paying an escort in advance

[Guest Piltdown Man]

>Kinda of a bitter statement!

 

Kind of a facetious statement is what it was. Read the quote above it if you feel like tsk-tsking.

 

>I'm a firm believer in you get what you project.

 

Well that's a fine Lawrence Welk you're projecting. "And a one, and a two, and a kinda of a bitter song!"

[Guest Piltdown Man]

>Kinda of a bitter statement!

 

Kind of a facetious statement is what it was. Read the quote above it if you feel like tsk-tsking.

 

>I'm a firm believer in you get what you project.

 

Well that's a fine Lawrence Welk you're projecting. "And a one, and a two, and a kinda of a bitter song!"

[sdg]

Gee Piltdown kinda nice to be responded to even if I have no fucking idea of what your response means. But I get the impression you are more into being right about your statements that acknowledging that there may be atlernative views to them. I think I should be insulted at being compared to Lawerence Welk but damn dude at least he always has a smile and life is too fucking short not to try to smile. The fact that you feel you can not trust an escort to me indicates a lack of trust for all. Which I can't say I don't agree with but try not to let that be the rule that determines my relationships.

 

sdg

[sdg]

Gee Piltdown kinda nice to be responded to even if I have no fucking idea of what your response means. But I get the impression you are more into being right about your statements that acknowledging that there may be atlernative views to them. I think I should be insulted at being compared to Lawerence Welk but damn dude at least he always has a smile and life is too fucking short not to try to smile. The fact that you feel you can not trust an escort to me indicates a lack of trust for all. Which I can't say I don't agree with but try not to let that be the rule that determines my relationships.

 

sdg

[Guest Piltdown Man]

>Gee Piltdown kinda nice to be responded to even if I have no

>fucking idea of what your response means.

 

Because you seem like a nice (if confused) fellow, I'll take the time to explain it all. A "facetious" (from the Middle French facetieux) comment is one made in jest, or, "not serious". The facetious comment I originally made was in response to someone who thinks escorts cannot be trusted and can never be befriended. I thought that was an unfortunate position to take, and pointed out my distaste for that standpoint through sarcasm and absurdity, by suggesting that escorts should be brutalized. An extreme position meant to draw gasps from those such as you, and more importantly, those who would make definitive blanket statements like "escorts cannot be trusted and are not your friends."

 

>But I get the impression you are more into being right about your

>statements that acknowledging that there may be atlernative

>views to them.

 

One might say the same of you, only in that instance, whoever said it might be closer to correct. And in typical human fashion, you reinforce the stereotype that people will always attack what they don't understand. Whatever conclusions you've leapt to concerning what "I'm into" are surely you're concern, but please don't be upset with me because you fail to comprehend me.

 

>I think I should be insulted at being

>compared to Lawerence Welk, but damn dude, at least he always

>has a smile and life is too fucking short not to try to smile.

 

Being compared to Lawrence Welk is not an insult. I just think he talked funny, in a cute way, loveable little Pole that he was. If you reread your first reply to me, you'll notice a typo that renders your opening line Welkian. Now, being compared to, say, Don Quixote might be construed as derogatory. And if that shoe fits, as I fear it may, I'd have to point out that you've chosen the wrong windmill.

 

>The fact that you feel you can not trust an escort to

>me indicates a lack of trust for all. Which I can't say I

>don't agree with but try not to let that be the rule that

>determines my relationships.

 

SD, allow me to reiterate. My original comment, in response to post #16, was meant to draw attention to the very thing you accuse me of. And as I mentioned in my previous response, you're scolding (tsk-tsking) the wrong person. Please reread post #16, then my own post #22, bearing in mind the definition of "facetious", and perhaps it will all be a bit clearer. If it isn't, please drop the matter as I won't take the time to explain it again and I don't want you going away sore.

 

Now I'd like to thank you for welcoming me to the boards with this sparkling repartee. Keep up the good work.

[Guest Piltdown Man]

>Gee Piltdown kinda nice to be responded to even if I have no

>fucking idea of what your response means.

 

Because you seem like a nice (if confused) fellow, I'll take the time to explain it all. A "facetious" (from the Middle French facetieux) comment is one made in jest, or, "not serious". The facetious comment I originally made was in response to someone who thinks escorts cannot be trusted and can never be befriended. I thought that was an unfortunate position to take, and pointed out my distaste for that standpoint through sarcasm and absurdity, by suggesting that escorts should be brutalized. An extreme position meant to draw gasps from those such as you, and more importantly, those who would make definitive blanket statements like "escorts cannot be trusted and are not your friends."

