What Do I do with This situation?

[Guest curious]

RE: What Some of You Have Been Waiting For

 

I was just wondering why you would question this post of Billyboy. What possible benefit or self-serving purpose would it serve? Billyboy admits here that he was going to have to cancel an appointment he made, maybe even without being able to warn the client.

 

Now if he would have ended the thread with something like he decided to skip the family emergency because an appointment with a client is sacred -or- that he talked the family member into postponing some operation-- that would be a whole different story.

 

Hey- I have a conspiracy theory for you. What if Skeptic and Billyboy are the same person who are using this message board to "attack" Billyboy so that all the readers will hire him in a mass protest against Skeptic.

 

Anyway, I hope both skeptic and billyboy continue to feel welcome to post anything they want to-- as should everyone else.

 

Peace

[Guest Skeptic]

Bravo, BostonGuy! Admirably put! A post that the hyperventilating name-callers ought to read and ponder. (Notice that I'm not citing anyone in particular here. If the ruby slipper fits. . .)

 

Of course we can agree to disagree! And I don't have to expand on that fine principle, or reiterate what all forums are for.

 

Grateful though I am that BG sees some integrity in my viewpoint, I must still point out that skepticism isn't quite the same as mistrust. It's closer to 'trust, but verify'--more cynical no doubt than BG's 'trust,' but hardly as doggedly negative as 'mistrust.' And it's a stance arrived at after long experience.

 

Maybe neither of us knows BillyBoy well enough to assess the sincerity of his 'guys-I-need-your-help' posts, but his ex, Barry, certainly ought to, and he gave us ample cause to raise an eyebrow at them during the 'Clarification' thread.

Unfortunately, right after the impartial Hoobody did his best to discredit Barry with some feline faux-sympathy about the 'pain' of breaking up, Barry's brilliant expose of Billy's M.O. was somehow lost when BigDaddy was mucking around in the archive. (BTW, BigDaddy himself seems to have got lost! Did he never wake up from his beauty nap? Has he wandered off into the chatroom, never to be seen again? How 'bout it, Hooboy?) In any case, it's a great pity that Barry can't do a de-construction of the richly layered text of 'What Do I Do?' in this forum. The Billyphiles would have a tougher job attacking my opinion.

 

However, again let me say that I have nothing whatsoever against BillyBoy and his large, happy clientele. Whenever Billy posts in a way that doesn't covertly peddle his superior professional services, I raise no objection and heap no scorn. And, as you see elsewhere, among the replies to his clever parody, I even have praise for his witty self-awareness--promo and all. Yes , it's true that I find his official portrait awfully cloying, but that's a matter of taste (non disputandum), and besides, if I always enjoyed poor Sandy Dennis, why should I decry the quivering vulnerability Billy seems so determined to project?

 

I hope my critics noticed that my original post to this thread was light-handed and almost tongue-in-cheek, and that I followed it immediately with another poking fun at my own reputation as Vlad the Impaler. It wasn't until the 'fuck yous' and 'fuck 'ems' and 'assholes' were lobbed at me by my otherwise tongue-tied opponents that Vlad returned to battle. And why not? Should I be made to look frightened off by the dud explosives sputtering at my feet?

 

In that regard, BG, you may be right in saying I'm unduly roughshod in trampling notions and people I disagree with. (In Billy's case, I'm probably using a baseball bat on a butterfly.)

But that has much more to do with literary style than truly felt animosity; and when people find out that I grew up reading Shaw, Alexander Wollcott, H. L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan, they tend to find me a bit less ferocious than many of you apparently do.

 

In any event, BG, thanks for posting so wisely and well to this discussion. As I see it, yours is everything a post should be!

[Boston Guy]

Boy -- to such kind praise, all I can say is "Thanks!" :-)

[Guest Shooter]

You win again, Flabby!

 

I do apologize for the nasty yet, regrettably, sincere comment. You see when someone attacks me (yes, even calling me a 'clucking old hen' for responding sincerely to Billy), my Irish ire gets up and I say very uncharacteristic things. I don't have the ability to be lighthearted like brianrj can or ignore it, like the others.

