Dick

Thanks GT for the clarification. I realise now your original post was intended entirely another way and not as I read it. Funny how each of us in isolation read things differently, and I can see now how others in the thread thought my post Over The Top. However, I think you know where I was coming from. But having read you revised post that begins 'I hear the red carpet should be rolled out for the grand dame... I can see I'm not the only one prone to OTT remarks on occasion. Further apologies unnecessary

My apologies if I offended anyone with my choice of words. But Gay Thailand's opening post about another whose name is not spoken didn't come across to me as either friendly or complimentary. To the contrary I found his tone mocking and derisory. My point is this: If the 'owner' or 'founder' opens a thread for no other reason than (as appears to me) to mock another, how can he expect the rest of the ethernet posting here to follow the board's published code of conduct? Not the example I would have expected the founder to set. It didn't come across as worthy. And why the label 'new Sheriff'? Is it intended to suggest the subject of his post is in someway a police or agency informant involved in the current cleanup campaign? Are we meant to wonder whether the subject of his post (whoever he is) was in some way involved in certain establishments being singled out? "This is what I heard, let me be the first to tell you." Oh Really!

I'm astounded that the owner should open a thread for no other purpose than to condemn demean and belittle another poster. Whilst not actually named, it isn't hard for most readers to see through the thinly disguised description and identify the subject of the owner's derision. Worse still, the owner opens his statement with the remark 'I hear', so we're not even reading fact, merely hearsay. When the owner opens a thread with such remarks, he's in effect inviting and giving free license to further criticisms to be posted. I would have thought the owner above all else should uphold the integrity of the board's code of conduct: "Gay Thailand membership is restricted to Adults Only. That Message Center members shall be expected to behave as adults is not an undue burden. The expected conduct standard for the Gay Thailand forums is the same as that observed everyday in society by adults in our neighborhoods, towns, and cities. It is based on straightforward mature behavior, civility and courtesy that you find in a neighborhood Pub or Tavern where neighbors and acquaintances joined by occasional strangers come together to socialize in good temper, to share conversation, and to hoist, in moderation, a glass of favorite beer or wine or a cup of coffee or tea. These forums are NOT presented for abusive arguing and name calling, score settling, thread stalking, or general cyberspace blood sport for the chronically bored."

Thank you TJ for re-posting my message on this Board. The Project's website has now been updated with additional pictures and a full report which can be seen here. I would encourage everyone to take a look and read the examples of how the Project is helping real people on the ground and making a difference. 'The Trustees wish to thank everyone who has supported this project in various ways and in doing so has helped the kids who may otherwise not have the support to make their difficult lives a little easier.' 'We would also confirm that as in previous years 100% of donations have been used for the benefit of the kids. No deductions have been made for administration costs as these have been met personally by the trustees. Also the travel costs of trustees visiting Pattaya have been met privately by those trustees as have any other expences associated with their visits.'

The thread is about equitable moderation. Smiles put forward a point of view, and one which I very much agree with, to the effect that too much Moderator intervention perhaps stifles posts from genuine contributors. As I see it, the 'issue' arises only because Gaybutton posts as both Moderator and individual, and many might be confused as to whether a post by Gaybutton represents personal opinion, or an expression or edict on behalf of the board as Moderator. On most Gay Thailand Boards that members are or have been familiar with, the Moderator(s)/Owner have only 'spoken' when it was necessary to issue official proclamations. On this Board in this enlightened environment, I am wondering if the facility to engage in argumentative reply with the moderator is really such a good thing, especially when Gaybutton's reputation from his own defunct Board precedes him. Does an argumentative debate with the Moderator encourage rule breaking? Wouldn't it be far better if the the poster known as Gaybutton, and the Moderator using that 'handle', parted ways and posted in their own right? The Moderator in him could become Moderator 3, Jaws2, Hydra1, or whatever. At least then any personal irritations directed to or eminating from the Gaybutton handle could remain separate from the Post of Moderator as represents this Board. Having said that, I firmly believe in strong proactive Moderation. I believe the bud should be nipped in time to prevent a thread festering. But gently please. I have been particularly dismayed by those who have adopted a multiplicity of 'handles' (sorry, a term I enjoy from my CB radio days) here and on other Boards to carry on their monologue. Much has been written. I even know and like some of those of whom I speak. I feel compelled to tell them now that their present style of posting doesn't do them any favours, and if my own appreciation is anything to go by, they continue to lose both the respect of their friends and the posting community. It's so awful ~ when you read something written by someone you know and (had) respected, and can not but assume he is entering second childhood! There but for the Grace of God go I. So let me tell you... for f***'s sake, buck up, open your eyes, use the spell check, and let 'it' lie. You'll do us all a favour.