 

>But I get the impression you are more into being right about your

>statements that acknowledging that there may be atlernative

>views to them.

 

One might say the same of you, only in that instance, whoever said it might be closer to correct. And in typical human fashion, you reinforce the stereotype that people will always attack what they don't understand. Whatever conclusions you've leapt to concerning what "I'm into" are surely you're concern, but please don't be upset with me because you fail to comprehend me.

 

>I think I should be insulted at being

>compared to Lawerence Welk, but damn dude, at least he always

>has a smile and life is too fucking short not to try to smile.

 

Being compared to Lawrence Welk is not an insult. I just think he talked funny, in a cute way, loveable little Pole that he was. If you reread your first reply to me, you'll notice a typo that renders your opening line Welkian. Now, being compared to, say, Don Quixote might be construed as derogatory. And if that shoe fits, as I fear it may, I'd have to point out that you've chosen the wrong windmill.

 

>The fact that you feel you can not trust an escort to

>me indicates a lack of trust for all. Which I can't say I

>don't agree with but try not to let that be the rule that

>determines my relationships.

 

SD, allow me to reiterate. My original comment, in response to post #16, was meant to draw attention to the very thing you accuse me of. And as I mentioned in my previous response, you're scolding (tsk-tsking) the wrong person. Please reread post #16, then my own post #22, bearing in mind the definition of "facetious", and perhaps it will all be a bit clearer. If it isn't, please drop the matter as I won't take the time to explain it again and I don't want you going away sore.

 

Now I'd like to thank you for welcoming me to the boards with this sparkling repartee. Keep up the good work.

[sdg]

Piltdown Man

 

Let start with the fact that this is just fun for me and nothing i take too seriously. Then add to that my lack of concern for reading ever nuance or trying to interpret the indirect meaning of something someone says. I'm pretty basic and straight forward most times but can appreciate subtlety and definitely am a fan of scarasm and humor just haven't seen alot of it here, well thats unfair i think some guys here attempt it. I am sorry that I misread you, do apologize for it and I do thank you for taking the time to enlighten the ignorant, always a noble deed. I will in the future take the time to read and try to understand what you are really saying before i open my dumb mouth. and do you think lawerence well was gay?

 

Look forward to see more of your posts now, Pilt.

 

sdg

 

sdg

[sdg]

Piltdown Man

 

Let start with the fact that this is just fun for me and nothing i take too seriously. Then add to that my lack of concern for reading ever nuance or trying to interpret the indirect meaning of something someone says. I'm pretty basic and straight forward most times but can appreciate subtlety and definitely am a fan of scarasm and humor just haven't seen alot of it here, well thats unfair i think some guys here attempt it. I am sorry that I misread you, do apologize for it and I do thank you for taking the time to enlighten the ignorant, always a noble deed. I will in the future take the time to read and try to understand what you are really saying before i open my dumb mouth. and do you think lawerence well was gay?

 

Look forward to see more of your posts now, Pilt.

 

sdg

 

sdg

[Guest Merlin]

The original Piltdown Man was, of course, a famous hoax. I think we must take everything our Piltdown Man says with a grain of salt.

[Guest Merlin]

The original Piltdown Man was, of course, a famous hoax. I think we must take everything our Piltdown Man says with a grain of salt.

[Guest cp8036]

<...Being compared to Lawrence Welk is not an insult. I just think he talked funny, in a cute way, loveable little Pole that he was...>

 

 

I didn't know Mr. Welk was of Polish descent, thought he was Lithauian (sp). "Ahhhh... the Lennon sisters, aren't they lovely."

[Guest cp8036]

<...Being compared to Lawrence Welk is not an insult. I just think he talked funny, in a cute way, loveable little Pole that he was...>

 

 

I didn't know Mr. Welk was of Polish descent, thought he was Lithauian (sp). "Ahhhh... the Lennon sisters, aren't they lovely."

[RM]

Ah!!! An apology offered on the Message Center, and, hopefully, accepted! It must be the the Christmas season!

 

Happy Yuletide, folks.

[RM]

Ah!!! An apology offered on the Message Center, and, hopefully, accepted! It must be the the Christmas season!

 

Happy Yuletide, folks.

[johnnysneakers]

Trust is earned, so is money! All else is theft.

 

Be wise when dealing with the unknown.

[johnnysneakers]

Trust is earned, so is money! All else is theft.

