Message in a bottle

[Candide]

VV/Ozzy

You stole my intellectual property (i.e. my posting) and you really should watch that stuff. How old are you by the way? Two?

And....

What is wrong with you?! Do you read at all?!

"2. accusing me of granting jag access to a provider(which btw she/IB accused me of before anyone else here"

What exactly are you smoking? I never, ever accused you of that. I only accused you of one thing - of having your nose so far up J.'s ass that you were talking nonsense. And I do not think ANYONE can deny there is some truth in that remark no matter what your perspective is. Bottom line is you only asked for the stuff on her, which was minor, to be removed and you never said a word about the tons of dangerous and nasty things said about countless other women you have had fuck and suck you - only J. Which says to me that you are not a full grown man yet, you are a fool who makes a spectacle out of himself, and I for one don't care that you didn't say anything when I got shat on, I just will be damned if J. gets anything erased and Patti, Val, Amanda Manhattan, Adriana...and about 50 others can stay there with do-do on them cause they are not your personal fav. Too Bad! Join the crowd comrade! You see, I actually care about other people...I care about other women...while you...you care about your dick...two different things entirely. J. was never in need of my support. The women who could have benefited from my support and your own are the women you seem to deem unworthy. ANd yet you still will not admit it. As Frog said, one can be biased on their choice of "dance partner" with regard to appearance. But in my own view, no one has the right to select who gets raped, robbed, physically abused, threatened, insulted and stalked and seperate them from who gets protected based on their appearance - You're violating Civil Rights :) regardless of provider level or status (i.e. the VV/Ozzy little black book top ten)

To Mr. P - I am different than you. I believe that the measure of a woman/man is being able to be honest, to the bone, about one's feelings, even if those feelings are vulnerable and sad and unattractive. To be able to do that and wake up the next day feeling cleansed and closer to my self and to feel self respect - cause I really do not care what you guys think of me - I care what I think of myself - that is courage, bravery, not some false, tight lipped, guarded machismo about my emotional scars and insecurities; that, to me, is rather acrid and boring and keeps me from growing. So I did think about it and...I posted what I wanted to post. I only took them off cause...forgive me for being human...but Frog, Slinky, and Ozzy where pretty cold to me ( they made me cry so hard everyone at work looked scared when I walked in today :(and it isn't my site - I got the feeling they wanted me to go - and more than that...I should start developing better habits/hobbies, as I admited to Fletch.

To ARi - I AM NOT Ms. JAG - who started that rumor? ANd I am asking you to contact Mr. JAG webmaster and ask him to take info's access away. Obviously I am "weak and erring" (from Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist) and can't rely on my own self restraint.

To Slinky Bender - "Candide" was a character invented by Voltaire who searched for "Utopia" in "Eldorado" where the streets were lined with gold...and elsewhere I think...I thought you'd get the reference. I thought you knew who I was and I thought everyone on JAG was well aware of who I was. Mostly because of comments made by guys (like BDM who said he'd 'miss me") but also cause I left plenty of hints.

There is one thing I posted and erased and I would like to leave it here:

To Hombre Secreto - you are the only Real Man with Balls in JAG. I propose the acronym RMWBIJ in your honor.

Sorry - I am a lot like Ozzy (is that why we clash?) I just can't keep my mouth shut) :)

I, upon my honor, will henceforth, never log into JAG...at all...never mind post - I won't even look...so could you hurry up and get my login axed? :)

[Edited by Candide on 02-21-2001 at 07:02 PM]

[jmcurry]

I appears we have some things to share. Email me.

[Ozzy]

:mad:

[Edited by Ozzy on 02-22-2001 at 09:32 PM]

[guy catelli]

how 'bout someone posting the reviews Infobooth and KS submitted to become mebers of jag? :p

[Big Dick Magee]

Isn't it funny that even here away from JAG, we refer to that girl as J?