Peter. When 'my friend' caught crabs 5 yrs ago, his doctor in London prescribed a liquid that had to be left on overnight, and the dose repeated about 6 days later to catch the new brood. Apparently you can't kill the eggs the adults deposit on your body... you have to wait for the blighters to hatch. The active ingredient in his liquid was Malathion. His Doctor apparently spent some time checking with the pharmacists to identify which of the many liquids on the market were 'safe' to use. If there had been a 'wash & go' alternative available then, I'm sure he would have prescribed it. Wash your bed linen daily, and make sure it is ironed. The washing AND ironing process together should eliminate any lice or eggs deposited on the sheets to prevent them crawling back while you sleep. Likewise, wash and iron your daily clothing that you wear during this period.

You actually found real yellow lemons for sale? I usually have to bring my own, and explain to the staff in my favoured bar what they are and how to slice... and to add only to my G & T's, naturally. Couldn't get lemons in the Maldives either. So I imagine its something to do with the climate this far East. I don't know. But if you can now find in your supermarket... don't knock it!

Having been constantly reminded by the (now ex) boyfriend when it comes to tipping ~ "20 Baht enough!", and bearing in mind that Thai people generally hold the view that you shouldn't tip people for doing their job, I use the following yardsticks as my guide:- luggage: 20 Baht per bag/case. And if the bell boys try the double delivery scam where once having delivered you and your bags to your room, another bell boys knocks at the door a minute later saying 'solly, mistake' and takes you and your baggage to a new room... I don't tip again. waiters: 20 Baht on anything up to a few hundered Baht spend is what the waiter would expect; up to 50 Baht for more significant spends. If in a larger party then obviously you would be expected to give more generously. If in a larger restaurant dining with company or where you know the service at times is not so attentive, I will usually tip the boss man 50 or even 100 Baht when I sit down... just so he knows I expect good service. It works! But all the above is forgotten when you've the 'hots' for the waiter serving:-) Meter Taxi: round the meter fare up to the nearest 10 Baht e.g. if the meter says 56, pay 60. Longer distance Limo/Cab between hotel/airport: 50 Baht provided he has driven safely and has handled the luggage in/out of the trunk. Hotel Maid: 20-50 Baht per day (leave it on a pillow), depending on how much mess we've made, and how well she generally cleans up. I would advise you to forget our Western habit of taking 10% or 15% whatever off the bottom line and using that as your yardstick. Think in lump sum terms regardless of your spend. I hope the above will provide a general idea. As mentioned above, opinion on tipping boys for sexual services varies considerably. In a top bar in Bangkok, provided the boy has performed satisfactorily, I think 1500 Baht short time plus 100 for taxi is not ungenerous. Adjust that accordingly in lesser bars. Long time add 500 Baht with the offer of breakfast, but you should expect the boy to 'take care you' in bed again in the morning.

David Jewel. There are a number of long threads over on Sawatdee Board, wherein people have asked questions about Sunee accommodations and Howards in particular during the past 2 years. Many posts for and against. Worth making a search with the keyword 'Howards'. Bucknaway for example (I believe a pal of yours) like myself, thought the beds too hard. Having tried both accommodations, I prefer Monty's... better rooms and location for my money, plus more farang to talk to or seek local advice from. But that's my opinion. But Jomtien now boasts decent inexpensive accommodations as described above if you are looking for an alternative to Boystown. I would also add the Lek Hotel to my short list. It's a couple of blocks North of Boystown, not gay but staff and straight guests don't mind people like us. It's buffet restaurant is very popular and attracts non residents for breakfast. No joiners fees. http://www.asiatravel.com/lek/index.html

Perhaps it's the example set by other moderators on other liberal forums to which people like us have written previoulsy, but somewhere in the back of my mind lies the thought that Moderators should set an example and ought to show some tendence towards the impartial, if only to maintain the respect of their office. If a poster writes something that contravenes Board rules or convention, or makes defamatory remarks towards other members, then one would expect the Moderator to exercise some form of censure or reprimand. But when a Moderator puts himself in a position of confrontation, toe to toe if you will, with someone he might regard as a protagonist, and hurls insults ~ calling that poster a 'damn fool', and a 'Doctor Cyclops', as well as criticising his abilities with the written word, to my mind it devalues that Moderator's currency. It's human nature to retaliate to an insult; that's why we so often respect a Moderator for his restraint and canny foresight. But when a Moderator directs insults at other posters, I believe it encourages others to follow suit, and only strives to perpetuate conflict on the Board. As on the football field, the crime of retaliation is as great if not greater than the original deed. Who's guarding the guards?