Lagoa

[Latbear4blk]

22 minutes ago, Riobard said:

Says an anti-science skinflint punter so transparently condescending that he uses the denigrating patronizing term “boi” directly in his handle. Fake, subjective, confirmation biased to justify point of view. Conjecture overconfidently stated as fact. Typical 21st century posturing to support a gringo-centric narrative. 

Over dozens of encounters across 9.5 years of visits I have detected no indication whatsoever that pricepoint contributes meaningfully to variance in terms of the quality of the encounter delivered or manipulative upsell attempts by local men. No correlation, so no point fabricating causation. 

 

And you think that your personal experience is statistically more meaningful than others' personal experience. Very scientific approach, indeed.

[Riobard]

1 hour ago, Latbear4blk said:

And you think that your personal experience is statistically more meaningful than others' personal experience. Very scientific approach, indeed.

Thinks for the kenan question. If I had thought of it before I would have specified only that I have standards for evaluating claims. I thought it was implicit.

No, there is no inferential statistical application utilized, though I could design same. I will put this according to my view that you are bright … 

What my take does is merely contribute to an overall grade of reliability of information. The standard of endorsement of a singular point of view, the predominant one having no basis other than that monetary anxiety and cynicism seem to underpin it, is consistency of impressions among a group of reasonable size and based on a decent amount of actual transactions. 

You are neither naïve nor in the dark, but an inexperienced punter lobbing multiple questions here deserves to read a range of impressions about trade trends and be faced with the task of synthesizing information and doing what he seems best according to his particular context. 

It’s more incumbent upon those asserting the unsubstantiated relation between pricepoint and manipulation to provide concrete evidence because all that somebody that opines no relation having occurred following a solid duration of time can do is raise eyebrows and roll eyes regarding the untested claim.

I live according to observing experiences that deviate from the null hypothesis. I tend not to record a nothing. I’m saying that my collective recollection anchors the null hypothesis. In contrast, posters here tend to highlight that the null hypothesis is rejectable and they say it is so because they have said it and, well, implying “everybody knows it”. Truth Social much? 

Arbitrarily bypassing a hot more expensive provider simply diminishes the range of data capture that more objectively and scientifically contributes to the hypothesis’ validity because there is no contributory information other than the assumption underlying the decision. That’s nuts, or blatantly stupid. I for one won’t have reality skewed in this way. I should add that there is nothing verifiable about my skill or demeanour that has exempted me from manipulation, that would predispose GdePs to steer clear of shenanigans. 

What I am saying is that I have not observed the anticipatory expectation that others describe and that could have evolved for them from episodic outlier encounters. That is no more or less scientific but I have experienced an expansive range of cost, having been very often situated in the low end of the bell curve but not nearly wedged into it.

What I have often witnessed first hand onsite, consistent with patterns here, is gringos obsessing about product and cost. A pleasant 1:1 social conversation, when joined by additional punter parties, usually evolves to the topic. It’s not unlike dinner with a group of flight attendants. You can try to steer the convo to other subjects such as movies, etc, but it springs back to work scheds of the month. It’s a natural common denominator. Flight attendant friends on 1:1 are extremely smart and possess diverse interests. I have insufficient data to support my flight attendant example and I now avoid gringo interaction that may disabuse me of assumptions about what will transpire. 

[Riobard]

Bear in mind, @Ale4co, that many punters here hire at high volume levels representing substantial proportions of their income. They eschew hiring at home (“western world” settings) and utterly panic at the prospect of paying greater than 10% of home base rates. 🤣You probably wouldn’t give a passing glance to most of their targets. Been there, seen that. If your orgasms are more financial than sexual that’s OK too. 

[ToTheCore]

Even if I know a bunch of the HOT guys get 150-200, if the guy I really want holds firm at 300, I'm still gonna go ahead and risk pissing off the locals and blow that extra 20 bucks.  

[BrazilianBoiChaser]

6 hours ago, Riobard said:

Thinks for the kenan question. If I had thought of it before I would have specified only that I have standards for evaluating claims. I thought it was implicit.

