A Flouncing Fanboy’s Fawning Fault Finding of Review Boards

I’ve always loved the fawners – those hobbyists who pander to providers at any cost. On the internet, these putative Casanovas like to portray themselves as self assured “gentlemen” when, in reality, they’re passive purchasers of sex scouring the internet for a companion who will feed their fantasy for a few hundred bucks an hour.

I stumbled upon one of these naive souls the other night when I was reading Adrianna Carter’s crusade against review boards like The Erotic Review. This dislike for reviews has gained momentum with many of the “high end” providers who are generally older and using airbrushed photos and polished websites to portray themselves as more desirable than they really are. So, I get their desire not to be reviewed. If too many people tell the truth, the fantasy is ruined and business falls off.

Of course, Carter and her cohort make some good points. Prolific reviewers and career hobbyists do sometimes use their on line status to extort free services and other nefarious things from naive providers. It happened all the time on the Midwesttimez board and on TER, I understand it’s even worse.

But, review boards serve a purpose. Before reviews, it was easy for a provider and/or her manager to misrepresent pricing, appearance, and even service and get away with it. To suggest that this is OK by calling for an end to boards like TER ignores the fact that the escort business has dishonest people on either side of the transaction.

That’s where this refined gentleman enters the story. In a foolish attempt to look like a friend to all providers, Captain Sav-a-Ho wrote an entire blog post decrying review boards. Rather than discussing the pros and cons, “Gentleman Client” (his words not mine) provides eight reasons why review boards have a negative effect on the “industry.”  His pandering post earned him some positive attention from some providers. But, his reasons are nothing more than sophistry intended to promote his own self interest.

The internet has leveled the playing field in many different industries by decentralizing and democratizing information that was previously hoarded to the advantage of a few. And, that’s why review boards will always be a good thing. Sure, some of the information will be false and a few bad actors will try to manipulate the process. But, in the marketplace of information, the bad people will ultimately be exposed. And, all of us benefit from the free flow of information. Advocating an end to this is naive. It’s asking for a return to the days of the newspaper classifieds.

Here are Gentleman Client’s eight reasons and my (in italics) comments:

  1. GC: Virtual monopolies fly in the face of a free market. The provider argument  that he’s restating here is that TER is their only source of advertising and therefore they’re at the mercy of those who run TER. But, he’s wrong. The internet is a huge place and there are plenty of places to advertise. I know many women who make a good living without TER. 
  2. GC: Collusive hobbyists cajole, harass and threaten providers. While this is true, it’s easily dealt with when exposed to the light of day like people have been doing on the local boards for years. And, it’s no reason to call for a cessation of the free flow of information. 
  3. GC: Authenticity, legitimacy, and safety are seldom what they claim. What does this even mean? I’ll agree wholeheartedly that the women who hide behind the carefully crafted photos and flowery marketing prose are “seldom what they seem.” And, that’s all the more reason to have the free and open flow of information that’s provided by the boards.
  4. Hackers have the potential to publicize a central database of private data. Nobody with a modicum of intelligence would use their real information to register for one of these boards. 
  5. Law Enforcement (LE) use boards to arrest clients and providers – with increasing impunity. Specious. Use of TOR or a VPN, combined with a hush mail account and a modicum of caution counteracts this. Moreover, LE enforcement against the boards is arguably unconstitutional. 
  6. Board administrators are understandably motivated by money – which too often opposes safety. See 5 above. No one should rely on strangers to protect them. I’m stealthed. I don’t do anything illegal. I couldn’t care less who operates a site that I post on. 
  7. Frequent reviewers (“Slobbyists”) earn undue reputation from a board, rather than a true safety network. This is more sophistry. Who cares? We take the information we want using the critical thinking skills we should have honed in school. I like how he adopted his favorite provider’s term for “hobbyists.” What a fawning, Beta. 
  8. It may be old fashioned, but to “kiss and tell” for all to read speaks volumes for the gent’s lack of discretion. Irrelevant. Reviews themselves tell you no more than the reviewer didn’t get arrested or ripped off. Everything else is fiction or part of a personal service that could never be the same for any two individuals. 

