Message in a bottle

Discussion in 'General Industry Related Topics' started by Candide, Feb 21, 2001.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    i have consistently championed the cause of increased public respect for honest working people by their employers who have received the services they contracted for. you cannot cite a single contrary example among the many hundreds of messages i have posted.

    that has nothing to do with the present case -- a former escort engaged in deception and folly on asp boards. i never signed on for 'escorts, be they right or wrong'. i have stated my opposition to deceptive trade practices from day one, and many times since.

    your claimed 'consistency' (which you presume to deem an 'ideology') has been in your public hostility to those who work for you. you're proud of that kind of 'consistency'!?! shame on you!

    [Edited by guy catelli on 03-04-2001 at 02:24 AM]
  2. Casper

    Casper

    Messages:
    8,268
    Quotrons, are those things still around !!!
  3. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    wall street bankers, by definition, do not "experience ... romance". you may have on occasion allowed yourself to experience a certain degree of 'bourgeoise sentmentality'. the two have almost no connection.

    your 'life' is to a life as a a quotation whizzing by on Quotron is to intrinsic value.
  4. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    your "arguments" in the present instance have consisted largely of absurd mischaracterizations, most of which were plainly mistaken based on the evidence right here on this board.

    when they were revealed as such, you resorted to a level of ad hominem that, at one time, was beneath you. 'ad hominem' is not "well-reasoned"; rather it is verbal 'brawling'.

    ... NO, I will not e-mail you. I have a life and I have no desire to spend the vast majority of it wading through your fuzzy logic and/or deleting your multitude of e-mails....

    this is a typical instance where, even on the occasions when your conclusions follow logically from your premises, the premises themselves are 180 degrees mistaken.

    you have always maintained that you keep your email address secret to avoid flaming (in spite of the fact that it is you who are the (entirely unreluctant) recipient of much of the verbal boot-licking on asp boards, including this one).

    by contrast, i have consistently maintained one of the most unpopular of positions (with flame-inclined clients), and my email address in this context has been out there for all to see for over a year and a half. virtually none of the flaming has come via email (A1N being the only exception -- and then only once or twice).

    this is the tip of the iceberg of how mistaken you are about virtually everything other than the relation of price to value.

    but, heretofore your good faith was not in doubt. i have labored, through various channels, to place your your first bit of 'acting out' on this board in the most favorable light plausible under the circumstances.

    however, the infrequent nature of your appearances here, and their belligerant irrationality, leave no reasonable interpretation other than that you are here solely to cause trouble.
  5. fletch

    fletch Voice of Reason

    Messages:
    197
    "no more mr. nice guy"

    You should change your screen name to Darth Catelli.
  6. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    {going for the gold!}

    as is well known by those who were jag members during the relevant period, your above characterization would be a 100% accurate description of my 9-month tenure at jag. however, things change. no more mr. nice guy ;)
  7. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    Ozzy is florida based?
  8. wsb

    wsb

    Messages:
    523
    By the way Guy, one point I neglected to address in my reply to you was how this whole episode reflects upon your purported "romancing" of providers.

    If it isn't already abundantly clear to everyone, your "romancing" of providers is nothing more than the sucking-up and boot-licking that I dismissed it as long ago. Rather than the besotted puppy dog you attempt to portray, you are just another john seeking to curry favor with whatever group best serves your needs, which in this case is the schoolyard bully and his henchmen. How else would one justify your undying support for one melodramatic and irrational Florida based former provider and your attacking or "making fun of" another former provider on the same grounds.

    You seem to be able to turn the "romance" on and off as it suits your needs. My experience with romance, which I reserve for women with whom I have a relationship, not those I pay for sex, indicates that if romance is anything it is hardly a convenient emotion. I think this glaring inconsistency in you actions once and for all demonstrates for all that you are nothing more than an opportunist.

    In general, you may disagree with my ideology, but my arguments are always well-reasoned and **consistent**. Sorry we can't same the same for you.

    --WSB

    P.S. NO, I will not e-mail you. I have a life and I have no desire to spend the vast majority of it wading through your fuzzy logic and/or deleting your multitude of e-mails. Go bother someone who cares.

