Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 55 of 55

Thread: Warning to all escorts

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,608
    Blog Entries
    1
    Reviews
    95

    Default

    I am not referring to that that lunatic atall
    The case i refered to it was never insinuated it had anything to do with this site
    Blatant promotion should be outlawed
    but
    Vincent Browne is a Hero

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    8,638
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by samlad View Post
    I agree with you, ber.
    Hi Sam,

    Just for your info (not that you are obliged to agree with me) I'll explain why we have sometimes pulled stuff that has been in public domain.

    Sometimes independent escorts working with friends are arrested (due to that silly law that says that 2 independents working together for their own safety can be considered a brothel) and I feel that is harsh enough, and it is bad enough that these ladies get "named and shamed" in a newspaper without everyone here adding to it also, so generally when cases like this come up I ask people not to add to the Google search results on these escorts' names by creating threads about the case here. Yes the info is in the public domain, but I don't think we need to add to it here. I think it is nasty to create threads about them here under the guise of discussing current news, and it is generally only people who want to be mean to escorts that create the threads.

    Also, over the years a lot of people have been silly here, continually posting certain people's names, saying it was in the public domain that X person was caught running a brothel or whatever, so it is fair enough to keep posting their name. It just became stupid. I mean if Joe Blogs gets caught running a brothel in the morning and someone posts a thread on that with a link to an article, fine I guess, but do we need to re-post the Joe Blogs story link every week from then on? I don't think so. But that's what certain users will do under the guise of only repeating info that is in the public domain. This will also sometimes cause the person being posted about to make continual complaints to E-I about their being discussed on E-I, which is a headache for us. Posting a link to a news article is usually OK, but sometimes it gets silly, and we decide enough is enough, we are not a news site and the link has already been posted numerous times, so it is time to start deleting the link if people keep on posting it.

    We try to be fair enough. This issue just isn't black and white. It's grey sometimes. And when it is grey there are those who would disagree with us and say we should never delete a link to a news article in the public domain, but I personally think we should sometimes, when it is hurting an escort who hasn't really done anything wrong or it is becoming silly repeat attacks on some person's name.

    Pat x

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    8,638
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    By the way, I know Ber and maybe other will disagree with me now! I'm sorry, I haven't the heart to keep debating this topic as I feel it has been debated so much already and it is one of those topics we'll never all agree on, as it is complex and difficult and there probably isn't any right or wrong way. I was just throwing my 2 cent in and I'm off now! ;-P

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,608
    Blog Entries
    1
    Reviews
    95

    Default repeat

    Links have been deleted here that have only been posted once not repeatedly and not related to individual escorts
    This an adult escort site so i dont think its a stretch if a pimp is arrestted and convicted that it would be a topical
    issue and a matter of intrest to forum members. If i go on a car site i expect cars to be discussed if i go on an escort
    site i think i should expect all elements of the buisness to be allowed be discussed
    Blatant promotion should be outlawed
    but
    Vincent Browne is a Hero

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,246
    Blog Entries
    1
    Reviews
    55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ber View Post
    Well try as they may they have nothing to link him to any of those
    I believe there is serious scaremongering going on here again the media are whipping up a frenzy,. ive no doubt
    this guy will be well monitored and he will be well aware of that.Dont for a minute believe the gardai wont be keeping
    tabs on him be it unofically
    there may be scaremongering Ber, but in this case I think it's justified. This guy was working a few hundreds yards down the road from where a young woman disappeared in the nineties, outside Newbridge. He pleaded guilty in the case where he was caught simply because he knew it would reduce his sentence. He refused to even talk to the cops while in prison about other cases. Half a dozen women didn't just disappear into thin air - somebody was responsible. He fits the profile in every way, but there is just no evidence. He seems to be totally remorseless, and I honestly pray that the Guards have the resources to keep up with him.
    It must be awfully hard for the families of those missing women at the best of times, but infinitely worse at this time.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •