Receipts

[Guest]

Let’s just say I have them

[TotallyOz]

??

[Guest]

Hi @TotallyOz - since you’ve asked 

receipts, as the kids call things these days, is typically digital proof that one has in their possession that can be used to prove a point of dispute 

so, when I say “I have the receipts” - I’m saying I have digital proof to backup some recent points of dispute in this forum.

Do you want to know more ?? 

 

 

[PeterRS]

15 hours ago, Slvkguy said:

Do you want to know more ?? 

I don't think anyone wants to know more. Put it to bed!

[Lucky]

8 hours ago, PeterRS said:

I don't think anyone wants to know more. Put it to bed!

+1

[Lonnie]

9 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Put it to bed!

Please.

[Riobard]

As I understand it, if I have this right, forum member S posted a trip report some weeks ago, including details about a service provided by advertiser G. Eventually member D backchatted with S to discuss the S-G transaction, seemingly innocent enough. [I have altered some cap letters in a way that does not undermine tracking the event sequence]

D subsequently engaged with G, stating and using his social connection with S in order to extract service playbook details, etc, information-seeking that someone like G might have handled differently had D simply been one inquirer among a horde of inquirers to which those in G’s service industry would be ordinarily accustomed. But then D had evidently pushed so hard and so inappropriately for information, attention, what have you, from G that G took time from his service schedule to castigate S for putting D onto him. This inevitably eroded S’s social capital with G, perhaps extending beyond due to service network interactions. Meanwhile, it appears that D could, or expected to, walk away unscathed. 

In actuality, D could have reached out to any number of players in G’s service industry … without manipulatively prevailing upon any forum member for the purposes of seeking an ‘in’ with the hope/goal of enhanced attention from (a) specific service provider(s).

S naturally and justifiably related this ugly experience on the forum, stimulating a discussion regarding how to handle sensitive information in the context of a forum in which some members’ behaviour and motives surrounding such information cannot be reliably predicted. 

It seems the plot then thickens as it appears that, not surprisingly, D quickly re-emerged as O. There may be other capital letters representative of players involved, given the flexibility within the forum for altering handles. However, S has only ever been S. 

S, and most of us in fact, view the prerogative of changing handles as legitimate. However, this happened very quickly, the incident funeral meats still lukewarm, and S perhaps still understandably wishing for, one, some kind of accounting from D/O+, and, two, desiring to alert other members regarding an established interloper’s pattern of ingratiating himself with others with the likely intent of repeating the kind of behaviour and trust-engendering that ultimately bit S in the ass. 

When S then initiated an exchange with O regarding an accounting of D’s behaviour that COULD be attributable to O, on the assumption D=O, it seems that O responded as if S was being inappropriately unwelcoming of new members, as if in fact S were being persecutory. This was puzzling and suspect because O could have carried on with his stated ‘new’ membership agenda without feeding the assumption he was, in fact, the original interloper D. His aim, apparently, was to split the forum membership into camps, hoping to conquer S, S being representative of decorum regarding how members handle information about service providers. 

S has naturally persisted in drawing attention to these dynamics because in addition to having been manipulated regarding the original G information scenario, he is reacting to apparent attempts made by the interloper to hoodwink him and the forum at large. I do believe that S may have cards yet to play, has alluded to such, and wishes to utilize his evidentiary data judiciously. At this point, an overt admission from O as to identity and troublemaking history is not required by SOME of us, according to our tolerance level for ambiguity. 

The membership IS divided, has capitulated to an interloper’s shenanigans, as some are blind to the unfortunate set of events, some may support D’s actions pursued with impunity because they have unique forbearance or would be inclined to replicate such behaviour themselves to a degree, or some may think S’s patient steadfastness is beyond the pale. The latest response trend seems to be that S bears more the brunt of responsibility for the spicy dynamics that have emerged regarding a theme that should be relevant to all us. Perhaps this is partly a result of the identity ambiguity already referred to. 