Richard

[Candide]

Important last footnote

The reason I am so blown away by H.S. is not cause he stuck up for me (you sweet loyal soul) but because when he developed feelings for a provider - he did not get nasty and hostile about or to her - he didnt hide behind bragging or humor - he was honest about it...painful as it was...that is REAL strength and manhood in my book - he wishes her well...he never got nasty with her though it hurt him to lose her - you are ancient soul in a young man's body. What an Hombre you are!

Richard - that's cause you never know who's reading :) Honey.

Ozzy - let's both get a life ok? I'm sorry! I'm being petty ...let's shake (no buzzers in palms) If anything, you are funny, sweet (when ya wanna be) and like a little boy - a baby brother :) I'm sorry Oz - no more picking I promise. But I just love it when you get all hot and bothered :)

[Edited by Candide on 02-21-2001 at 08:03 PM]

[Ozzy]

because thats her real name......BDM. another reason those threads should have been removed....

[Candide]

Oh Jesus get me my violin :)

[Candide]

Sorry, sorry! :) you're right. Maybe they should be removed? I certainly have no clout on that score - turn on that VV charm Ozzy - this time I will NOT stop you from getting that J stuff removed - I'll be busy reading :)

[Big Dick Magee]

Candi - would certainly appreciate an e-mail from you. But if you don't I'd understand.

Richard

[Big Dick Magee]

Vic I'd never try to convince you. You are a stone wall.

[Candide]

Psssst Richard :) I'd be happy to old friend, but I have no address for you - I'm here if you ever wish to say hi carepackage@hotmail.com

Hope you're not working too hard Dear - C.

[frog]

By MadMach on Wednesday, February 21, 2001 - 08:15 pm:
Infobooth's account has been closed since last night.

there you go.

[Ozzy]

:mad:

[Edited by Ozzy on 02-22-2001 at 09:35 PM]

[Rust]

Candi-

Maybe you can explain to me why you posted on JAG. I'm somewhat confused since its not really a healthy environment for providers, retired or active. You talk about the way your self esteem was damaged for sometime, I don't see how reading JAG can be helpful. It seems that you only became bitter about certain situations that arose on JAG. I must admit, reading your old posts now, i can't believe how i was duped, the posts are so telling of you. But I did enjoy them, both the first time and second time around.

Rust

[frog]

which is a great rationale for providers to NOT read JAG.

[Edited by frog on 02-21-2001 at 09:37 PM]

[Candide]

Rust & Frog,

suffice it to say that often when an injury occurs, the injured returns over and over again to the place or device, or even the person they receive injuries from. Maybe that's why really smart pro's don't post.

And that's why I'm starting the yoga class at my neighborhood gym and taking flute lessons after work :) I may even cave in and take conga drums which I always wanted to do. And I'm reading reading reading - so much else I could have done eh?

Ozzy :( I have no idea what you are talking about. All I can say is "peace brother" - the first word in the quotes I got from a smart sister who's name starts with V who don't post here no more either.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by Candide
....suffice it to say that often when an injury occurs, the injured returns over and over again to the place or device, or even the person they receive injuries from...

"often": only in cases where externalities (children, finances) so require; or where there is some internally calculated 'payoff'.

otherwise, it is quite rare to be attracted to aversive stimuli. this is the fundamental axiom of 'behaviorism', the essential premise of the 'pleasure principle', and just plain 'common sense'.

[Geezy Muldoon]

great hoax.

[Edited by Judge Crater on 07-25-2001 at 03:10 PM]

[K.S.]

I'd like to do a little public service announcement here:

If you don't understand what they hell Guy Catelli is talking about, please don't feel bad. I'm a mother-fucking genius, and I don't have a clue what he's nattering on about.

The naked guy is NOT the Emperor.

[fletch]

Generall, I would agree with you. But I understood his last post.

Maybe you're only a fucking genius?

[K.S.]

No, I'm not a fucking genius. While I did give pretty good head, I am given to believe that I'm only a mediocre fuck.

sigh...

