ManToMan Post MIA?

[Guest IM_Moore]

I replied to a post by Dave of Man To Man ... several others had replied as well. The post was not very nice and myself and the others who responded remarked about this. Now the enitire thread is gone. A bit of slight of hand for an advertiser who made a huge mis-calculation? Very distrubing indeed.

 

 

PS I will email each of you who had replied so you can voice your opinions as well.

[+ deej]

Dave's original post was borderline libel. I suspect HooBoy deleted the thread on that principle alone.

 

The rules do say that HooBoy and Daddy are the final arbiters of appropriateness.

[mmk]

I was one of those people who did respond to that thread and thinking on it I can see where it could have been deemed libelous, but what if Dave would have posted all of that info about the nameless escort as a review and it got published? In fact, could not any negative review published here be deemed libelous? If I meet up with Escort X (the rejected member of the X-Men - his mutant powers of escorting were not needed to combat Magneto) and I submitted a negative review about him, couldn't that escort have a case against me? (I am not a law student or a lawyer so any simply put legalese would be appreciated.) Thanks.

[Guest jc92103]

The thread needed to be pulled sooner. It was the same as if we posted a negative review based on second hand information. This is not the place to air personal conflicts. x(

[Guest SD Mike]

>The thread needed to be pulled sooner. It was the same as if

>we posted a negative review based on second hand

>information. This is not the place to air personal

>conflicts. x(

 

 

Oh MY God. That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. This place has been used to air every conceivable personal conflict under the sun.

 

I'm no lawyer either, but the board seems to have more than a few and maybe one of them can weigh in on this. A contract is not valid and binding if it involves illegal activity. Wouldn't the libel laws be applied the same? How could an escort, operating under a "stage name" make a case about being libeled for not "producing wood" and demonstrating improper hygiene?

 

I think I've heard the lawyers say that truth is an absolute defense against libel. Well, this is NOT second hand knowledge. I've been there and done that. While Dave's post was harsh...it was NOT untrue.

[HooBoy]

>A bit of slight of hand for an

>advertiser who made a huge mis-calculation? Very distrubing

>indeed.

>

>

 

For what its worth, I did not pull it.

 

So take your advertiser theory and shove it. x(

[Guest IM_Moore]

>>A bit of slight of hand for an

>>advertiser who made a huge mis-calculation? Very distrubing

>>indeed.

>>

>>

>

>For what its worth, I did not pull it.

>

>So take your advertiser theory and shove it. x(

 

Well, knowing this makes me feel a bit better about this forum that I have had problems with in the past for these types of situations. I have no reason at all to doubt you as you are very outspoken when you have in the past pulled a thread.

 

I have been trying to keep an open mind lately haven't you noticed how nice most my posts have been Really!

 

Its sudden absence cannot be blamed on the new software ... I have not noticed any other threads missing. So what do you feel happened to it?

[Guest ManToManEscorts]

Hello Guys!

 

For whatever it's worth, I asked NO ONE to remove the thread about Rick, nor would I have asked that to be done.

 

Since Deej and HooBoy have each denied removing the thread, I am just as baffled as everyone else as to what happened. But I did NOT use my influence as an advertiser to coerce Hooboy or any of the Powers That Be into doing such a thing. These guys are ALL too savvy and upstanding to bow to that kinda of pressure -- which is one of the many reason I love this site.

 

I agree with IM Moore that my post was not "nice", however I stand behind every word that I said -- I spoke the truth. It was no more harsh than many MANY of the reviews posted herein.

 

Anyhow, before the thread was removed, I thanked those who supported me, and acknowledged those who offered "constructive" criticism -- and not just bitchy snide remarks.

 

Anyhow, i'm off to bed. I think I've said enough already.

 

Nite

 

 

Dave

http://www.ManToManEscorts.com :'(

[Guest Esc_Tracker]

MMK,

 

I think you are missing the point. First hand and second hand info are not the same. Dave is not an escort client, and his post was not a review. He was repeating supposedly negative comments he had received from unidentified third parties who could have ulterior motives for complaining (like wanting Dave to give them a refund). There is no way to verify such information, and as such Rick would not be able to defend himself. No reviews based on second hand information would be allowed precisely for this reason.

 

I know Rick has reviews on this site though I haven't checked them. Do so and see what those who have actually *been* with Rick have to say about him. If you are tempted but still have concerns, call or e-mail Rick and discuss them with him. Don't simply rely on unverifiable hearsay.

 

Complaining about Rick bypasing Dave's agency was perfectly legitimate because it related directly to Dave's one to one business relationship with his escort. Unless Dave does "casting couch", however, he had no grounds for making the other comments.