Sure, we all want more entertaining and salutary posts to read, but there is a process within social media that often calls for an accounting of behaviour. Personally, unlike a number of others, I don’t mind the back and forth among key players within this whole scenario. Like anyone else, I can calibrate my degree of attention to the narrative. 

If I have it wrong, if D=O is untrue, I see such a judgement as a natural artefact of human error. However, a ‘Hakim’s razor’ application to the thread content leads me to believe that S’s conclusions are supportable. He did something intending to be graciously accommodating and the cascade effect is a forum malignancy not of his making.

I suggest pausing and taking stock of where most of the sucking up one side of the system and shitting down the other side of the system is actually occurring. 

[Riobard]

A little off topic, but perhaps instructions need to be clearer about how to finesse the follow-through of stated intent to block member-specific details and forum content. And correct, not using this pro anybody. This is the kind of person I can be. It’s for a lark; I am shameless. LOL

[Latbear4blk]

I think I feel compelled to publicly thank @Slvkguy (S in @Riobard's story for those who are not paying attention) for two major achievements:

1. He has unmasked one of the most deceitful, manipulative, malign, bat crazy trolls I had never interacted with.  With the same emphasis that I express my gratitude, I want to suggest @Slvkguy to take the case privately to the owner, and end the public beefing. If anyone who is paying attention still think that the troll is an innocent victim, they are blind. 
2. He has trigger @Riobardto write a long, multiple paragraphs posts, in an language that even this not very bright English learner can understand without calling my cryptologist and Egyptologist friends to give me a hand.

THANK YOU, @Slvkguy

My gratitud is blurred, however, by a little tiny question hammering my decaying brain:

Why did @Riobard pick a Capital O instead of a capital J?

[Guest]

On 7/11/2022 at 9:52 AM, Riobard said:

Sure, we all want more entertaining and salutary posts to read, but there is a process within social media that often calls for an accounting of behaviour

this is true - and @Riobardhas articulated the entire scenario accurately.  

as for online accountability in anonymous forums - well, that hardly ever happens

however, when crossing over into the real world, things can happen differently 
in this case, the predator/abuser/troll chose to go offline using text messaging to harass their target 

when retelling this story to a friend, they asked me to send the screenshots of the text messages.  The text messages included a phone number, name & face picture which I assumed were all fake to shield the trolls real identity.  
A few hours later, my friend confirmed that the original text ID information was indeed real & authentic. He used a  reverse phone lookup to authenticate the phone number & identity from the screenshot. My friend explained that once a real name & phone number are known, then it can be cross-indexed to get a complete profile including home address, previous addresses, employer, birthday, friends & family, and social media accounts.  Who knew all that could be had for free with a few clicks ?  

It’s all relevant because trolls thrive in online environments where they are anonymous.  The point here is that this troll is no longer anonymous. 

The “receipts” will not be posted as it wouldn’t make any difference, except to one person.  

Participation in this forum has opened my eyes to many things - the abuse of the working boys is pretty high on the list. I had no idea this was ongoing & tolerated by many.  The irony is that the guys who are the real clients usually treat everyone extremely well & the guys who never hire make it impossible for the working guys to trust anyone. 

Btw - this was never about me.  It was about someone here abusing a working guy who is trying to scratch together a living and having to deal with a first world entitled asshole who gets off on some weird sexting fetish.  Using deception, trickery and information obtained here in the process.

Turns out the garoto was the smartest guy in this situation bc he wouldn’t take a call/text from a blocked or unverifiable number.  His only mistake was believing that the abuser was a friend of mine - and because i treated him well, he assumed someone claiming to be my friend would treat him well too.  

when this troll goes away & comes back once again (and he will) - might I suggest @DramaQueens as the new screenname ? he knows exactly what I mean

Many lessons learned indeed.  

No need to take it to @TotallyOz because the case is closed.  On my end.