[fletch]

I wouldn't worry about it; that 's the guy's job anyway.

OK, so were down to just plain genius, which still isn't too bad.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by K.S.
... I did give pretty good head, ...

that part i believe :p

[littleguy]

K.S.

I'm neither kind of genius but I have to concentrate much too hard to understand G.C. so I generally don't bother.

Sure do with they'd take away his "quote" button though.

[frog]

Originally posted by fletch
I wouldn't worry about it; that 's the guy's job anyway.[/i]

off topic, but I think this is so true.

[justme]

While I did give pretty good head

Makes sense... seems like you'd have to have a good head before...

[TuckernotSucker]

I am convinced of it. I pass by his posts. I too cannot understand them.

[guy catelli]

Carl M is my brother. the three of us party together all the time :p.

[Candide]

Guy

What about people who cut themselves or mutilate themselves? (common among teenage girls) What about anorexia nervosa? What about "The Rain Man" who beat his head against the wall? What about me, who has no children nor financial problems and yet repeatedly gets into trouble with myself and others by posting here and elsewhere? I must be a masochist for answering you - but if you think the pleasure principle rules - you should talk to young people more - suicide attempts (painful ones) are not uncommon among teenagers. And I've counseled beautiful young girls who slice their arms up with knives. Please do not answer my posts with ridiculous comments - I feel compelled to explain myself.

[justme]

A cat jumps on a hot stove, think that cat's gonna jump on any stoves after that? - I think that's all that was meant.

But I think that Candy's making a different point. Often people become strangely fascinated with the circumstances of a traumatic experience (I know that's happened to me). Still, much like the examples she's cited, this behavior isn't really healthy (I know it's been unhealthy for me). Guy's response (I think) is talking about healthy reactions to pain...

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by Candide
Guy

What about people who cut themselves or mutilate themselves? (common among teenage girls) What about anorexia nervosa? What about "The Rain Man" who beat his head against the wall? What about me, who has no children nor financial problems and yet repeatedly gets into trouble with myself and others by posting here and elsewhere? I must be a masochist for answering you - but if you think the pleasure principle rules - you should talk to young people more - suicide attempts (painful ones) are not uncommon among teenagers. And I've counseled beautiful young girls who slice their arms up with knives. Please do not answer my posts with ridiculous comments - I feel compelled to explain myself.

Candide, it's insulting to characterize someone's posts as 'ridiculous' (although my friend justme also characterizes my posts as "rediculous".) if you were not smart and bookish, and if i were not dumb and sexy, i would think you didn't like me!

you write, "What about me, who has no children nor financial problems and yet repeatedly gets into trouble with myself and others by posting here and elsewhere?"

imo, that is a very good question, Candide. please correct me if you again feel i have misread you. but, my current understanding is that you were bookish and a (virtual) sexual innocent until sometime past the age of 35. then, while on AOL, you learned that men like oral sex, and that some of them would pay money to have it.

you then spent a year or so advertising yourself as available for paid-in-advance encounters with men. however, in the event, once a man had gone to the trouble you had induced him to undertake, you would back out (turning all convention on its head -- the usual problem being the client backing out).

at some point, you were traumatized by what had been written about you on jag, something i am in complete sympathy with. that's why i don't like jag; hence, i don't go there.

you, however, assumed a false identity as a male client to return to the source of your pain. (to those who are unfamiliar with jag, this is not as difficult as it might seem. when i arrived there, clients were having great difficulty determining a provider's gender, even in personam, sans culottes!)

at some point while you were at jag, you picked a fight with the best friend any escort ever had, Ozzy, and succeeded in provoking him into getting himself suspended.

you then followed him over here, and proceeded to make us all paranoid with your gender-bender morphing as a civilian woman pretending to be an escort pretending to be a male client pretending to be an escort.

once your deception was uncovered, you proceeded to accuse the APM and Ozzy of having done you wrong! then, with much bathos, you announced you were leaving, never to return.

a day later, you are back, basking in all of the attention your melodrama has attracted. someone here asked the reasonable question: if, as you suggest, the stove is burning your behind off, why do you continue to sit down on it? you brushed off this sensible question with a reply to the effect that people "often" sit on a stove while their ass burns off.

i replied that such cases do not occur "often"; they occur rarely. you responded by calling this statement 'ridiculous', and then proceeded to list a number of other examples of bizarre behavior that a small percentage of people engage in. the question you were originally asked is legitimate: if this place is so painful for you, what are you still doing here?

i think the answer is obvious. so, my question to you is: will you go out on a date with me this coming saturday?