No, there is no inferential statistical application utilized, though I could design same. I will put this according to my view that you are bright … 

What my take does is merely contribute to an overall grade of reliability of information. The standard of endorsement of a singular point of view, the predominant one having no basis other than that monetary anxiety and cynicism seem to underpin it, is consistency of impressions among a group of reasonable size and based on a decent amount of actual transactions. 

You are neither naïve nor in the dark, but an inexperienced punter lobbing multiple questions here deserves to read a range of impressions about trade trends and be faced with the task of synthesizing information and doing what he seems best according to his particular context. 

It’s more incumbent upon those asserting the unsubstantiated relation between pricepoint and manipulation to provide concrete evidence because all that somebody that opines no relation having occurred following a solid duration of time can do is raise eyebrows and roll eyes regarding the untested claim.

I live according to observing experiences that deviate from the null hypothesis. I tend not to record a nothing. I’m saying that my collective recollection anchors the null hypothesis. In contrast, posters here tend to highlight that the null hypothesis is rejectable and they say it is so because they have said it and, well, implying “everybody knows it”. Truth Social much? 

Arbitrarily bypassing a hot more expensive provider simply diminishes the range of data capture that more objectively and scientifically contributes to the hypothesis’ validity because there is no contributory information other than the assumption underlying the decision. That’s nuts, or blatantly stupid. I for one won’t have reality skewed in this way. I should add that there is nothing verifiable about my skill or demeanour that has exempted me from manipulation, that would predispose GdePs to steer clear of shenanigans. 

What I am saying is that I have not observed the anticipatory expectation that others describe and that could have evolved for them from episodic outlier encounters. That is no more or less scientific but I have experienced an expansive range of cost, having been very often situated in the low end of the bell curve but not nearly wedged into it.

What I have often witnessed first hand onsite, consistent with patterns here, is gringos obsessing about product and cost. A pleasant 1:1 social conversation, when joined by additional punter parties, usually evolves to the topic. It’s not unlike dinner with a group of flight attendants. You can try to steer the convo to other subjects such as movies, etc, but it springs back to work scheds of the month. It’s a natural common denominator. Flight attendant friends on 1:1 are extremely smart and possess diverse interests. I have insufficient data to support my flight attendant example and I now avoid gringo interaction that may disabuse me of assumptions about what will transpire. 

You could have stated you’re a pompous know it all with less words. Reading your overly wordy responses are truly insufferable. 

[Riobard]

2 hours ago, ToTheCore said:

Even if I know a bunch of the HOT guys get 150-200, if the guy I really want holds firm at 300, I'm still gonna go ahead and risk pissing off the locals and blow that extra 20 bucks.  

You’re not pissing anybody off. That’s another fallacy, a myth constructed by control freaks. Their freaking out is on them. But I appreciate the possibility of annoying a whiner. That said, there would be no reason for a punter local to be privy to your expenditures unless he put his nose where it doesn’t belong. They are welcome to join here and meet their match; you obviously qualify to set things straight.

2 hours ago, BrazilianBoiChaser said:

You could have stated you’re a pompous know it all with less words. Reading your overly wordy responses are truly insufferable. 

Yeah that’s pretty much the flimsy gaslighting response I expect from somebody that’s got nothing, Twittergradeguy. I implied I expect to be shown the money and your pants pockets remain turned inside out. I thought I made it clear that I was specifically addressing the challenge of an academic individual I already know to be intelligent. 

If you don’t want your recommendations to be called out, disagreed with, don’t load them with cynical offensive stereotypes and do expect that they are going to be read through the lens of critical appraisal.

My stats prof summarized inadequate assessments best. Convoluted Reasoning & Antiscientific Pomposity. Maybe you know him seeing as you parrot a term that endears me to him.

The one thing I know is that your perspective is wrong and a disservice to any newcomer that gullibly buys into it. Fortunately, we can see other examples of sensible ‘with it’ punters here that don’t take poor direction geared to opportunistic lowballing. This is a polarized topic so expect polarizing. 

Thanks for the good times. This is far more interesting and amusing than today’s crossword puzzle. 

[Latbear4blk]

2 hours ago, BrazilianBoiChaser said:

You could have stated you’re a pompous know it all with less words. Reading your overly wordy responses are truly insufferable. 