 

You see, since our exchange when you were Flabby on the old board when you slammed the contest and the site and many people in the process, (and don't pretend you don't remember, you aren't that forgetful!) I have managed not to respond to you as Hed or Dio or whoever. I realized then that you don't answer to logic as, at that time, you called all the responses to you 'illogical'. Even brianrj and I who were just requesting you clarify your criticisms. No names were called and yet you called our thoughtful posts illogical including denying you ever criticized the site...that is, until I posted, word for word, no fewer than six instances where you specifically criticized the site. You never bothered to respond. Admittedly, I gave a 'you win, I don't need the stress' but I figured HooBoy got tired of you and shut you up. Could it have been that you were not enough of a man to come back and say 'sorry, I was wrong and, while I don't owe you an explanation, I apologize for criticizing your accurate observations'? :-(

 

Then, as Hed, you slammed Billy repeatedly (don't deny they are slams. No one says those things and the things posted here when they, as you say, 'have nothing against him'!) in his 'clarification' thread. You continued to belittle anyone who responded in a supportive manner. I also believe that is the thread where you called Matt a 'dire looking twink'. Some people might consider that a compliment, Matt did not. Yet, you did not apologize or respond. You stopped posting in the thread, and I have no idea if it had a thing to do with it, when I posted my dismay at how gay men, who advocate and plead for diversity and tolerance, could be so intollerant of diversity among themselves. At least this time, you posted an apology of sorts claiming you never intended to cause this response. Isn't this also the thread where Rod Hagen threatened to break your arms if you slammed him? Maybe I'm mistaken there.

 

Now, as Skeptic, you're at it again. And still claiming you never say anything to deserve the arrows that fly your way!

 

BTW, you know full well that the BillyBoy posting the current 'I was going to keep quiet...' thread is not Billy the escort. Yeah, it might not be you but, while some people use mutiple screen names here, Billy uses 'Billy' and the reason for the title 'A Clarification' was because that post started with him explaining that the 'Billyboy' posting was not him. :-(

 

Who on the board, other than you and your aliases, insites such anger, name calling, and, in some extremes, hate? Note, I didn't use the word controversy or argument. Any review or point of view will spur some debate. Sometimes a good one. Yeah, there are those with the outstanding ability to respond with restaint, eloquence, or light-heartedness like BostonGuy and brianrj. Even in his 'Open Letter to Hed', BostonGuy asked you to think about playing well with others and not being so nasty (I know, very simplified but you know me mindless, illogical, and senseless!)

 

Again, I apologize for the very blunt and nasty comment. A couple of my worst personality traits are being too sensitive and finding it difficult to forgive myself and others and even more difficult to forget. Brianrj, Will, BostonGuy, Steve, and HooBoy...I'm working on it and hope I haven't offended any of you by what I've said in haste. Keep smilin'! Shooter :-)

[HooBoy]

RE: You win again, Flabby!

 

There WAS another Billyboy who was not the escort and the escort was Billy.

 

I deleted the BillyBoy and made the escort BillyBoy to cut down on confusion.

 

I think there was similar situation with Assmaster, where I had to make some changes in the names simply to maintain consistency with posters' handles.

 

HooBoy

[Guest Skeptic]

RE: You win again, Flabby!

 

Would someone closer to the oracle than I kindly explain this last pronouncement? It's a tad too cryptic for me.

 

How can two individuals log on to this message board using precisely the same name, but different passwords? I thought the software prevented this.

 

Or, more to the point: didn't the person who wrote the what-do-I-do posting above write the parody version of it, too? And if the parody is from another hand, whose hand is it? And how did he (or she)make off with Billyboy's identity?

 

Confidential to Shooter: If you'll be patient, I'll try to address all your points in one to three sentences each.

[HooBoy]

RE: You win again, Flabby!

 

The board is case sensitive.

 

If someone wants to log on as skeptic, instead of Skeptic, they can, but I will delete them when I catch it.

 

I hope this is not too cryptic for you. If it is, email me and I'll give you a detailed explanation once I have an hour to read what I assume will be a novel-lengthed email message. :-)

 

HooBoy

[Guest REGINA]

I Want to Bitch Slap Skeptic

 

Histrionics indeed!

 

Had writers such as Shaw and Woolcott written in run-on sentences and mindless drivel, then yes, you would indeed exemplify their style. Sadly, however, this is not the case. If you think the greatest of literary giants have infected your words, you are sadly mistaken.

 

The only thing I can count on from you is to be embarrassed into enlightenment from your tired, acerbic wit and room-temperature I.Q.