[Edited by guy catelli on 02-22-2001 at 09:24 PM]

[justme]

We ain't so different GC, just a couple of rediculous hobiests.

[SkellyChamp]

Ozzy was NOT suspended from JAG.

I now banish myself from lurking for the sin of reading a GC post.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by SkellyChamp
Ozzy was NOT suspended from JAG.

that's how i understood something he wrote about the matter. regardless of technicalities, Candide succeeded in creating substantial friction between jag and one of its most popular members.

I now banish myself from lurking for the sin of reading a GC post.

please, go forth and sin no more. thanks.

[SkellyChamp]

mflmflmflmflmflmflmflmflmflmflmflmf.................why can't take the heat. Damn. I failed.

[Lucifer]

:mad:

[littleguy]

Skelly,

You count to 11 ? before asking "Now WHAT am I mad about"

OK all you geniuses, where's that line from.

First one that gets it wins a date with (name withheld)

[Edited by littleguy on 02-23-2001 at 02:39 PM]

[wsb]

Guy --

I'm afraid I must disagree. Ozzy attacking Candide on UG for issues he had with her at JAG is no more appropriate than you attacking myself, Mr.P or A1N for issues you had with any of us in another forum.

Although I haven't read all of her posts, as far as I can discern, Candide was going about her business on UG when this matter was brought up by others. I also disagree with your assessment of her posts as "gender bending", but that is really beside the point. The bottom line is that she is as entitled to privacy as you or I and her outing by those who were privy to certain info and used it against her was simply wrong. I would feel exactly the same way if any of the other UG contributers who had made the effort to chose a different handle for their contributions to this forum, presumably for the purpose of maintaining some form of anonymity, were wrongly identified by their JAG or other prostitution board handles.

Lastly, I'll refrain from addressing the issue of who was ganging up on Candide, but I do find it curious that this attack was allowed to occur in the first place. I've seen several more benign posts deleted, so it does lead one to wonder as to what exactly the editorial standards are.

Regards,

WSB

[Lucifer]

:mad:


WSB, The fact that you did not read all candide's posts means that you should not comment. Also all those posts were deleted by candide herself.




I'm watching all of you.

[Edited by lucifer on 02-23-2001 at 03:51 PM]

[Lucifer]

posted by Slinkybender

Because when that person first signed on to UG, they used the email of someone who is a regular JAG poster ( not "close to", but letter for letter exact ). they also chose a handle which, while some might think is a woman's name, is actually more common as a man's name. When they first started posting, their posts were somewhat sexually ambigous, like "PAT" on SNL. Then, just before they seemed the "come out" as a woman, they changed their email address for UG contact. then, they seem to be going out of their way to state ( over and over again, even where the question has not been asked ) that they are a woman.

Any idea who I might be talking about ?



WSB, This is the post that you claim outted Candide. Please tell me where the APM mentions Candide's name or JAG handle please.

[wsb]

Re: "WSB, The fact that you did not read *all* [emphasis added] candide's posts means that you should not comment. Also all those posts were deleted by candide herself"

Well, I am bedevilled by that logic. Aren't you contradicting yourself by responding to a post I directed to Guy C.

Re: "I'm watching all of you."

I've heard that certain drugs do make you paranoid.

--WSB



[Edited by wsb on 02-23-2001 at 04:19 PM]

[wsb]

Re: "WSB, This is the post that you claim outted Candide"

Really??? Where did I say that???

