlook this faux pas, too, lest you find yourself banned again or suspended.
Secondly, strongisland, she was banned, as she and I just explained. Therefore, you are wrong in your surmising that she got away with violating the self-promotion statute. Conversely, by questioning the moderators, you yourself are guilty of a rules violation:
Badmouthing this site, arguing with moderators, complaining about the rules of this site, etc.
So, in a "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" manner, you should also be careful about what you post. Yes, I realize that you were just as alarmed about her behavior as AHF, but you stepped over the line when you made the issue about the mods. Especially since, the APM himself had already dealt with this.
Thirdly, as to the concerns being bantered around about the Bombshell, I see no reason why the members should not be made aware of risky behavior. Providers with drug issues can cause a myriad of problems for clients, not the least of which is dying or even just ODing in their presence, as kbeemer speculated. Plus, there's also the possibility of a client being caught up in a possession charge. Then there's the chance that the provider might pull a dash with the cash, as another girl has been reported doing. At the least, there's the issue of the quality of the session with a provider that's high. So, I think that discussions of this type are totally valid and with serious merit. On the other hand, I do not see how it is the responsibility of anyone on here to have to worry that this type of speculation is somehow going to interfere with the provider getting better as you propose, Sophia. I think that task is way above our pay grade. That said, if you want to throw in a good word for another provider and vouch for her, even to the point of asking us to back off, that seems okay to me.
Lastly, this thread has really gotten off topic this last page. Usually when that happens, the thread would be closed. That will be up to one of the mods or Slinky himself. But for everyone's sake here, please let this be the last word on this particular issue regarding Sophia in this particular thread.