The guy who wrote this concluded it with some trite advice for all providers on how they should market themselves. This is the kind of drivel we used to see on Scorpsguide when the Captain-Sava-Hos  would all come out and tell the providers how to conduct business.

The TLDR version of this is that Adrianna and her over-the-hill cohort of providers who may or my not be as attractive as they once were want to limit the flow of information. And, this blogger is simply a fawning minion hoping to curry favor.

The internet has disrupted every industry by distributing information to anyone with a computer and an internet connection. It’s had a positive effect on the sex industry and saying otherwise is self serving and disingenuous.

Just When I Thought Review Boards Were Foundering – Another New One

When Midwesttimez was taken down, I figured that the Miadultdestination board would take on a lot of new members and flourish as the only general membership review board in Michigan.

Remarkably, instead of expanding, MAD seems to have grown smaller. When I log in, most times there is only one page of posts every 24 hours, and the same 15-20 providers who’ve posted ads there. While there is useful information from real hobbyists, it’s a very, very small community now, with a paucity of providers and very few new members joining.

Like I’ve said in the past, I think the boards are on their way to extinction. There are too many other options, and LE has identified these review boards as low hanging fruit that grabs headlines and allows them to justify federal anti-trafficking grants. Those two factors are causing people to rethink their participation in these boards.

Still, people continue to try to start new boards. Just this week I received the following email about a new board that supposedly will emphasize privacy.

Sending you this email as an introduction and some information about a new forum for the Midwest area, currently focusing on the Michigan area during launch. midwestcompanions.com I do realize the name plays off a couple former known sites and that is were the similarity ends. I am not affiliated nor a former owner or staff member of the old sites. I do know of them from parties and other gatherings. None of them will be a staff member of Midwest. My intentions for the name was to make it known we would only focus on the midwest area and to hopefully use some of their name recognition from past boards to drive traffic my way. We are not looking to go global as some of the old boards have done or poorly attempted to do.

My focus when starting this board was to provide a place were everyone can gather without fear of government oversight and the fear of the server being seized. A place that a provider can post whatever kind of ad she wants to post and not worry about the authorities launching a raid to steal the servers they have no business with and using them against providers and hobbyist. Our tax dollars can be used for much better things.

Some steps have already been put into place with the new site, we are truly hosted offshore, a location that ignores ridiculous laws that the us government placed on our hobby. The only currency used for purchase of the server and domain name is bitcoin. My server is Tor friendly and the forum software is free, not a purchased software like IPB or VB which then from the start has the owners domain name and credit card information. I encourage any suggestions from you or any members on additional steps or policy that can be put into place to help keep everyone safe and enjoy our hobby.

As for who I am, that will be kept a secret as well, I understand it will take a small leap of faith to believe me when I say I am not a former owner, staff member, stalker (toms), or any of the others from recent boards or any of the boards. While I can agree with some stuff by them, I also believe some stuff was wrong. Midwest companions plans to use the mistakes of others and move forward. I am not looking to stroke my ego with some big board, I wanted a safe place I can enjoy the hobby. My identity being kept secret will allow others to have secure place.

We’ll see how this one fares. I joined. Since I’m hiding my IP address with a VPN and using a Hushmail account, I’m not too concerned about knowing who is running it.

I like the attempt to focus on privacy of members.  But, for anyone looking to join a new board, please use hush mail or some other encrypted, privacy based service to sign up and use TOR whenever you connect. That way, you’re beyond the reach of LE or anyone else trying to contact you about your board activities. Here’s the link: MidwestCompanions

Chilling Story About the Seattle Bust Highlights Draconian LE Tactics

Reason magazine published a great story by Elizabeth Nolan Brown  about the take down of the Seattle boards and the fallout.

These fishing expeditions by LE  waste taxpayer money, violate the Constitution, and ruin the lives of innocent hobbyists and providers who are engaged in mutually agreeable conduct  Ms. Brown does a credited job of making this point.

But, the reason everyone needs to read the article is to get a sense for how far LE will go to make an arrest. Pay particular attention to Part 2. If you’re not using TOR and Hushmail for all your hobby activities, the article will be a great motivator for you.