I think you know the posts I'm talking about.

--WSB

[Lucifer]

Because she outted herself after that post.


You've got to stop playing these games. ;)

[justme]

WSB - As someone who finds himself in agreement with you more than any other online poster (incuding the venerables), I'd ask you if the best possible outcome is possibly worth the agravation?

On a separate note... email me?

[wsb]

JM --

I'm not sure what sort of rumors are being spread, but I don't have any sort of hidden agenda. I am just lodging my objection to what I perceive as an injustice, and I think that's always worth a little aggravation. If anything, I strive for consistency.

Your question sort of reminds me of the time a mutual friend of ours asked me why I would bother debating Con law with the *** crowd. I don't think I really had a very good answer for him at the time, but upon reflection I guess the answer is that when you've spent a good portion of your life arguing positions and points of view, it is hard to turn that off and be more tolerant of the knuckleheads in the world just because they happen to be posting on a prostitution related message board. After all, how much time can one possibly spend looking for Greek in NJ???

Regards,

WSB

P.S. I would e-mail you, but I don't have your address. I'll try to get in touch through a mutual contact.

[justme]

Fair enough.

[Ozzy]

wsb....


if you want to talk about blind accusations than maybe you can speak to your friend (candi) about accusing me of advocating the rape and beating of any woman over the age of 30 or any woman who isn't good looking enough for me to fuck(those were her exact words, i think enough people here read it before she deleted it). and doing this on a public board no less. And your own blind accusation that the only reason for the moderator outed Candi was to help
me extract retribution for what happened on JAG ? The
moderator didn't out her and his motivitaions were clearly not what you accuse. But it would be
convenient for you for it to be that way, so you
simply state it as fact ( that's the definition of
Dogma, isn't it ? )
i had no ax to grind with info/cand. that was an issue i was more than glad to get over with. the fact that i am somewhat friends with the person who runs this board has absolutely nothing to do with it. i received NO special treatment as those posts referring to me condoning rape were left up on the board until candide removed them herself. in the past you have called me a racist without any merits, you have accused me of giving jag access to providers without any form of proof and you've done this knowing that your friend info, whom you seem to be rather close to among other things....had total access to jag herself. if you want to continue to have it out with me which it seems is something you want to do, than we can arrange that......but not on a public board. how about we meet for a drink?


Bisous,

ozzy;)





[Edited by Ozzy on 02-25-2001 at 10:40 PM]

[guy catelli]

it is obvious that Candi, aka Infobooth, aka Candide, is a master (mistress?) of a game that psychologist Eric Berne dubbed "Let's You and Him Fight!", in his classic work on transactional anaysis, Games People Play. see: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345410033/qid=983027838/sr=1-1/ref=sc_b_1/102-6998034-9550504

is anybody surprised that she picked two men who never back down to a challenge as her 'players'?


[Edited by guy catelli on 02-24-2001 at 10:29 AM]

[guy catelli]

could Candi, aka Infobooth, aka Candide be the answer to the question: what would A1N (another wannabe impressario of 'Let's You and Him Fight!') have been like if she had taken her medication?

[wsb]

Ozzy --

That was a particularly lucid and coherent post (albeit wrong for the most part). Did you hire a ghost writer???

Beaucoup bisous,

WSB

P.S. I don't drink ripple.

[Ozzy]

i've said already that i prefer a bottle of Courvosier "60 ans". i gotta case....wanna split a bottle?

but to tell you the truth..... if the ripple tasted better, i'd drink it.

what? do you think the booze you drink and the language you use, makes you a better man. you're not as wise :confused: as i thought.



and i don't need no stinkin ghost writter. besides i don't think he's up at this hour........


