Riobard

Unfortunate. Murder is the worst, no doubt. So sad this has to happen as a wake up call to others. You could also attend a sauna and the ultimate outcome might be crossing paths interpersonally with another person where the path leads to threats of blackmail, various degrees of expressed intentional harm. Hypervigilant vetting is the right call at all times in all contexts of the transactional sex agenda.

I have not shared any personal official government-issued identification with any member of the board. It has come to my attention that one or more members of our board has claimed possession of that level of documentation. I have had face-to-face contact with 3 members of the board. I have not ever turned over any ID of this nature. Anybody in possession of my identification or facsimile thereof is holding stolen or misappropriated property. Anybody that has declared such possession is, similarly, in violation of the law. I believe it is termed identification theft. Tread on thin ice at your peril. I add that, formally, I urge anybody in possession of the aforementioned material to assiduously document how they came to be in possession of it, including any contextual factors, in case of a memory lapse going forward. Optionally, direct mail me here if you see fit. I will deal with the ‘peanut gallery’ later as I do not have access to all submitted content while handling the central demands of the bully brigade. My prediction is that it is misguided hostile pejorative ridiculing content from guys not particularly bright in some matters.

Half right half-vaxx. Let’s back this up. The OP never had an issue with your content. Lurking trolls will spread shade at any opening they can get and where the shade lands is usually random and often peculiar. Like the flavour of the week. They may be inclined to misappropriate the true provenance of terms such as ‘ugly American’. Narcissistic scammers within the lurking troll community will declare a vigilante stance over the most droll occurrences, putting forward implausible deniability about MO. In this case we see an open admission from such a narcissist S that his selectively gunning for somebody R was that, via hearsay, a third party, B presumably as B is the most likely candidate (besides T and F the only others possible otherwise, having personally crossed paths with R) didn’t particularly like somebody he eventually crossed paths with, R, with whom a positive exchange over months previously lead to a meet-up for a meal. Historically, S is a bitch on wheels with R and prone to amateurish diagnostic formulation. This is ironic considering R’s status. S openly described legitimizing his insane belligerence by attempting to distance himself from obvious manifestations of narcissism attributed to him. His source B was somehow cloned and evidently a series of mitosis yielded an enormous grouping of persons throwing shade on R. Delusions abound. S also declared personal contact with R in a mutual setting, a contact that never occurred but was fabricated scam-grade in a desperate manipulative attempt to self-justify his pejorative impressions. High-grade manipulative weaponry is the hallmark of a narcissist. S’s ground-bound cape progressively shredded owing to R’s astute grasp of reality, S then misanthropically appropriated the shenanigans of L(J), U, and M, themselves narcissistically inclined, related to their inappropriate cunty assertions that a member on another board and R, here, are the same person. S having done this is reflected to R by a friend as R is not want to view the toxic material of a flagrant narcissist. This sad ungentlemanly behaviour, now reported on two boards and under review, also reeks of implausible deniability and what we see is the representation of a few pathetic jackasses slithering about and a few small-minded minions getting sucked in by them. R doesn’t have a pressing need for allies and interprets lack of open board empathy as reflective of understandable distance stance from conflict, not as cowardice. R has a backchannel support system here and a radius of personal social support. Getting back to B; B, an inveterate scammer himself, would have wondered why R’s demeanour changed when on to the scam. B is not well. R has known and worked with others that impersonate various high-profile professions. An abrupt change in R-B dynamics and desperation by B to maintain his scam seems to be the source of the aspersions cast upon R and that form the basis of S’s narcissistic ammo. My friend tells me that a few out of control maniacs here may have identifying info about R they are open to sharing. Nobody here would consent to it and if being held hostage is not grounds for a ban, what is? These assertions (by S? others?) are, well you get the picture. These last few assumptions are less verifiable because R never openly confronted B and R can only assume that S’s reference to a young person is B. R’s friend described that S has declared a cadre in type and age of members that have labelled R as creepy, unhinged, mentally unwell. B may be sociopathic and an in-person encounter was what flipped the lid off the black box of his fabrications. R has never shared B’s ID or handle. B had staked a claim to a bizarrely vast set of professional credentials and affiliations. R, himself a high profile academic, cannot fathom why B thought R so naïve. B apparently catfishes locals with fraudulent social capital. B is charming on the surface and it is sad that B cannot just be himself. R has no desire to harm B but referencing him is essential in elucidating the well-established history of S’s derogatory and condescending commentary. In some ways, B and S should just get a room. However, two personality disorders fellows would not fly well, inn’t. B and R have a lengthy recorded text history. If B were to have breached boundaries, not surprising for a characterologically unhinged fellow, and as my friend has suggested when reading the thread, the Hiroshima/Nagasaki fallout would be such that the person most likely to brush off the ashes and walk away is R, make no mistake. R has all the goods, has B’s ‘number’. Openly disclosing info about R is forbidden. A written record of slander/libel now exists. A statement of blackmail lives on the board. Guess who is in control. R’e assumptions about B are presumptive and R reserves definitive judgement but Hakim’s Razor is often a solid guiding principle. R has not revealed B’s identity and would wish to be judicious in this regard. However, R would welcome any concrete record of what was said about R behind R’s back, and if in conjunction with ID, that has taken things to a very different level. T and R are friends. F may be somebody that can grow on R, an acquired taste taken in small doses, but runs in many directions. One can take or leave F and he can be inflammatory according to some of his content. R can handle F as F is well, basic, basic and at heart a good guy, maybe? B is out of the picture for years but it appears lives in perpetuity vis-a-vis S’ batch of flimsy slings and arrows. R has no interest in a connection with L(J), U, or M. S is somebody R wouldn’t give the time of day to but S certainly applies for such time and attention relentlessly. S is the most interesting from an academic viewpoint, a scratching post rehearsal for the exigency of how-to manuals related to co-existing among social media trolls. S is not definitively a narcissist and R has described impressions but a formal diagnosis is deferred and is not R’s role or prerogative. It’s just social media Board, and perceptions are, as such, subject to limits. So, scammer is an apt term as put forward by HV. Coke merely a metaphor for insatiable attention-seeking cravings. Coke is corrosive. Don’t drink the coke. R would not drink coke between clinically related expert witness testimony breaks.