 

Would someone please drop a house on this witch and her numerous evil personalities?

 

By the way, Dorothy Parker would have found you common.

[Bilbo]

RE: I Want to Bitch Slap Skeptic

 

Lately, I've been finding that Skeptic has a certain "talent to amuse." In fact, I've had many a chuckle from this entire thread. And one of them must be at poor, overworked HooBoy slapping his forehead when he realized how simple the answer given here that worked was and how he had overlooked it. Skeptic is not pretending to be nice. He is nice. It's just that his version of common sense is not the same version the rest of us tend to work with. (And this has caused an ascerbic exoskeleton of protection which he wants to let us through but has trouble when we do things which are all too human, ie. silly.) Perhaps I can notice that easier since I have none of it myself, book learning but alas no common sense. Since I can't actually introduce y'all to my lover, who is sortof a halfway point between the two camps here, perhaps I could suggest the play, "Love! Valour! Compassion!" which I had only read and actually saw on stage for the first time last night. (Haven't seen the movie yet.) There is a character in there that if you really look at him with a sympathetic eye might go far towards explaining our friend Skeptic to you.

[Barry]

I guess I have to speak.

 

When I wrote my little "neither confirm nor deny" post, my intent was to lighten up a thread that was beginning to slide down that rocky road of foes and allies on either side of a clearly drawn battle line. Well I guess I won't be getting any offers from Letterman or Leno to write for their monologues. Now that Skeptic has suggested possible reasons for my post or silence as it were, I do feel personally compelled to clarify some points.

 

Yes I am the Billyboy "Ex". Unfortunately that fact was made public during a previous thread. I am not angry that it came out but I am disappointed in that it does change things relating to what and how I post. Allow me to explain.

 

I would not post anything about our relationship out of respect for his and my privacy. I will not again post anything specific to Billy simply because the knowledge of our past relationship will skew the credibility of what I write.

 

For those who agree with what I write, my "insider" status will somehow make my words gospel. For those that disagree with me, my "Ex" status will discredit my words as those of an embittered BF with an ax to grind.

 

What would be lost is the discussion, analysis, opinions, ideas and lively debate of the actual subject. I would become the subject as we have seen Skeptic become.

 

This is why I have CHOSEN to stay out of it. There is no "post-nuptial" pledge of silence. There is a post-nuptial promise to treat each other with respect. HB has not attempted to silence me. He hasn't even asked me to back off or keep quiet. Those that know me also know that anyone attempting to silence me would experience the laws of physics first hand, i.e., an equal and opposite reaction. This is MY CHOICE for the reasons stated.

 

As far as Hoo's post on the old "a clarification" thread......I can honestly say that I don't know his motive. To discredit me? Perhaps. To end the thread after 60 posts? Perhaps. What I do know is that his expression of feeling my pain was not false sympathy. I do know HB and we have communicated many times by email and phone. At the ending of the relationship he was very supportive, understanding and, I truly believe "felt my pain". Now before anyone accuses me of sucking up to HB let me tell you he says and does things that I do not agree with. But then again the opposite is also true. I can say the same about Skeptic, BG, Newbie, Brian and virtually every other poster here. I am not an unconditional supporter or detractor of anyone or anything.

 

As for my response to "a clarification". I was being totally honest in my analysis (some called it a deconstruction) of the original post. It was taken step by step and clearly based on what was stated in the original. I would have written the same thing had the poster been someone other than Billy. Would I have written it if Billy and I were still together? Probably not. I would, however have done the same "deconstruction" to his face. Do I regret my response? No, but with 2 qualifications. If I could turn back time (thanx Cher) I would have posted under a pseudonym. More importantly, I would not have added the few personal zingers that my pissy, bitter, evil twin told me to weave into the response. It only served to place in question the credibility I hold so dear.

 

Now as for the discussion of who should be allowed post here and what should or should not be posted. Don't go there people. Never attempt to silence anyone because you disagree and pray it never happens. With the exception of the privacy rules that have already been laid out there should be no enforced limits. The very basis of constitutional free speech is the right to freely DISAGREE. Without disagreement, there is no reason for free speech and indeed the very concept would be difficult, if not impossible to define. And similarly our legal system is adversarial by design.