Ciao, and a lot of bisous to you too.

ozzy :cool:

[Edited by Ozzy on 02-25-2001 at 03:39 AM]

[Ozzy]

IT'S LIE.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb

I'm afraid I must disagree....is no more appropriate than you attacking myself, Mr. P or A1N for issues you had with any of us in another forum.

that's silly. people in general, and those who write for publication (formal or informal) especially, are accountable for their past words and deeds, whether they move on to another school, publication, public service job, etc. just ask Bork and Guanier.

moving from one url to another doesn't confer absolute immunity for all prior words and deeds, especially with respect to the same parties!

Although I haven't read all of her posts, as far as I can discern, Candide was going about her business on UG when this matter was brought up by others.

her 'business' is obviously deception at many levels, getting men to fight with one another, making wildly untrue, vicious, and unfair accusations against a man who is a true friend of escorts (is that your 'problem' here?), and at the same time claiming she is being persecuted for her age and looks.

her attacks have extended not only to clients, but to the entire male gender (with the sole exception of mr. p, perhaps due to the 'self-pity connection').

I also disagree with your assessment of her posts as "gender bending", but that is really beside the point.

no; she has repeatedly made gender (her own and ours) an issue. she started a thread http://www.utopiaguide.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=320 to which she posted, in relevant part,

"I've often heard comments from men about wishing they could command the adulation and attention (and subsequent financial rewards) that popular strippers and dancers do. How many of you would trade in your manhood to be women if you could be stripper material?

Does the pursuit of beautiful women and the enjoyment of them have anything to do with admiration for their power over other men?"

if that's not "gender bending", what is? she's got a right to attempt to gender-bend. i welcome her doing so. but, we have a right to know which gender is attempting to do so. and the reponsible parties on this board, or any other publishers, have an obligation to protect their readers from what they have very valid reason to believe is gross deception, of one form or another.

it was this very post that prompted an obligatory query as to whether UG readers wanted to be made
aware of very valid bases for suspecting gender-deception. and then, it was 'Candide' herself who got in the APM's face and challenged him to name names.

and now, you show up to blame others for the inevitable consequences of Candide's latest farce. are you actually reading the posts upon which you base charges against others? or, are you just wildly (and irresponsibly) flailing your verbal fists at people who don't share your enthusiasm for jag's version of 'objectivity', a representative example of which you have presented here for all who have never been members of jag.

The bottom line is that she is as entitled to privacy as you or I and her outing by those who were privy to certain info and used it against her was simply wrong.

the 'bottom line'? the bottom line is that she is an (admitted) 'drama queen' who mainly succeeds at creating farce. {enter wsb.}

I would feel exactly the same way if any of the other UG contributers who had made the effort to chose a different handle for their contributions to this forum, presumably for the purpose of maintaining some form of anonymity, were wrongly identified by their JAG or other {asp} board handles.

to my knowledge, she didn't show the respect of emailing the responsible parties at UG, explaining her 'situation', and requesting their cooperation and confidentiality in making a 'clean start' here. she couldn't, because she wanted to continue her deception at jag. thus, such a disclosure would have made a jag member here complicit in her deception there.

her deception there, and her ineptness (or caluculation) here, created a situation that the responsible parties here were morally obligated to untangle for the sake of their own integrity.

Lastly, I'll refrain from addressing the issue of who was ganging up on Candide, but I do find it curious that this attack was allowed to occur in the first place. I've seen several more benign posts deleted, so it does lead one to wonder as to what exactly the editorial standards are.

look, you once showed yourself to be a true man of honor by speaking in my defense, at a time when no other client would. but, men of honor can sometimes behave foolishly. i was engaged in no small folly myself on one occasion (at the prompting of another instigatrix).

here at UG, you acted like a fool with one of the most beloved escorts in the country as soon as you arrived (paralleling what, to my knowledge, was your debut on ***, which became the first occasion for my addressing you).

after much prompting on my part, you later returned here to behave in a reasonable fashion.

now you are back for round three, with a bizarre and ludicrous spin on events that someone's own bad faith brought upon herself. along the way, you have made some pretty nasty noises in the direction of someone respected by most people of goodwill in the asp online community.