LE are treacherous liars and your constitutionally protected right to free speech and assembly will be disregarded in their quest for headlines. Please protect yourself.



Tagged , , , ,

A Note on The Comments

My view on comments is that anything goes. When I first started here, the comments didn’t require approval. I had to change that because a few people were posting personal information ( although legal and within the TOS of this site I don’t feel comfortable allowing personal information to be posted and I remove it when asked if it somehow slips by me) and some of the comments violated the TOS of WordPress.

Even though I have to manually approve comments, I’ve taken a hands off approach. I’ve trashed only 5 comments in two years. Some were spam and some contained personal information. I’ll continue to have a liberal comment policy, but when things start to get more tired and vapid than usual, I’m going stop approving comments.

For example, the Taz41/Samara rants have now ended. They were entertaining simply because they illustrated how some members of these boards conduct themselves. But, now they’ve grown repetitive and boring. I don’t want to take the time to skim them for personal information so I’m gong to trash any further comments in this flame war.



Midwesttimez Taken Down Reason Unknown

Seems like Raphlie and Tomz, the two hapless whoreboard impresarios from Midwesttimez, have taken down their board.

For anyone who doesn’t know, the Midwesttimez board was a board that required recommendations from known  providers or hobbyists to be admitted. There was no way to determine how the admission process worked, as people who had been on the boards for years and had solid recommendations from known providers were frequently not approved.

Most of the members on Midwesttimez had been in the Michigan hobby for years. In fact, I’d suspect that many of these guys have reached the age where boners are a thing of the past. I’d always suspected that the  aging membership there would lead to the board closing due to a lack of interest. But, I have no idea why the board was taken down.

There’s been some speculation that a drunken outburst by an elderly provider with the screen name sic “Rumour,” where sic Rumour  made threats about allowing board access to the Michigan State Police led to the board closing. I doubt the threats are real and I can’t really believe that the State Police care about a small private message board where a bunch of portly 60 year olds romance down-on-their-luck women. The whole thing is more pathetic than it is some criminal enterprise. But, who knows? It’s an election year.

I suppose there’s a big downside for the board operators since they’re easily traced. So, even if there’s no logical credibility to the LE rumor, why take a risk? TomZ and Ralphie weren’t making big money off the board. They simply liked the ego strokes it provided. But, at a certain point, the risk out weighs the reward.

If anyone one knows why they shut the board down, I’d like to hear. Post to the comments. In the meantime, I suspect Miadultdestination will be a busier place now that it’s the only game in town.

Tagged , , ,

Anastasia Kane rebrands to Emma Gray and Demands That I Take Down This Post

Anastasia Kane has rebranded. She’s now Emma Gray, a really common name that’s not easily found with a Google search. So, for anyone interested here is her new information:


Emma Gray

If anyone has a link to her blog please send it to me or post it in the comments.  I won’t make your comment public so that Anastasia Kane Emma Gray doesn’t catch on and move her blog again.

Kudos to Anastasia Kane/Emma Gray for her marketing prowess. Seems like she’s found a niche and she’s capitalizing on it.

But wait, there’s more. Tonight Anastasia Kane  Emma Gray sent me the following email with the subject “Take Down That Post.”

On July 28, 2016 at 10:18 PM, “Anastasia Kane” <anastasiakane1@gmail.com> wrote:
>What in the fuck is wrong with you? I didn’t rebrand because I
>wanted to.
>Someone outed me to my family! Why are you so fucking obsessed
>with me?
>Leave me alone! I’m sick and tired of dealing with this. I don’t
>even have
>a blog anymore. I can’t have anything because people who don’t
>even know me
>want to ruin my life. So I really hope that you are happy and
>proud of what
>you’ve accomplished.

So, the “High Class Courtesan” with the blog where she disclosed personal information to anyone with an Internet connection wants to blame this blog for her problems? That’s laughable. She needs to look a little closer in that mirror she’s always using to shoot selfies. She’ll find the answer to her problems peering back at her from the back of an iPhone.