 

Also let's not forget we are communicating on the INTERNET. While the WWW has opened the entire world to free speech, the communication is often limited to the typed word. There was a study showing that 60% of communication is visual (body language, facial expression, etc.)....30% is sound (tone, volume, inflection, etc.).....and only 10% are the words themselves.

 

I'm not all that quick witted so I have found that when confronted with a strong need to respond to a post I do the following. After I read the post for the first time, I step away for a few minutes. Get a drink, go pee, take the dog out. Then I come back and reread the post, twice more. Then I write my response. It still surprises me how often what I finally write is not what I was going to write originally. Usually it's because my interpretation or feelings on what was originally posted has changed. It may seem silly but it works for me.

 

Now I strongly agree with what Boston Guy has stated so eloquently. While some may not like Skeptic's style, he is logical and consistent. I certainly don't agree with everything he says or the way he sometimes says it. But his words (and those of many other posters) at least give me something to think about, and accordingly agree or disagee with. Post's which have a central theme of "asshole" or "fuck 'em" add nothing to either side of the discussion/debate. I must say that several contributors here have made me thankful that http://www.m-w.com (Merriam-Webster) is not a pay-per-use site. :-)

 

God, I'm going on and on. I need to go out and get a new BF before someone accuses me of having no life. I will continue to post and write reviews here. I see and appreciate the value of this site, it's host and it's many contributors. Just please don't ask me to add or respond to anything that involves my personal life, past or present.

 

Now have at me......I can take it. }>

 

Barry

[Bilbo]

RE: I guess I have to speak.

 

In case I am one of the ones who is sending you to m-w, please allow me to somewhat apologize. I am going through a slightly trying time with my legal entanglements, one which I find a little demeaning, and one of my natural reactions is for my word choice to swing over towards the multisyllabic and all its snobby uppercrust overtones.

[Boston Guy]

RE: You win again, Flabby!

 

To Shooter, Regina, Skeptic, Hooboy, Brian, Billyboy, and everyone else who has posted to this thread (but especially to Shooter):

 

I would like to suggest that we re-examine for a moment precisely why it is that we post here and read what others have written. Perhaps I was mistaken, but I thought it was supposed to be fun. I thought it was about an exchange of information that might be useful, interesting, entertaining and, yes, fun.

 

I don't remember the part where it's supposed to turn into a vicious hatefest. And I don't mean to only lean on you, Shooter; I was a little embarassed when I just read Regina's last post. But, Shooter, I recommend highly that you consider calming down and taking all of this way less seriously. I was astonished when you mentioned the name of that old thread I had created (An Open Letter to Hed) -- I had completely forgotten that thing had existed! And that's what you need to do as well. Take this stuff with a huge grain of salt, accept that we can disagree on lots of things -- virtually everything -- and it's still ok. And stop letting it eat away at you.

 

For God's sake, let go of posts that are months or weeks old. Stop remembering them and concentrate on things that are more fun and more productive. If necessary, go away from the keyboard and go have fun! :-)

 

This is a just a bunch of guys posting on a message board. While we do try to make sense when we post here, what we write will little alter the course of just about anything at all.

 

Sure, as I said in a previous post, I think Skeptic is quite a skillful writer and he could get across his points quite well indeed without hurting feelings as much as he sometimes does. But we can only get angry or be hurt at what he or anyone else writes if we allow ourselves to. So again -- please, before we get or give ulcers to one another -- let's try and lower the animosity level about five notches.

 

(This is pretty much what I said to Jake a couple of days ago. He didn't like at all what I had posted and thought I was being a big windbag. Well, that's ok -- maybe I was. <G> But either way it didn't really matter -- what I wrote wasn't that important -- and I just thought he should stop obsessing and go do something more fun instead.)

 

Thank you.

[Guest lovemblond]

RE: I guess I have to speak.

 

No need to apologize Bilbo. I appreciate and enjoy your insight and posts. I have actually been having fun with the internet version of m-w. I haven't had to look up so many words since grad school and have been learning something to boot. :-)

[Guest Skeptic]

Sorry, still too cryptic

 

Well, I'm afraid that 'explanation' IS still too cryptic. Case sensitivity doesn't seem to have anything to do with the matter at hand.

 

And we hardly need to exchange emails of novel-length for you to explain how the 'Billyboy' of "What do I do" and the parody 'Billyboy' (identical name, no case-sensitive variants) could be two separate posters. If they ARE, that is. . .

