Have you ever fallen in love with a WG?

[dunhill]

First of all, I'm not defending him. All I said was that we cannot always believe everything we hear or see and sometimes we have to use logic. For example, I have never seen a man smell so bad that fumagation is required. That's all. However, I think there is correlating evidence based on his behaviour, and previous posts to definitely justify a ban.

What I don't appreciate, is being told what to think by comments like this. It makes you come across as quite defensive.

Nope, not defensive, just a little frustrated - just because you have not experienced something, that does not mean it is not true. I also didn't say you were defending him. 

KT has been banned by the board owner and the mods.  I highly doubt they have taken this step without checking facts.  However, if you feel so strongly, contact them if you are concerned that some of the reports about KT are nothing more than hearsay and hyperbole without substantiated evidence.

But, by doing so, or at least by casting doubt on the veracity of the reports on Saafe, it looks like you're supporting KT.  Not a good look. But, by all means, crack on.

See, at no point in my post did I suggest or write that you're defending KT.  I just said that it looks like you are supporting KT which is different. And can only apologise if you felt I was accusing you of defending him.  I was not.  It was clumsy use of language on my part, and I clarified this post earlier this afternoon - see post #826.

But please, at no point have I tried to tell you what to think. You and I are on very different wavelengths, that's all. And it's fine, we're adults and can agree to disagree.

[scutty brown]

Apologies to all participants in this thread for derailing. I never really visit these parts of the forum. I have another particular interest in this thread hence why I started following it. I’ve only seen Massagepuntingfan’s posts.

Anyway, hopefully you won’t see my mug anymore. Don’t worry I won’t be offering to buy up anyone’s family with my wealth. Peace.

If you have really "only seen Massagepuntingfan’s posts" then maybe you should read the whole thread so you've got an idea of what's happened.

[scutty brown]

It’s hard for us to know how much of what was said on SAAFE is true. Personally I suspect there is some truth and some exaggerations in it, as is also sometimes the case with negative reviews here.

His AW feedback is interesting and includes a good amount of feedback from girls who are not associated with London agencies as far as I can tell, including some tourers who I have come across outside of London. Mentions of haggling on price, having a different/unique/eccentric personality, walking due to a hairy mango, and him having good levels of cleanliness. All from a good few years ago now though.

None of the comments on SAAFE about Monkeyman's  hygiene, dress sense or behaviour are new.  They've been documented previously on older SAAFE threads, UKE and other dead fora. Also comments on here in the many hundreds of deleted spam threads he started.
Around 2017 one girl said he was the most offensive, dirty, stinky bloke she'd ever seen. (The webpage is long gone so you'll have to take my word for it)
The only bit that was new was the claim about him getting free fucks for reviews, which had been long suspected but never proven. Well, presumably now it has been. That's why he's gone.
Those of you trying to put a revisionist view on this by doubting the SAAFE reports are collectively talking out of your arses.

[JD1]

None of the comments on SAAFE about Monkeyman's  hygiene, dress sense or behaviour are new.  They've been documented previously on older SAAFE threads, UKE and other dead fora. Also comments on here in the many hundreds of deleted spam threads he started.
Around 2017 one girl said he was the most offensive, dirty, stinky bloke she'd ever seen. (The webpage is long gone so you'll have to take my word for it)
The only bit that was new was the claim about him getting free fucks for reviews, which had been long suspected but never proven. Well, presumably now it has been. That's why he's gone.
Those of you trying to put a revisionist view on this by doubting the SAAFE reports are collectively talking out of your arses.

Fair enough, it just all seemed bizarre and as others have mentioned that recent post read a bit weird and like someone with a grudge against him to me, but clearly there was some truth in the post regardless of the intentions of the person behind it.

I’ve only been punting for a matter of months and I’m not familiar with the history of KT dating back to 2017. I will bow down to your superior knowledge on the history of the monkey man. Nothing wrong with a little bit of skepticism and balance. I agree with the decision to ban him regardless.

[scutty brown]

Fair enough, it just all seemed bizarre and as others have mentioned that recent post read a bit weird and like someone with a grudge against him to me, but clearly there was some truth in the post regardless of the intentions of the person behind it.

I’ve only been punting for a matter of months and I’m not familiar with the history of KT dating back to 2017. I will bow down to your superior knowledge on the history of the monkey man. Nothing wrong with a little bit of skepticism and balance. I agree with the decision to ban him regardless.

FFS if you were ordered by your boss to fuck a bloke who stinks of dog, shit, sweat and Kouros, wears filthy clothes, spits in your face, physically threatens you, breaches your boundaries.............all for free, you'd hold a bloody big grudge

[JD1]

FFS if you were ordered by your boss to fuck a bloke who stinks of dog, shit, sweat and Kouros, wears filthy clothes, spits in your face, physically threatens you, breaches your boundaries.............all for free, you'd hold a bloody big grudge

Ah yes, but then the poster changed their story and actually it wasn’t for free but rather the agency was allegedly paying the girls instead of KT.

Wonder why their story changed.

But yes, we must blindly accept everything we read on SAAFE.

Even one of the mods has posted to say there is nothing wrong with people questioning what is posted on there. Presumably they have had a closer insight into the decision than yourself, even if you do consider yourself an authority on the subject.

[Kev40ish]

Those of you trying to put a revisionist view on this by doubting the SAAFE reports are collectively talking out of your arses.

Does that include me 

[dunhill]

Ah yes, but then the poster changed their story and actually it wasn’t for free but rather the agency was allegedly paying the girls instead of KT.