 

Be wise when dealing with the unknown.

[Guest ermingard]

>I am very confused about your purpose in starting this

>thread. If you are not concerned about the money, if you are

>happy that the escort has left the business and wish him

>well, why did you bring the whole thing up?

 

Although I have been reading from this site for some time, I have never taken part in any discussions. I brought this up because of the NiceGuy/Rick Munroe message, as I stated originally. I see parallels between the two situations, and because I really have no other way to vent my disappointment regarding the trust I placed in an escort (now retired) that had an excellent reputation. As I read the messages regarding the NiceGuy/Munroe dispute, I felt that at least Mr. Munroe surfaced to explain and defend his position. This, in my mind, illustrates good character. It also would lead me to believe that he is an escort that can be trusted. It's too bad he doesn't live in Los Angeles.

 

If you are actually looking for advice about whom to trust with your

>money, then all I can say is that escorts are no different

>than anyone else as far as character goes: some are

>trustworthy, some are not, and circumstances can make

>anyone's future conduct unpredictable.

>

>If you are asking for advice as a business matter, paying an

>escort a year's advance is not the same as putting your

>lawyer on retainer. A simple rule of thumb is to ask what

>your chances are of recovering the money if someone does

>not/can not go through with his part of the bargain: with

>your travel agent it is close to 100%--if he doesn't go out

>of business--with your brother-in-law it is 50%--better if

>the family is tight and applies pressure--and with an escort

>it is virtually zero.

 

These are very good points, and I agree completely. I have never even been approached in my life to loan someone any sizable amount of money. Because I had never been through such an experience and because I trusted the escort in question, it never crossed my mind that he would not fulfill his part of the bargain, or to put it in the words he used when he brought up this proposition, "I will always be there for you."

>

>If you can afford to lose the money and really do not feel

>hurt and betrayed, consider yourself lucky.

 

I do feel hurt and betrayed...that is the reason for asking these questions about trust. I am a paradox. I consider myself very lucky to have chosen this escort the first time out and had the wonderful experience I had. This escort suggested the pay-in-advance plan, justifying that it was the same type of arrangement he had with other clients, including NiceGuy. NiceGuy had confirmed this 'pay-in-advance' arrangement in past messages on this site. Yes, I guess I was gullible and stupid, and yes, I would never do this again.

But, in my defense, all indications were that this proposal was sincere, backed up by past messages on this site.

 

I appreciate the feedback that has been offered here. I am more than ready to let the matter rest.

[Guest ermingard]

>I am very confused about your purpose in starting this

>thread. If you are not concerned about the money, if you are

>happy that the escort has left the business and wish him

>well, why did you bring the whole thing up?

 

Although I have been reading from this site for some time, I have never taken part in any discussions. I brought this up because of the NiceGuy/Rick Munroe message, as I stated originally. I see parallels between the two situations, and because I really have no other way to vent my disappointment regarding the trust I placed in an escort (now retired) that had an excellent reputation. As I read the messages regarding the NiceGuy/Munroe dispute, I felt that at least Mr. Munroe surfaced to explain and defend his position. This, in my mind, illustrates good character. It also would lead me to believe that he is an escort that can be trusted. It's too bad he doesn't live in Los Angeles.

 

If you are actually looking for advice about whom to trust with your

>money, then all I can say is that escorts are no different

>than anyone else as far as character goes: some are

>trustworthy, some are not, and circumstances can make

>anyone's future conduct unpredictable.

>

>If you are asking for advice as a business matter, paying an

>escort a year's advance is not the same as putting your

>lawyer on retainer. A simple rule of thumb is to ask what

>your chances are of recovering the money if someone does

>not/can not go through with his part of the bargain: with

>your travel agent it is close to 100%--if he doesn't go out

>of business--with your brother-in-law it is 50%--better if

>the family is tight and applies pressure--and with an escort

>it is virtually zero.

 

These are very good points, and I agree completely. I have never even been approached in my life to loan someone any sizable amount of money. Because I had never been through such an experience and because I trusted the escort in question, it never crossed my mind that he would not fulfill his part of the bargain, or to put it in the words he used when he brought up this proposition, "I will always be there for you."

>

>If you can afford to lose the money and really do not feel

>hurt and betrayed, consider yourself lucky.