Not a significant contribution. I am not frustrated. I deal with pomposity like yours all the time and made a damn good living out of it. I am qualified; you are not. Your job is blogging eroticized images of youth. My background is very much clinical and you are coming across as ultra-amateurish and overly simplistic, formulaic clichéd. Knowing your place would serve you. You are serving DJT incoherence. That makes you soooo easy. This is not a discussion. I’ll let you know if it qualifies as a discussion. You left the discussion earlier and anything more is out of fashion window dressing. This is me dealing with pathetic antipathy, rudeness, and dismissiveness. You own up to nothing, so nothing is of substance as you schoolmarm your path thru this. Your talking down to me is both sad and amusing. My mental health rests on speaking my piece. Get help yourself if you have such a pressing need to be dictatorial. I am not cheap porn fodder for one of your sad Schpielberg fiascos. Go for that SAG, yaz queen. Next?

Barcelona is not near on my event horizon but I will definitely try to follow the events. I think that all factions were pretty much not objecting to the abolitionist model. When you think about it, a small proportion of the community cares a whit, and Spain wouldn’t be a standout by criminalizing. It will take some drilling down to stratify the ideology across party platforms.

I am not looking for further discussion from the broad membership. I have been adequately informed about the existence of posted content on this board and the other MSM board, content that underpins the basis of my protest. Moderators can take it from here. Their Board, their rules. Wear a condom, literally and figuratively. You never knows, do ya. From what I can gather so far, a similar complaint has been brought upstairs over at the other gay forum. There are a few good dependable guys to lean on.

From what I understand based on my friend’s communication to me the link was not suggested but was declared as fact. Then I saw it myself as exactly that level of obnoxious. Thereafter, a cascade effect in which one or more members here more recently are extending, perhaps spitefully, an explicit reiteration of the link. Therefore, my own initiation of the thread herein did not inflate what had already been posted by somebody other than me. But then you are likely under-thinking it. I realize your point but I had actually considered what to do and sought advice. There was no real basis for not calling out the aberrant behaviour because the content had already been deposited here in full view without consent of the guy over at M4Mforum or myself here. I never opened the barn door that’s open. I think in Gestalt terms, not impulsively. If there are suggestions that I am not somebody of some worth meeting personally, so be it. It’s not a priority. I do have Zip files of communication with everybody I have personally met on this board, 3 in total is the number of guys met in person. I cannot release them without consent but I can assure you that none of the interactive content falls short of mutual respect and enjoyment. With permission I am open to sharing these because nobody would sustain any damage. Frankly, when looking back at these interactions I am stymied by impressions of me that are derogatory in nature. I did have one in-person interaction that threw me for a loop and blindsided me in a way that required me to pause and re-organize my connection. That may have prompted an impugning of my character by one specific individual. I did have to look into this guy after months of positive exchange because he made what I took to be a veiled threat and I needed to process the whole encounter. I have also been warned by DMers looking out for me to tread lightly with particular individuals, all documented. The net outcome appears to be that a few fellows don’t like my writing style and a few fellows think I am disturbed. I can assure you the latter is far from reality. I am probably one of the most boring normal persons one could meet. I am financially secure because I possess good people skills and my writing has been sought by elite institutions without the proviso of peer review. Apparently some people have good attention spans. As Brooke declared in In Treatment, “I don’t work with narcissists.” This is where exceptionalism comes into play and I similarly don’t feel obligated to play nice.