    [Edited by wsb on 02-26-2001 at 12:42 PM]
  9. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    WSB,

    i've been making fun of Candi's aspiring to melodrama but achieving farce instead, because i think it's the wisest response to such cases, on balance. at one time, i relegated you to the same status. your present conduct on this board may suggest you harbor a certain nostalgia for those days.

    my problem is not with Candi, per se; rather, it's your conduct here with Val and now with Ozzy; and, secondarily, your whining about your posts being deleted. if your posts are being deleted more than mine, that alone should give you pause for thought.

    i don't in any way, shape, or form see A1N and Candi as "co-conspirators". if you think i wrote something that constititues an "admission" of such, please specify where i did so, in order that i might promptly edit or delete it. if you cannot do so, it is yet another demonstration that, though you may mean well, you are quite often mistaken even about what's 'between the four corners of the document', never mind elsewhere.

    A1N is the only escort, before or since, who has ever succeeded in making herself an exception to what you characterize as my "normal overzealous defense of current and former providers". by itself, that fact should be considered by anyone 'just tuning in'. (did you ever take her up on her repeated offers to you of her "homebaked lasagna"? ;))

    you have written an utterly irrational version of events involving Candi and UG. you have included some nastiness about some of the people here. i have written a point by point response that reveals same.

    for you to now respond that you will not reply to my "irrationality" is tantamount to 'default'.

    as you well know, i have always maintained that you mean well, but are the type of the 'brawler', however learned and civilized you also happen to be. but, presumed conscious good intentions nothwithstanding, there is still room for legitimate concern re: why this brawl, in this bar, with this particular manager and two of his 'best customers'?

    to say that you are doing the 'honorable' thing begs this more fundamental question: why this (supposedly) honorable thing, at this time, and this place?



    [Edited by guy catelli on 02-26-2001 at 10:19 AM]
  10. wsb

    wsb

    Messages:
    523
    Guy --

    Your continued attacks on Candide and support of those who do likewise, in glaring contrast to your normal overzealous defense of current and former providers, indicates that you still haven't gotten over your issues with A1N (qu'elle surprise!). By your own admission, you view Candide as a co-conspirator in that whole situation, so I see no point in fueling your irrationality by addressing any of your points.

    Same goes for Ozzy, who's still smarting over the thrashing he got on JAG from Infobooth (which I disagreed with, despite my feeling that the J. posts should stay up). It is pointless to try to convince him of the error of his ways, but hopefully I at least added some balance to the record.

    --WSB
  11. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    there; all better now?
  12. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    take your time....GC
  13. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    will do. i have to take some negatives to the lab right now. i'll do it when i get back.
  14. Slinky Bender

    Slinky Bender The All Powerful Moderator

    Messages:
    19,495
    Guy,

    Three times in one post ? Don't you think that's laying it on a little thick ? Perhaps that needs a wee bit of editing ( please ).
  15. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    there is no 'vast right-wing conspiracy' arrayed against you here. rather, there is a certain amount of justified annoyance that, in this instance, you're being an asshole.


    Je consens beaucoup avec l'au-dessus


    merci beaucoup

    ozzy de monsieur ;)






    [Edited by Ozzy on 02-25-2001 at 10:41 AM]
  16. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    Originally posted by wsb

    I'm afraid I must disagree....is no more appropriate than you attacking myself, Mr. P or A1N for issues you had with any of us in another forum.


    that's silly. people in general, and those who write for publication (formal or informal) especially, are accountable for their past words and deeds, whether they move on to another school, publication, public service job, etc. just ask Bork and Guanier.

    moving from one url to another doesn't confer absolute immunity for all prior words and deeds, especially with respect to the same parties!

    Although I haven't read all of her posts, as far as I can discern, Candide was going about her business on UG when this matter was brought up by others.

    her 'business' is obviously deception at many levels, getting men to fight with one another, making wildly untrue, vicious, and unfair accusations against a man who is a true friend of escorts (is that your 'problem' here?), and at the same time claiming she is being persecuted for her age and looks.

    her attacks have extended not only to clients, but to the entire male gender (with the sole exception of mr. p, perhaps due to the 'self-pity connection').

    I also disagree with your assessment of her posts as "gender bending", but that is really beside the point.

    no; she has repeatedly made gender (her own and ours) an issue. she started a thread http://www.utopiaguide.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=320 to which she posted, in relevant part,

    "I've often heard comments from men about wishing they could command the adulation and attention (and subsequent financial rewards) that popular strippers and dancers do. How many of you would trade in your manhood to be women if you could be stripper material?

