Escorts Who Diss the Competition

[woodlawn]

RE: Tradition

 

>Just tell us the basis for your above statement:

 

And what do I get in return?

[woodlawn]

RE: Tradition

 

>Hi Woodlawn,

>

>I would appreciate if you read read again what I had asked

>you,

 

Your request is denied.

 

 

>Opposed to what you are suggesting, I was not stating that

>what Rick made up from your words was correct. I only wrote

>that your words had made the same impression to me (and now

>I'm even more curious to see what they really ment).

 

I think it is for you and your friend Rick, not me, to explain why it is that you look at my post and assert it is meant to convey something that appears nowhere in that post. I can't be expected to explain what goes on in your head(s), and that clearly is the source of the statement Rick (and apparently you) claim I was making -- since, once again, that statement appears nowhere in my post. I can offer several possible explanations of why you seem to see words that are not there -- dyslexia, hallucinations, or just a tendency to make up shit about other people as an excuse for bashing them, for example. But I have no idea which of those explanations is correct. Only you know that.

 

>Secondly, and even more eminent, I'm getting curious for the

>difference between what you wanted to say, and what Rick made

>up from your words, all according to the way you perceived

>it.

 

I've already explained the difference quite clearly. He asserted that I deduced from the fact that escorts get paid for what they do that they are all about making money. As I told him above, that is NOT how I deduced it. Seems eminently clear to me.

 

 

>

>There clearly seems to be a misunderstanding here, I'm trying

>to get my finger behind it, and I'm convinced that that's in

>the interest of all of us.

 

You haven't convinced me. You're free to keep trying, of course.

[woodlawn]

RE: Tradition

 

>

>Credibility and respect.

 

From whom? Flower? Rick? Lucky? Expressions of credibility and respect from people with their history would not be worth the pixels they are printed on, unfortunately.

 

You are asking me to engage in a detailed discussion of a small part of an earlier post of mine in this thread. I am trying to make it clear to you without undue harshness that I don't see that such a discussion would be worth my time and effort. I could have simply ignored your requests altogether, a very common method that posters here use to cut off discussions they don't care to pursue -- just ask Rick, he does it all the time. If you or anyone else posts anything that rekindles my interest in the matter, I'll certainly let you know.

[woodlawn]

RE: Tradition

 

>The issue is not that such a discussion would not be worth

>your time and effort. The issue is clearly that you can't

>explain your very own words ...

 

Such a discussion with you is not worth my time and effort, because I have learned from experience that whenever you don't get what you want you start making the kind of negative personal remarks that I see above. Why do I need it? Go pester someone else.

 

 

>And if you cannot express the exact meaning of your own words,

>then you cannot blame others (in this case Rick) for not

>picking up their true meaning ...

 

I can always blame someone for reading a post of mine and then asserting that it means something that is not expressed anywhere in the post. It's called "lying."

[Rick Munroe]

RE: Tradition

 

>I can always blame someone for reading a post of mine and then

>asserting that it means something that is not expressed

>anywhere in the post.

 

Silly Woodsie, I asserted nothing. My statement was posed as a question, as evidenced by the little character that looks like this: ? and which can be found at the end of my sentence in the above-continually-referenced post.

[Guest arbee]

Help?!

 

Maybe because I'm here relatively infrequently I have a problem understanding the "stuff" going on. So... my take on this thread is that it can't possibly be real; it's all written by the same person –– kinda performance art, yes? Can't be serious, right?

 

OR (assuming I'm wrong)... Would someone with some longevity here explain the "cast of characters" and their agendas? This just makes so little sense. (I sometimes read a professional forum and things do get heated, but the venom here is over the top.)

[AaronScottDC]

RE: Help?!

 

but the venom here is over the

>top.)

 

HA! You haven't seen anything yet! Stick around a while and you will soon see that this little exchange is really rather calm.

 

Aaron Scott DC

http://www.erados.com/AaronScottDC

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/aaronscottdc.html

[woodlawn]

RE: Tradition

 

>>I can always blame someone for reading a post of mine and

>then

>>asserting that it means something that is not expressed

>>anywhere in the post.

 

>>Silly Woodsie, I asserted nothing. My statement was posed as

>a question, as evidenced by the little character that looks

>like this: ? and which can be found at the end of my

>sentence in the above-continually-referenced post.

 

 

Rick, you dear old gasbag you, if you would just tear yourself away from the sweaty clinches with your Mom for a second, you might recall that you followed that "question" with a bunch of verbiage that seems to assume the question has been answered by someone in the affirmative. Who answered it? I know it wasn't me. So who does that leave?