Tagged , , ,

Join the movement to defend privacy and security online


With Rule 41, Little-Known Committee Proposes to Grant New Hacking Powers to the Government

The government hacking into phones and seizing computers remotely? It’s not the plot of a dystopian blockbuster summer movie. It’s a proposal from an obscure committee that proposes changes to court procedures—and if we do nothing, it will go into effect in December.

The proposal comes from the advisory committee on criminal rules for the Judicial Conference of the United States. The amendment [PDF] would update Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, creating a sweeping expansion of law enforcement’s ability to engage in hacking and surveillance. The Supreme Court just passed the proposal to Congress, which has until December 1 to disavow the change or it becomes the rule governing every federal court across the country. This is part of a statutory process through which federal courts may create new procedural rules, after giving public notice and allowing time for comment, under a “rules enabling act.”1

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure set the ground rules for federal criminal prosecutions. The rules cover everything from correcting clerical errors in a judgment to which holidays a court will be closed on—all the day-to-day procedural details that come with running a judicial system.

The key word here is “procedural.” By law, the rules and proposals are supposed to be procedural and must not change substantive rights.

But the amendment to Rule 41 isn’t procedural at all. It creates new avenues for government hacking that were never approved by Congress.

The proposal would grant a judge the ability to issue a warrant to remotely access, search, seize, or copy data when “the district where the media or information is located has been concealed through technological means” or when the media are on protected computers that have been “damaged without authorization and are located in five or more districts.” It would grant this authority to any judge in any district where activities related to the crime may have occurred.

To understand all the implications of this rule change, let’s break this into two segments.

The first part of this change would grant authority to practically any judge to issue a search warrant to remotely access, seize, or copy data relevant to a crime when a computer was using privacy-protective tools to safeguard one’s location. Many different commonly used tools might fall into this category. For example, people who use Tor, folks running a Tor node, or people using a VPN would certainly be implicated. It might also extend to people who deny access to location data for smartphone apps because they don’t feel like sharing their location with ad networks. It could even include individuals who change the country setting in an online service, like folks who change the country settings of their Twitter profile in order to read uncensored Tweets.

There are countless reasons people may want to use technology to shield their privacy. From journalists communicating with sources to victims of domestic violence seeking information on legal services, people worldwide depend on privacy tools for both safety and security. Millions of people who have nothing in particular to hide may also choose to use privacy tools just because they’re concerned about government surveillance of the Internet, or because they don’t like leaving a data trail around haphazardly.

If this rule change is not stopped, anyone who is using any technological means to safeguard their location privacy could find themselves suddenly in the jurisdiction of a prosecutor-friendly or technically-naïve judge, anywhere in the country.

The second part of the proposal is just as concerning. It would grant authorization to a judge to issue a search warrant for hacking, seizing, or otherwise infiltrating computers that may be part of a botnet. This means victims of malware could find themselves doubly infiltrated: their computers infected with malware and used to contribute to a botnet, and then government agents given free rein to remotely access their computers as part of the investigation. Even with the best of intentions, a government agent could well cause as much or even more harm to a computer through remote access than the malware that originally infected the computer. Malicious actors may even be able to hijack the malware the government uses to infiltrate botnets, because the government often doesn’t design its malware securely. Government access to the computers of botnet victims also raises serious privacy concerns, as a wide range of sensitive, unrelated personal data could well be accessed during the investigation. This is a dangerous expansion of powers, and not something to be granted without any public debate on the topic.

Make no mistake: the Rule 41 proposal implicates people well beyond U.S. borders. This update expands the jurisdiction of judges to cover any computer user in the world who is using technology to protect their location privacy or is unwittingly part of a botnet. People both inside and outside of the United States should be equally concerned about this proposal.

The change to Rule 41 isn’t merely a procedural update. It significantly expands the hacking capabilities of the United States government without any discussion or public debate by elected officials. If members of the intelligence community believe these tools are necessary to advancing their investigations, then this is not the path forward. Only elected members of Congress should be writing laws, and they should be doing so in a matter that considers the privacy, security, and civil liberties of people impacted.

Rule 41 seeks to sidestep the legislative process while making sweeping sacrifices in our security. Congress should reject the proposal completely.

Read EFF and Access Now’s joint testimony on Rule 41.

1. See 28 U.S.C. § 2073