(again, to my knowledge) there is no 'vast right-wing conspiracy' arrayed against you here. rather, there is a certain amount of justified annoyance that, in this instance, you're being a fool.

[Edited by guy catelli on 02-25-2001 at 03:27 PM]

[Ozzy]

there is no 'vast right-wing conspiracy' arrayed against you here. rather, there is a certain amount of justified annoyance that, in this instance, you're being an asshole.


Je consens beaucoup avec l'au-dessus


merci beaucoup

ozzy de monsieur ;)






[Edited by Ozzy on 02-25-2001 at 10:41 AM]

[Slinky Bender]

Guy,

Three times in one post ? Don't you think that's laying it on a little thick ? Perhaps that needs a wee bit of editing ( please ).

[guy catelli]

will do. i have to take some negatives to the lab right now. i'll do it when i get back.

[Ozzy]

take your time....GC

[guy catelli]

there; all better now?

[wsb]

Guy --

Your continued attacks on Candide and support of those who do likewise, in glaring contrast to your normal overzealous defense of current and former providers, indicates that you still haven't gotten over your issues with A1N (qu'elle surprise!). By your own admission, you view Candide as a co-conspirator in that whole situation, so I see no point in fueling your irrationality by addressing any of your points.

Same goes for Ozzy, who's still smarting over the thrashing he got on JAG from Infobooth (which I disagreed with, despite my feeling that the J. posts should stay up). It is pointless to try to convince him of the error of his ways, but hopefully I at least added some balance to the record.

--WSB

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
Your continued attacks on Candide and support of those who do likewise, in glaring contrast to your normal overzealous defense of current and former providers, indicates that you still haven't gotten over your issues with A1N (qu'elle surprise!). By your own admission, you view Candide as a co-conspirator in that whole situation, so I see no point in fueling your irrationality by addressing any of your points.


WSB,

i've been making fun of Candi's aspiring to melodrama but achieving farce instead, because i think it's the wisest response to such cases, on balance. at one time, i relegated you to the same status. your present conduct on this board may suggest you harbor a certain nostalgia for those days.

my problem is not with Candi, per se; rather, it's your conduct here with Val and now with Ozzy; and, secondarily, your whining about your posts being deleted. if your posts are being deleted more than mine, that alone should give you pause for thought.

i don't in any way, shape, or form see A1N and Candi as "co-conspirators". if you think i wrote something that constititues an "admission" of such, please specify where i did so, in order that i might promptly edit or delete it. if you cannot do so, it is yet another demonstration that, though you may mean well, you are quite often mistaken even about what's 'between the four corners of the document', never mind elsewhere.

A1N is the only escort, before or since, who has ever succeeded in making herself an exception to what you characterize as my "normal overzealous defense of current and former providers". by itself, that fact should be considered by anyone 'just tuning in'. (did you ever take her up on her repeated offers to you of her "homebaked lasagna"? ;))

you have written an utterly irrational version of events involving Candi and UG. you have included some nastiness about some of the people here. i have written a point by point response that reveals same.

for you to now respond that you will not reply to my "irrationality" is tantamount to 'default'.

as you well know, i have always maintained that you mean well, but are the type of the 'brawler', however learned and civilized you also happen to be. but, presumed conscious good intentions nothwithstanding, there is still room for legitimate concern re: why this brawl, in this bar, with this particular manager and two of his 'best customers'?

to say that you are doing the 'honorable' thing begs this more fundamental question: why this (supposedly) honorable thing, at this time, and this place?



[Edited by guy catelli on 02-26-2001 at 10:19 AM]

[wsb]

By the way Guy, one point I neglected to address in my reply to you was how this whole episode reflects upon your purported "romancing" of providers.

If it isn't already abundantly clear to everyone, your "romancing" of providers is nothing more than the sucking-up and boot-licking that I dismissed it as long ago. Rather than the besotted puppy dog you attempt to portray, you are just another john seeking to curry favor with whatever group best serves your needs, which in this case is the schoolyard bully and his henchmen. How else would one justify your undying support for one melodramatic and irrational Florida based former provider and your attacking or "making fun of" another former provider on the same grounds.