There is a Polonius in every Court. Learn to skip posts, or use the Ignore feature.

[BrazilianBoiChaser]

15 minutes ago, Latbear4blk said:

There is a Polonius in every Court. Learn to skip posts, or use the Ignore feature.

 

You’re right, I shouldn’t even have responded.

[Keithambrose]

14 hours ago, BrazilianBoiChaser said:

You could have stated you’re a pompous know it all with less words. Reading your overly wordy responses are truly insufferable. 

+1

[Riobard]

14 hours ago, Latbear4blk said:

There is a Polonius in every Court.

Oh, snap Gert, this made my morning java.🤣

You make it too easy.

As there is a scheming Rosencrantz & Guildenstern and Co.

Claudius types obvi don’t like to be called out for gaslighting.

You might be better off consulting Huckleberry for your practice runs as a Hamlet seems to elude you.

On the thread financial topic, jointly put by the non-gullible: “Do you think I am easier to be played on than a pipe? Call me what instrument you will … you cannot play upon me.”

Stick to the pipes you know and try not to play within a play within a play within a play. Get a room you two and sort out your tangle of dispatched posts to avoid own goals while I’m to be.

[bucknaway]

Message board fights.  😴

[floridarob]

13 minutes ago, bucknaway said:

Message board fights.  😴

it's always one sided with him....he likes mental masturbation, can you translate what he says?

[Riobard]

31 minutes ago, bucknaway said:

Message board fights.  😴

It’s not officially that without opinion weight class in common.

Maybe stick to the stimulating navel-gazing of daily currency exchange. 😘

IMHO no cause for celebration when advantage gringo disadvantage garoto de programa. YMMV. 

[Riobard]

Viagra toxicity alert! Somebody call the FDA. Some poor bargain basement pharm discount PDE5i-addicted sad sack doesn’t grasp that self-pleasuring by normal people is by definition inadvertently mental.

[Riobard]

On 8/3/2024 at 1:49 AM, Ale4co said:

 ok lesson learned. I’ll give it another try this time with wisdom. 

 

 

No reflection on you and I think you are sharing to be hospitable more than being in any way incompetent, but I must have missed the loopy analytical part (not yours) where the $18 dollar guy who could possibly have upsell-attempted but was in a panic about his missing locker key, combined with the $27 dollar guy that already stated his usual $54 fee yet did (shockingly!) attempt an upsell supports anything but the logical probability that a low-rate-agreement guy is no less inclined compared to a higher end rate one to attempt upsell.

This language should be relatable to those whining about failure to understand yet going in endless circles about fees. Just go up-Topic and see the endless navel-gazing and bot-like repetition about one of the most boring features of our hobby. 

Again the only way to support the claim that a higher-rate guy is more out to manipulate is for punters too cheap to attempt it sufficiently to gather trends objectively to actually do it. They won’t; ignorance trumps illumination but you can only lead a lame horse to water.

In an ideal world without influence-grasping trollification, best to position actual data as opposed to delusional assumptions against the concrete experiences of punters here that have observed no connection between provider rate and performance or finagling. 

—-
For those many intelligent readers here it’s not lost on me how much a few silly punters will go to the mat and use rudeness to subvert truth to save a few bucks. I’m quite aware a few dollars makes no difference in the grander scheme of things. Why do I do this, should you ask? It’s quite linked to my career and is quick and easy. I just hate misinformation, abject failures among punter groups to relay correctly, and I made quite a lucrative living countering bullsh*t. 

[Keithambrose]

3 hours ago, floridarob said:

it's always one sided with him....he likes mental masturbation, can you translate what he says?

Google translate gives up!

[Riobard]

Wheeeee! All emoticons count for overall reputation category upticks. I’ll take the gringo’s 10 and claim the deal was 20. I’m far less generous. Watch out for the own net, emojifiers. 

[12is12]

Somebody mentioned a function of blocking posts authored by a member. Where do I find it, and how does it work? If I use it and cant read his posts, what about other mmbrs' posts that react 2 his?

I just found out that the 3 dots on the top right of each post, lead 2 a "report" link. What things may I report, and who reads them and might act on them?

