jgoo

Seems to be almost a default position by several people to say someone is using a pseudonym rather than making some effort to discuss the point being raised. I've noticed that in several instances and while I have no idea if in fact that may be the case with others, I do think it becomes rather tiresome when it is raised without any basis or grounding in fact.

Don't they have the right (if we are in fact given rights on this site) to participate? Why the need to get rid of anyone? I am not trying to be argumentative, and I certainly don't want to hijack this thread, but it seems to me that there is some predisposition by some against some members and their participation. I truly would like to understand.

If there is an issue someone has with this site I hope they would be able to explicitly spell it out, for the purpose of either trying to explain why they don't participate or speculate as to why others may not, with some constructive intention of making it a more suitable and welcoming place. This is certainly not the intent of this specific thread to open that discussion, but nevertheless it is one worthy of exploring and perhaps something could be learned along the way.

Nothing silly about dying in a car crash. Very sad indeed.

Roger Ebert's review of the movie was perfect, from my perspective: "Throw Momma from the Train" is a series of missed opportunities and unexploited situations, a movie that wants to have genuine nastiness at its heart but never quite works up the energy or the nerve to be truly heartless. Couldn't have said it better and I have always rated it as sub-par in all categories of what makes a good movie...including the key actors' performances.

I budget and track my costs/expenses for this little hobby of mine closely so I have a pretty good handle on what I spend per year. Based on my hiring preferences, the extra expenses beyond what are paid in fees and tips to the escort is typically and 50% to 60% additional.

Just to clarify and to help with consistency, are you looking for answers based on just the amount paid to the escort directly or is it inclusive of all costs associated with the appointment (which might include entertainment, travel, meals, etc)?

For those interested in taking the quiz that I believe the survey is based on, here it is: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0105/Are-you-smarter-than-an-atheist-A-religious-quiz/When-does-the-Jewish-Sabbath-begin For whatever reason, it would not work in chrome but did in explorer.

Very interesting thread. It caused me to wonder how commercial space travel vehicles are licensed, permitted and/or approved. I am fairly confident, admittedly without knowing all the details involved, that commercial air travel has a rather developed process to approve new aircraft designs, which undoubtedly involves new technologies at times. I would hope (expect) at least the same rigor would be applied for commercial space vehicles. I would further hope (expect) that this would extend to test vehicles and test lauches/flights. I googled this question I had and found that there is a part of the FAA tasked with various responsibilities related to commercial space travel, as it relates to US responsibilities, and it is the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. I thought it was very enlightening and for those interested in the details, here are two links for your perusal: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Commercial_Space_Transportation It would seem reasonable to state that commercial space vehicles are pushing the envelop of various aspects related to what is well established in the rest of commercial air travel. As is often the case, there may be some catching up in establishing or adjusting monitoring and controls as things move into new areas such as this. The important thing, it seems to me, is that a thorough review is done to see not only the cause of the accident but also how effective is the monitoring, control and approval process that is currently in place. We may learn that the rigor does in fact exist (and the accident happened regardless of well understood and managed/mitigated risk) or we may learn there are clear deficiencies. Time will tell.

I've had pies that are square and cornbreat that is round. The shape does not define either, rather what it is made of and method of preparation.

Many factors go into determining, on an individual basis, whether or not buying organic is worth it. Here is a decent article about that: http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/organic-food/art-20043880?pg=1 I personally buy organic as much as I can because I believe it is overall better for the environment and I am willing and able to pay a premium for that belief. I don't see anything really surprising or shocking in the results of this because we have no idea how selective the video is in the responses they are showing, the actual level of "expertise" of those sampling the food and the impact of various extraneous factors, such as someone being interviewed on film and the impact that may have on their response.

And if you have the time or interest, this is quite fascinating as well... http://youtu.be/9FF5K8VlcRI Ben Crystal is easy on the eyes too

Perhaps some here may find this as interesting as I did.... http://youtu.be/gPlpphT7n9s

When I was an undergrad and in a frat, we did lots of "crazy" things that weren't directly related to our academic pursuits. However, it was part of the college experience and building long lasting friendships.....and a hell of a lot of fun to blow off steam, having fun, etc etc. And it didn't in any way prevent me from graduating summa cum laude from an ivy league school so I am sure my parents had nothing to complain or worry about. Seems to me that these "kids" were doing nothing more than what we did 30+ years ago, just another medium and way of expressing their fun. I enjoyed the video very much.

I plan on placing an order over the weekend and will let you know how it went. Here is a whimsical video on the latest offerings that I enjoyed: http://youtu.be/90NJOpjq02M

This is a truly beautiful song with depth of meaning and emotion. I know this artist very well and hold him in high regard. One can relate to or interpret the meaning at whatever level it touches them based on their own experiences of course. Also, one can also simply enjoy the beauty of the totality of the song without even trying to gather insight or reflection. A video may or may not always compliment that interpretation so I often tend to just listen to the artist performance. In this case, however, there was for me a nice synthesis between the music and the video that added something extra special that is difficult to articulate. I came across this, for those that would like to hear the artist's intent: A quote directly from Matt, regarding the song. "The biggest love of my life had fallen out of love with me because he thought I had fallen out of love with him. This was the saddest thing that had happened in my life romantically to date. The song was a real attempt to reconcile with someone who meant very much to me." Using the metaphor of a roller coaster for a relationship, and that roller coaster, like the relationship, coming to an end. Also, about trying to let go at the end of a relationship.