You seem to be able to turn the "romance" on and off as it suits your needs. My experience with romance, which I reserve for women with whom I have a relationship, not those I pay for sex, indicates that if romance is anything it is hardly a convenient emotion. I think this glaring inconsistency in you actions once and for all demonstrates for all that you are nothing more than an opportunist.

In general, you may disagree with my ideology, but my arguments are always well-reasoned and **consistent**. Sorry we can't same the same for you.

--WSB

P.S. NO, I will not e-mail you. I have a life and I have no desire to spend the vast majority of it wading through your fuzzy logic and/or deleting your multitude of e-mails. Go bother someone who cares.

[Edited by wsb on 02-26-2001 at 12:42 PM]

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
... your undying support for one melodramatic and irrational Florida based former provider

Ozzy is florida based?

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
... you are just another john seeking to curry favor with whatever group best serves your needs, which in this case is the schoolyard bully and his henchmen....

as is well known by those who were jag members during the relevant period, your above characterization would be a 100% accurate description of my 9-month tenure at jag. however, things change. no more mr. nice guy ;)

[fletch]

"no more mr. nice guy"

You should change your screen name to Darth Catelli.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
.... In general, you may disagree with my ideology, but my arguments are always well-reasoned and **consistent**.

your "arguments" in the present instance have consisted largely of absurd mischaracterizations, most of which were plainly mistaken based on the evidence right here on this board.

when they were revealed as such, you resorted to a level of ad hominem that, at one time, was beneath you. 'ad hominem' is not "well-reasoned"; rather it is verbal 'brawling'.

... NO, I will not e-mail you. I have a life and I have no desire to spend the vast majority of it wading through your fuzzy logic and/or deleting your multitude of e-mails....

this is a typical instance where, even on the occasions when your conclusions follow logically from your premises, the premises themselves are 180 degrees mistaken.

you have always maintained that you keep your email address secret to avoid flaming (in spite of the fact that it is you who are the (entirely unreluctant) recipient of much of the verbal boot-licking on asp boards, including this one).

by contrast, i have consistently maintained one of the most unpopular of positions (with flame-inclined clients), and my email address in this context has been out there for all to see for over a year and a half. virtually none of the flaming has come via email (A1N being the only exception -- and then only once or twice).

this is the tip of the iceberg of how mistaken you are about virtually everything other than the relation of price to value.

but, heretofore your good faith was not in doubt. i have labored, through various channels, to place your your first bit of 'acting out' on this board in the most favorable light plausible under the circumstances.

however, the infrequent nature of your appearances here, and their belligerant irrationality, leave no reasonable interpretation other than that you are here solely to cause trouble.

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
My experience with romance, ....

wall street bankers, by definition, do not "experience ... romance". you may have on occasion allowed yourself to experience a certain degree of 'bourgeoise sentmentality'. the two have almost no connection.

... I have a life ....

your 'life' is to a life as a a quotation whizzing by on Quotron is to intrinsic value.

[Casper]

Quotrons, are those things still around !!!

[guy catelli]

Originally posted by wsb
...I think this glaring inconsistency in you actions once and for all demonstrates for all that you are nothing more than an opportunist....

i have consistently championed the cause of increased public respect for honest working people by their employers who have received the services they contracted for. you cannot cite a single contrary example among the many hundreds of messages i have posted.

that has nothing to do with the present case -- a former escort engaged in deception and folly on asp boards. i never signed on for 'escorts, be they right or wrong'. i have stated my opposition to deceptive trade practices from day one, and many times since.

your claimed 'consistency' (which you presume to deem an 'ideology') has been in your public hostility to those who work for you. you're proud of that kind of 'consistency'!?! shame on you!

[Edited by guy catelli on 03-04-2001 at 02:24 AM]