 

I do feel hurt and betrayed...that is the reason for asking these questions about trust. I am a paradox. I consider myself very lucky to have chosen this escort the first time out and had the wonderful experience I had. This escort suggested the pay-in-advance plan, justifying that it was the same type of arrangement he had with other clients, including NiceGuy. NiceGuy had confirmed this 'pay-in-advance' arrangement in past messages on this site. Yes, I guess I was gullible and stupid, and yes, I would never do this again.

But, in my defense, all indications were that this proposal was sincere, backed up by past messages on this site.

 

I appreciate the feedback that has been offered here. I am more than ready to let the matter rest.

[Traveller]

>Suffice it to say, I agreed. For a short while, I

>heard from the escort via email. I have never seen the

>fellow since I gave him the money. It was a sizable amount

>of money, enough to cover a year of visits.

 

A year of visits. Please detail exactly how many that would be. Are we talking only once a week - something I have trouble comprehending - or are we actually talking about serious cash?

 

Also, what were the subjects of his emails after receiving the up front payment? "I can't wait to see you next Flag Day." or maybe, "I'm looking forward to seeing you when we celebrate the inauguration of the next democrat administration."

 

>I am ready to be called gullible and stupid. I am not out

>for justice or my money back. I certainly don't wish the

>escort in question ill will. I guess what I want, from both

>ends of this spectrum, is clarity. Is there any place in

>the world of clients and escorts that one can safely use the

>word 'trust'?

 

Lets go in a totally arbitrary order.

 

1. Never put anything in joint names with a BF until he's signed an enforceable "pre-nup."

 

2. Never "loan" money to a friend unless you consider it a gift that you will never see again.

 

3. Pay an escort up front only after a full frontal lobotomy.

 

Later.

[Traveller]

>Suffice it to say, I agreed. For a short while, I

>heard from the escort via email. I have never seen the

>fellow since I gave him the money. It was a sizable amount

>of money, enough to cover a year of visits.

 

A year of visits. Please detail exactly how many that would be. Are we talking only once a week - something I have trouble comprehending - or are we actually talking about serious cash?

 

Also, what were the subjects of his emails after receiving the up front payment? "I can't wait to see you next Flag Day." or maybe, "I'm looking forward to seeing you when we celebrate the inauguration of the next democrat administration."

 

>I am ready to be called gullible and stupid. I am not out

>for justice or my money back. I certainly don't wish the

>escort in question ill will. I guess what I want, from both

>ends of this spectrum, is clarity. Is there any place in

>the world of clients and escorts that one can safely use the

>word 'trust'?

 

Lets go in a totally arbitrary order.

 

1. Never put anything in joint names with a BF until he's signed an enforceable "pre-nup."

 

2. Never "loan" money to a friend unless you consider it a gift that you will never see again.

 

3. Pay an escort up front only after a full frontal lobotomy.

 

Later.

[Guest LG320126]

>this is such a stupid thread and a subject matter that has

>been neaten to death. i have read your post and cannot

>understand why u even started it. if u want to pay an escort

>in advance do it, if not then don't. are u that stupid

>?

 

 

If the thread is so stupid, why have you entered into it? And by the way, how can you be calling other people stupid when you have the subject matter being "neaten" to death, huh stupid?

[Guest LG320126]

>this is such a stupid thread and a subject matter that has

>been neaten to death. i have read your post and cannot

>understand why u even started it. if u want to pay an escort

>in advance do it, if not then don't. are u that stupid

>?

 

 

If the thread is so stupid, why have you entered into it? And by the way, how can you be calling other people stupid when you have the subject matter being "neaten" to death, huh stupid?

[Guest Nice Guy]

If he is indeed a close friend of mine... I think you owe it to yourself, the site and to me to say who he is....

IT is INDEED a matter of principle..... on one hand everyone says DON"T PAY IN ADVANCE.... implying distrust from the start.... and a sleeze factor. so speak up and tell US all who your talking about... or it is just hearsay....and WE DON"T WANT THAT, now DO we!!!!!!

[Guest Nice Guy]

If he is indeed a close friend of mine... I think you owe it to yourself, the site and to me to say who he is....

IT is INDEED a matter of principle..... on one hand everyone says DON"T PAY IN ADVANCE.... implying distrust from the start.... and a sleeze factor. so speak up and tell US all who your talking about... or it is just hearsay....and WE DON"T WANT THAT, now DO we!!!!!!

[Guest ermingard]

I'm sorry, but I can't. I have too high a regard for this particular fellow, and I also have too high a regard for you as a friend that has been there for him. I really want this thread to fade into the archives.

 

Sincerely