 

Surely everyone deserves to know that. And I can't think of any reason why you, as the webmaster, would want to keep it from us.

 

Last week you (and many others here) acted as if having more than one identity was a sin against the Holy Spirit. I'd think that being able to assume someone else's ID is a much more dangerous duplicity.

[HooBoy]

RE: Sorry, still too cryptic

 

>>>we hardly need to exchange emails of novel-length for you to explain how the 'Billyboy' of "What do I do" and the parody 'Billyboy' (identical name, no case-sensitive variants) could be two separate posters. If they ARE, that is. . .

<<<

 

They are one and the same; They are both Billy the escort from Illinois who goes as Billyboy. They were written by him. Him meaning Billyboy, the escort from the state of Illinois. There is no other Billyboy on this board other than Billyboy, the escort from Illinois. He writes his own material.

 

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to leave the Department of Redundancy Department.

 

HooBoy

[Guest REGINA]

RE: I guess I have to speak.

 

Dear Boston Guy,

 

If I offended you by my latest post I am sorry. I do not, however, recant my statements. They were specific to a specific person and that's that. If you want humor, check out the jokes (literally) on the other forum. In fact, if you know any, please list them. The list is getting stale! Sorry if my prose extended beyond my normal postings of grunts and clicks; I'm reading about Existentialism and decided to be responsible for my own destiny.

 

And Barry, I certainly cannot claim to have the intimate experience with Billy that you do, I was simply responding to the numerous crucifixions to which he had been subjected. I have no knowledge of whether or not he deserves them, it was a knee jerk response. Again, if you were offended, I am sorry.

 

You have a dog? There's nothing like dog walking to relieve stress, other than sex!

[Guest Shooter]

Sorry, Skeptic!

 

Yep, Billy nailed me on that one and I apologize to you. My mistake!

[Guest Shooter]

Chastisement accepted!

 

Sorry, BostonGuy! My unforgiving little butt is climbing back behind that wall as we speak! :-(

 

See ya (much) later, Shooter

[Barry]

RE: I guess I have to speak.

 

REGINA dearest,

 

Thank you for your apology but none was necessary. I took no personal offense to your comments.

 

Walking Jesee is very relaxing. Now dear...you weren't suggesting that sex WITH Jesee would be even more stress relieving, were you? :o

 

Barry

[Boston Guy]

RE: Chastisement accepted!

 

Sorry, Shooter -- I think I wasn't clear.

 

I wasn't suggesting that you go away or put up any walls. Just that you accept that all of this is pretty unimportant in the big scheme of things and not let it get to you. Take the stuff here that's valuable to you or amusing to you and enjoy it -- and ignore the rest unless you feel like joining a dogfight from time to time. :-)

 

But don't let it eat away at you. Life's too short.

 

I always look forward to reading your posts and hope there will be lots more coming.

 

BG

[Traveller]

You've gotta go with Skeptic on this one ladies; however, hasn't HooBoy instituted a no response over 100 words policy. Less writing and more fucking. Finally, R's advice to Billy is perfect ("Fuck em") provided that Billy's received the snap-on tools set that I ordered for him.

[Guest Skeptic]

RE: Sorry, Skeptic!

 

No apology needed! I was just as much flattered as amused that both you & PR were so sure I had written it: as I said to Billy, I thought it was very well done, and I meant it.

 

But I'm still trying to figure out why Hooboy did his evasive best to avoid admitting it WAS Billy's work. And even when finally pinned down, he seemed pissed off at being made to answer a simple question with a simple answer. I think anyone who reads his three posts on this subject will agree that his attitude about the whole thing is a bit bizarre.

 

Maybe he shouldn't do this stuff up in a plane.

[Bilbo]

RE: I guess I have to speak.

 

It's like I like to tell my massage clients when they ask what the difference is between sensuous and sexual - Petting my cat can be a very sensuous experience, but if you really don't know the difference between sensuous and sexual, stay the hell away from him!

BTW, I have a chowchow named Champgne Deco Bard (Bard for short, after Shakespeare and because I like it when I am calling him and sound like I'm barking.) and a white mixed breed cat (although one of my friends convinced herself that he is or mostly is a rex) named Phantom (or Phantom Shadow Darling Dear for long, named after the Phantom of the Opera. I'd tell you why, but what is this about a limit on word counts??)