Wonder why their story changed.

But yes, we must blindly accept everything we read on SAAFE.

Even one of the mods has posted to say there is nothing wrong with people questioning what is posted on there. Presumably they have had a closer insight into the decision than yourself, even if you do consider yourself an authority on the subject.

I'm fairly certain it's two different posters using the same account and I say this based on other posts made on that account back when it first registered.     So rather than changing their story, it's two different people sharing their experience. 

[scutty brown]

Does that include me 

I may have missed it but I've not seen a comment from you.
Are you asking as a member or as a MOD?

[MysteryManNo.7]

Nothing wrong with a healthy dose of scepticism and not believing everything we've read about him on SAAFE as gospel as exaggerations may have been made and details blurred and of course there are two sides to every story but I'm more inclined than not to believe he's a wrong'un.

There has also been a disturbing tendency by some members to defend abusive behaviour in the past; a few months back there was a thread started by a convicted sex trafficker who served time at HM's pleasure and many long time and respected members were defending him on here! 

[Kev40ish]

I may have missed it but I've not seen a comment from you.
Are you asking as a member or as a MOD?

There is nothing wrong with people questioning the veracity of the reports on Saafe. It doesn’t make them supporters of KT. 

Asking as a member

[Kev40ish]

I'm fairly certain it's two different posters using the same account and I say this based on other posts made on that account back when it first registered.     So rather than changing their story, it's two different people sharing their experience.

Ahh two posters a bit like when people have two profiles on here???

[scutty brown]

Ah yes, but then the poster changed their story and actually it wasn’t for free but rather the agency was allegedly paying the girls instead of KT.

Wonder why their story changed.

But yes, we must blindly accept everything we read on SAAFE.

Even one of the mods has posted to say there is nothing wrong with people questioning what is posted on there. Presumably they have had a closer insight into the decision than yourself, even if you do consider yourself an authority on the subject.

So lets assume the girls got a discounted basic fee from the agency, they're still going to be pissed off that he's doing all that crap and not paying

[dunhill]

Ahh two posters a bit like when people have two profiles on here???

No, not really because it's one account with a post made by someone who I think is not the actual registered poster - so I think it is two escorts who work for the same agency/live on the same premises.

Like you can see our IP addresses when we post here, the mods and admin can see each individual post's IP address. Also, and perhaps most pertinently, every post in that sub-forum is on pre-mod, so if the admin and mods thought something was off or the report was falsified in any way, they would not have let it through.  If you look at the posts, they've been edited in places and details removed.

Obviously I don't know for sure, but the use of English in one of the posts is a little off, like it's been put through google translate, whereas all the other posts, particularly the first few made a few years ago, the English is fine.

I hope this makes sense, it's surprisingly difficult to explain succinctly.

[scutty brown]

Asking as a member

then within the context of what you posted, no it doesn't include you. I don't see you disagreeing with the SAAFE post, simply that you say people are free to disagree i.e. normal free speech. Fair enough. You've enough experience to know the history
My comment was aimed primarily at those who seem to want to deny or minimise the SAAFE claims despite having little or no knowledge of what went before in the KT saga

[Momodan38]

If you have really "only seen Massagepuntingfan’s posts" then maybe you should read the whole thread so you've got an idea of what's happened.

don’t worry I’m all caught up.

[PilotMan]

I just admitted my fault in lack of judement in my previous post  . Oh my God... you are still holding me calling you a coward into account from a different issue relating to PP1920? This is why you decided to question me directly today? Oho ok then. You have a nice day.

We all do things at a certain time and make mistakes, without an intention to hurt others.

It takes great strength, introspection and self belief for a person to offer a genuine apology and do so with graciousness. It shows that person has courage and conviction, and is willing to take responsibility for their previous actions and do their best not to make the same mistake in the future.

PYWM, I thought your apology was very sincere and self reflective.

It also takes a strong and mature person to accept that apology with the graciousness in which it is given, and forgive that person, without harbouring any negative feelings.

[larryshouse]

I have to provide some pushback against those who say members put up with the behaviour of the currently banned individual of the jungle variety.
Where they attempted to derail my reviews I fired back utilising appropriate methods.

I'm not posting this to speculate on the quality of the straw or the quantity of the straws that broke the camel's back. However I will stand up and say I complained.

[Punting2022]

Back on topic. I have got over the issue i had. Taken steps, fair to say i was played. Well not again.
Dunhill are you able to pm me. Need some advise. You have good perspective

[daviemac]

Back on topic. I have got over the issue i had. Taken steps, fair to say i was played. Well not again.
Dunhill are you able to pm me. Need some advise. You have good perspective

I think you should check the announcements thread at the top of the main board for the updates to the rules.

33 Access to sending Private Messages and the visibility of Members Post history have different criteria to be gained. The criteria will not be made public. Anyone attempting to circumvent the PM criteria by requesting PM’s may receive a ban.

[Punting2022]

I think you should check the announcements thread at the top of the main board for the updates to the rules.

33 Access to sending Private Messages and the visibility of Members Post history have different criteria to be gained. The criteria will not be made public. Anyone attempting to circumvent the PM criteria by requesting PM’s may receive a ban.

Sorry. Will read the rules now and comply

[PilotMan]

Sorry. Will read the rules now and comply

Put up a review of your favourite SP  ... maybe it will help you to toward the criteria for your ability to message members 🔓  - not that I have a clue about the criteria, just saying 😉