 

[Keithambrose]

1 hour ago, 12is12 said:

Somebody mentioned a function of blocking posts authored by a member. Where do I find it, and how does it work? If I use it and cant read his posts, what about other mmbrs' posts that react 2 his?

I just found out that the 3 dots on the top right of each post, lead 2 a "report" link. What things may I report, and who reads them and might act on them?

 

Let me know!

[Riobard]

Interim Exec summary:

OP goes to Espaço Lagoa. Nice guy. Humbly makes inquiries. Doesn’t demean workers with the label “boy”.

Oodles of previous board info on the subject. What could be more real in terms of the lack of an accurate answer than the existence of decades of Groundhog Day threads in which the answer is elusive. 

Punter’s been to Colombia once or twice, Brazil a handful of times. Apparently makes him an expert on comparing quality and presentation of men within same region based on nationality. Castigates Colombians. Purports to possess the bottom line of objective factual data on SoAmer transactional sex. Trashes escort subgroups while withholding evidentiary receipts regarding same. Digs his heels in when called out. Doesn’t like perspective challenged. Can’t wrap his head around scientific logic. Sound familiar in ‘24? 

Centred out simply for representation of distorted info. It’s a small clustered group of chaps that live to shape reality meeting their needs. Not doing everyone a favour.

Yes, please please please, guys that similarly distort info to spin narrative give him backing. That’s a central function of chat rooms. But why just 2 or 3? 

A reasonably equal number pose a contrary recollection of experience. So sue us. Thanks for the laughs. I know for sure I’m not the only amused geezer here.

Frankly, do what you want, write what you want, choose who you want if they accept you back and pay them whatever. No skin off my teeth. I have nothing to gain one way or another. I haven’t had a bad hiring experience over 10 years of Colombia and Brazil travel. My sole warning is manipulated news.

If I had written that the input was not reflective of everybody’s reality and their experiences with escorts I’d have received an equal flimsy drubbing for not expanding. That’s the way the board crumbles. 

[Latbear4blk]

17 hours ago, 12is12 said:

Somebody mentioned a function of blocking posts authored by a member. Where do I find it, and how does it work? If I use it and cant read his posts, what about other mmbrs' posts that react 2 his?

I just found out that the 3 dots on the top right of each post, lead 2 a "report" link. What things may I report, and who reads them and might act on them?

 

If you place the cursos on top of a member's nickname, without clicking, a mini window will pop up. At the bottom of the mini window, to your right, you will find the ignore menu.

The "report" feature is to report when a forum member breaks the site guidelines. I think the only moderator is @TotallyOz, but I may be wrong.

[Riobard]

1 hour ago, Latbear4blk said:

If you place the cursos on top of a member's nickname, without clicking, a mini window will pop up. At the bottom of the mini window, to your right, you will find the ignore menu.

The "report" feature is to report when a forum member breaks the site guidelines. I think the only moderator is @TotallyOz, but I may be wrong.

Not that a Bard academic with Polonius-grade mega-influencer multilingual broad-reach articles would blogger to cursos any other member.🤔

If u r 2 rprt, 4 1 thng, use ur wrds.

Thnx 4 12s or bakr 12s (13) o’ 🤣😂

[Riobard]

If anybody really wants to support the board admin to safely and legally conduct the site, I suggest using developmentally appropriate language when referring to men eliciting admiration, as opposed to creepy terms that otherwise stereotype adult MSM preferring to distance from pedophilic labelling.

Additionally, doing excited backflips over only having to pay a few bucks for sexual favours abroad simply reinforces the aforementioned stereotype. What naysayer won’t spin it as exploitation of socially & economically disadvantaged youth?

Apart from that, insults directed at trade abounding, “don’t dish it out if you … (get the drift)”

[Latbear4blk]

2 hours ago, Riobard said:

Not that a Bard academic with Polonius-grade mega-influencer multilingual broad-reach articles would blogger to cursos any other member.🤔

If u r 2 rprt, 4 1 thng, use ur wrds.

Thnx 4 12s or bakr 12s (13) o’ 🤣😂

Thank you, Polonius. @12is12, I meant to write "cursor". 

[12is12]

Thx LatBear; I understood u perfectly.

However, when I did what u said - the menu below opened up, with no "ignore".