    Does the pursuit of beautiful women and the enjoyment of them have anything to do with admiration for their power over other men?"

    if that's not "gender bending", what is? she's got a right to attempt to gender-bend. i welcome her doing so. but, we have a right to know which gender is attempting to do so. and the reponsible parties on this board, or any other publishers, have an obligation to protect their readers from what they have very valid reason to believe is gross deception, of one form or another.

    it was this very post that prompted an obligatory query as to whether UG readers wanted to be made
    aware of very valid bases for suspecting gender-deception. and then, it was 'Candide' herself who got in the APM's face and challenged him to name names.

    and now, you show up to blame others for the inevitable consequences of Candide's latest farce. are you actually reading the posts upon which you base charges against others? or, are you just wildly (and irresponsibly) flailing your verbal fists at people who don't share your enthusiasm for jag's version of 'objectivity', a representative example of which you have presented here for all who have never been members of jag.

    The bottom line is that she is as entitled to privacy as you or I and her outing by those who were privy to certain info and used it against her was simply wrong.

    the 'bottom line'? the bottom line is that she is an (admitted) 'drama queen' who mainly succeeds at creating farce. {enter wsb.}

    I would feel exactly the same way if any of the other UG contributers who had made the effort to chose a different handle for their contributions to this forum, presumably for the purpose of maintaining some form of anonymity, were wrongly identified by their JAG or other {asp} board handles.

    to my knowledge, she didn't show the respect of emailing the responsible parties at UG, explaining her 'situation', and requesting their cooperation and confidentiality in making a 'clean start' here. she couldn't, because she wanted to continue her deception at jag. thus, such a disclosure would have made a jag member here complicit in her deception there.

    her deception there, and her ineptness (or caluculation) here, created a situation that the responsible parties here were morally obligated to untangle for the sake of their own integrity.

    Lastly, I'll refrain from addressing the issue of who was ganging up on Candide, but I do find it curious that this attack was allowed to occur in the first place. I've seen several more benign posts deleted, so it does lead one to wonder as to what exactly the editorial standards are.

    look, you once showed yourself to be a true man of honor by speaking in my defense, at a time when no other client would. but, men of honor can sometimes behave foolishly. i was engaged in no small folly myself on one occasion (at the prompting of another instigatrix).

    here at UG, you acted like a fool with one of the most beloved escorts in the country as soon as you arrived (paralleling what, to my knowledge, was your debut on tbd, which became the first occasion for my addressing you).

    after much prompting on my part, you later returned here to behave in a reasonable fashion.

    now you are back for round three, with a bizarre and ludicrous spin on events that someone's own bad faith brought upon herself. along the way, you have made some pretty nasty noises in the direction of someone respected by most people of goodwill in the asp online community.

    (again, to my knowledge) there is no 'vast right-wing conspiracy' arrayed against you here. rather, there is a certain amount of justified annoyance that, in this instance, you're being a fool.

    [Edited by guy catelli on 02-25-2001 at 03:27 PM]
  17. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    oh, and that post was accurate because if there's one thing ozzy doesn't do.....

    IT'S LIE.
  18. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    i've said already that i prefer a bottle of Courvosier "60 ans". i gotta case....wanna split a bottle?

    but to tell you the truth..... if the ripple tasted better, i'd drink it.

    what? do you think the booze you drink and the language you use, makes you a better man. you're not as wise :confused: as i thought.



    and i don't need no stinkin ghost writter. besides i don't think he's up at this hour........


    Ciao, and a lot of bisous to you too.

    ozzy :cool:

    [Edited by Ozzy on 02-25-2001 at 03:39 AM]
  19. wsb

    wsb

    Messages:
    523
    Ozzy --

    That was a particularly lucid and coherent post (albeit wrong for the most part). Did you hire a ghost writer???

    Beaucoup bisous,

    WSB

    P.S. I don't drink ripple.
  20. guy catelli

    guy catelli

    Messages:
    478
    i wonder ...

    could Candi, aka Infobooth, aka Candide be the answer to the question: what would A1N (another wannabe impressario of 'Let's You and Him Fight!') have been like if she had taken her medication?