It is always interesting how different people view and react to posts in a variety of ways. For me, I don't necessarily see it as stirring up trouble and controversy although it certainly had the potential to do so (if that was his intent, and I have no idea if it was, then it seems for the most part it failed) . I viewed it more as a retrospective to summarize his observation and to perhaps prod some of those listed to respond or participate further. It is an approach that may be a bit unconventional in its style but still seems valid. I suppose that some listed might respond in a way that would cause trouble and controversy, depending on their own predisposition to the subject at hand, while others (and I would include myself in that group) might just respond (and maybe even continue to participate) in a more congenial way. I don't have any issue with people being called out, and I believe while the same point could have been made without naming names, I do think the point is a bit stronger by doing so. Likely I would not have responded if my name had not been listed. I also like it when someone makes an attempt to be as specific as possible (and allowed) about things with some backup info and facts to support their position. It makes the argument more robust, in my view, and gives others the chance to more thoroughly evaluate what is being stated. I loathe, for the most part, when people make statements with a broad stroke of generalities or vagueness. I guess I just look at it from a different perspective but certainly respect the views of others who do not appreciate the approach taken. Others also come to this with more background on the original poster and his past behaviors, attitudes, etc that I am not necessarily knowledgeable about. Yet I can only react to how I see things through my own set of lenses with my own background knowledge. Just my two cents worth.

Very well done, soldier.

If they are just for show, then a little leeway is fine in how they act, however these guys are more than that and regardless of the boredom factor, they need to be disciplined and follow the proper decorum.

I respectfully don't agree that your bottom line applies to everyone of us you listed and who posted during the recent hiatus of Daddy's site, as it certainly does not apply to me. Not sure it is widely known by the regular posters here but during that period (I don't recall the precise timing), all deactivated account holders on Boytoy were contacted by email indicating that their accounts were re-activated and invited to come over here to participate in the site. As there wasn't any other forum to check out during the period, I took him up on the offer. I did do a single post and I don't believe (from my review of what I wrote) that I was complaining about Daddy, and certainly my intent in coming back wasn't for that purpose. Certainly some of the people you listed did take advantage of the opportunity to complain and got caught up in the frenzy of the particular thread. The reason I haven't been compelled to post more is more involved, relating to my own preferences, how I view this particular site and other factors. I'll try to find some time to succinctly articulate some of the things that may be relevant in that regard. But of course whatever I may say is from one person's perspective but I hope it goes to the point that there is many possible reasons why some don't stay or revert to being lurkers rather than actively participate. I may be misinterpreting the intent of this thread but I thought I would jump in as I saw my name in the original post and for whatever reason didn't want people to get the wrong idea of what brought me back, which certainly wasn't to bash Daddy or anyone else.

I observe both sites (specifically the forums) and it seems to me to be pretty clear that the two have different philosophies in how to moderate. Simplistically speaking, Daddy's is over moderated and Oz's is under moderated. Assuming Daddy's forum comes back on line, which I believe it will, this provides people who want to participate with choices, always a good thing imho. People that are put off by the way one is operated can go to the other or just go away if they don't like either (or start up their own site and see if they can figure out how to be somewhere in between). The "marketplace" will provide some indication of overall preference for the style/philosophy (as in how many different people post at each site, the number of guests observing, the number of different threads, the liveliness of discussions, etc). The "under" moderation here seems to have worked for the most part for the group that regularly posts here but like all things there are times when situations arise that test how well it works. Both forums have their hot buttons that typically cause a huge kerfuffle (topics with Benjamin Nicholas comes to mind over there as an example and topics about Daddy's site over here). Those topics (among others) often bring out the worst in some posters. The difference is that the BN thread would likely be locked down while threads about Daddy's site are left open. And would a thread even be allowed to go on over at Daddy's discussing BoyToy? I don't know for sure but I have my own speculation on the answer to that question. Based on that, and considering one takes the bad with the good, make a decision as to which one suits your sensibilities better. As far as more escorts participating in either forum, after years around both I have reluctantly concluded that it ain't gonna happen. It doesn't work at the over moderated site and it doesn't work at the under moderated site.

I for one plan to start coming here more often and get used to the format. I may peek over at the other site from time to time but I doubt I'll be doing much posting there any longer.

I got quite angry reading the account of what happened. This young man's future is potentially compromised by the actions taken by the coach for what I consider a minor infraction (lying to his coach, which btw he ultimately corrected the mistake on his own). Clearly he has discretion in how to deal with this and he chose something that is unfair and, imho, biased. Did the punishment fit the crime? I think not and I only hope he is able to move forward and upward to better opportunities.