 

And note that this is not an attack on Dave. If one of us had approached Dave privately for info on Rick, that would have been one thing. Trashing someone whom you have just fired with second hand information in a public forum is just graceless, however, and I hope Dave will think twice before doing it again. Life is a learning experience.

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

Oh honey, you are the star player here at airing personal conflicts:+

[mmk]

where exactly is Rick reviewed here on this site?

[Guest Esc_Tracker]

Sorry MMK, you seem to be right. I stand corrected. I could have sworn he had three or four reviews by now. Well, that's what I get for not checking.

 

In the absence of a review, I guess Dave's comments are all you have to go by.

[Guest starfucker]

>where exactly is Rick reviewed here on this site?

 

Rick was never reveiwed on this site although his name has come up in previous threads. Here is an opinion I posted on Oct 1:

 

>>Oct-01-01, 04:27 PM (EST)

 

3. "RE: Rick, Tino, Christopher in San Diego"

In response to message #0

 

 

I was interested in Rick after seeing him in the flick FLORIDA ERECTION. His screen name is Rick Ritter and he has done a few films for Dirk Yates/All Worlds.

 

I can't relate any first hand experience but I definitely noticed his clumsiness and lack of erection in more

recent film releases. He also appears to have an acne problem and has been coached on body hair clipping. I was told he is straight/bi and unwilling to bottom.

 

His furry butt had me salivating but I decided not to hire him considering the above factors. If you're into

sucking straight boy dick, you will probably be satisfied but that doesn't do it for me." <<

 

A URL for a photo of Rick:

 

http://www.allworldsvideo.com/awv/Detail.bok/00daeff398f25097c91003947716887?&category=All&keyword=rick+ritter&keywordoption=AND&price=All&start=1&total=1&no=1076

 

In a recent string (that seems to have disappeared) Dave, the owner of Man To Man Escorts announced that he had fired Rick and included a list of reasons - among them complaints about Rick's erection inability and poor hygiene. Rick apparently will be marketing himself with a personal website and Dave @ M2M issued a Buyer Beware notice.

 

Some of the forum readers here jumped on Dave with accusations of vindictiveness and unprofessional agency airing of dirty laundry. Personally I applaud Dave's Tell All. In absence of any credible reviews it confirms my decision not to hire this escort and I have saved $200.

[Guest need2Btopped]

The law of libel is, to a great extent, governed by the First Amendment. Everyone has a First Amendment right to express their opinion; accordingly, opinion is not capable of constituting libel. It would not be libel to say, e.g., "I think he's a lousy escort," or "I think his reviews are inaccurate and overblown," or "I think he's a bit too long in the tooth to be charging what he charges." You get the idea. Expressions of fact, however, can be the subject of libel so long as they are untrue; but if true, expressions of fact, like opinion, are absolutely protected from liability for libel. Thus, "He never showed up," "He was on drugs when he arrived," "His dick is just 4 inches long," are capable of constituting libel if untrue. The exception to the protection given to opinion is when you commit what is known as "libel per se," i.e., accusing the other person of loathsome or horrendous things. In that situation, the law says one cannot shield the libelous statement by dressing it in the guise of "opinion" or qualified language. In a famous case, the Village Voice once published an article that said a judge was "probably corrupt." When sued by the judge, the Voice's defense was that the word "probably" indicated opinion. No good, said the court: one is incapable of having an "opinion" that a person is a criminal; the person either is a criminal or isn't. Accordingly, saying that "I think he stole my wallet," or "He probably has crabs," or "In my opinion, he's murdered every client he's ever been with," if untrue, would constitute libel.

 

All of the foregoing is the long way of saying that if you're going to bad-mouth someone: (a) expressing your opinion is okay, and (b) telling facts that are true is okay too.

 

BUT the practical warning -- one that employers expecially should heed -- is that in our wonderful country anyone can sue anyone for anything irrespective of how meritless the claim, and the loser does not pay the winner's attorney's fees. If you get sued it takes lots of money to get un-sued. So the lesson to the wise is, avoid inflamatory conduct that might cause a lawsuit. Employers are well advised simply to say that Employee X no longer works for them and has moved on. Getting into the why's and wherefore's of an employee's departure can cause expensive trouble.

 

On the question of escorts specifically, I do not know whether one who engages in an illegal activity is incapable of suing for libel in connection with that illegal activity. My sense is that statements concerning the legal part of escorting ("He took my money but never showed up," "We agreed that he would be with me for 90 minutes, but he left after an hour") could constitute libel if untrue, while those concerning the illegal part of escorting ("I paid to get a blow job, but then he refused" "We agreed that he would top me, but then he refused") even if untrue would not be actionable as a matter of public policy. I guess I'll give you the ultimate lawyer's answer: IT DEPENDS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.:-)

[phage]

Thanks for the info Need2. I figured it would be about as clear as mud. You gotta love the law!