You don’t exhibit any lack of sophistry. You can take the lead on that, likely a perfect candidate. I’ll stick to coherence and convey others are idiotic where applicable. There must be hall monitor openings you are better suited for. You won’t contribute, go to Ignored, do not pass go. C U Next Tues, #8. I’ll take a break 4 U since your batteries are of the highest quality and U are permanently on call. Don’t drop your phone in the crapper. You may need it to look up your words, let alone mine. In terms of values and preferred interpersonal interaction mode, your buddy met me in person, his choice to make that reveal, and reported here his perception that I am “educated, friendly”. That’s my general nature but we all have our gloves and mine aren’t grafted to my palms. Keep your nose out of it, svp. I can handle ignoramuses attempting to malign me and misshape the narrative. U have good status here and don’t need to be an unwarranted distraction. There is only one valid side here.

How about making a commentary about the central issue as opposed to playing wannabe moderator and hijacking a report submitted to the actual moderators? Try to be more relevant than incessant shadowing, and stay in the lane. A point of view, perhaps? Does anybody here want to reveal their other social media names? I don’t. Maybe you’re on Instagram as VincePoohbear. It’s your choice alone to present it, no?

Let me put it in terms that even a simpleton Gov DeS follower could comprehend: Let’s say a member here is oriented to sex tourism and posts here as “BKKpunter” (made up for the sake of illustration). Let’s say BKKpunter also posts on tripadvisor about any number of topics and does not reference there his GayGuides affiliation or the activities written up in GG fellowship. Maybe he is a generic tourist guide, but he compartmentalizes his handles: BKKtravel411. Both message boards are predominantly open publicly. Then, say a GG member posts on tripadvisor the claim that BKKtravel411 is the same guy as BKKpunter, stirring up shit and prompting readers to look into the association. If that’s OK and there are no repercussions other than for BKK guy, then Houston Bob’s Your Uncle we have a problem. The infraction is the same whether he is both handles, as in this example, or the two are separate guys, the same irrespective of your assessment or degree of like/dislike. The principle of prerogative for anonymous compartmentalization stands. In fact, I cannot even assume that two handles of the same name reflect the same person because pseudonym choice is not blocked on a site unless already taken.

Yeah I got the full range of answers accessible and possible. Aren’t you the magnanimous one. Your Best wishes: Where best is the best example of being disingenuous.

Christ man! Now you’re being an idiot. I do have a low profile with a pseudonym that you undermined by suggesting it belonged to a person on an unrelated platform where no cross-affiliation had ever been declared. But you are on to something. When an ignoramus is happy to step all over you the best board profile is no profile. I don’t need you to have any control; we are beyond you impacting on me and my locus of control is internal. What I will do is underscore that my impression now is that you decide for others because you have a particular insidious perspective on emancipation viz self-identification and the boundaries in terms of your sex blog, albeit sorta kinda consensually based, that depict a unique level of comfort with privilege-staking not shared by a substantial majority of these board memberships. You might consider de-centering and being less oversensitive to a contrasting viewpoint about anonymity.

Utter bullshit. You wrote what you wrote for ulterior impact. It was a throwaway comment when you could have simply asked the guy for clarification on content. I have now located the post by searching over there and it is patently clear that you were grumbling about this guy when others in the thread evidently comprehended his content and style. Don’t fucking reference two identifier handles without explicit permission from both parties. One can use the backchannel where the recipient can vet for the implications of a question or comment. Full stop. Your distancing yourself simply supports the justification others are now banking on. Be a values leader; don’t drop a grenade for effect and think you smell like roses. Jeezuz!! It is exclusively the autonomous prerogative of a forum member to determine how to render their membership affiliations and pseudonyms. Get it? This goes for all those implicated in this middle school level occurrence. LBBJS, I’d have turned the page but for your refusal to be on the same page.

I take it, then, that you are comfortable being more transparent about your identity. You could have DMd the Company member. Your personal reading comprehension needn’t have prompted such a lack of tact and that lack of discretion prompted a few jackasses to assert a confirmation of your hypothesized relation like sharks to chum in the brink. Fucking snivelling misanthropes waiting for you to come along. Now the cascade effect of pathetic trolls extending upon it. If you posted on Instagram as ABC I would never ever ever consider openly asking if you were XYZ on Twitter, and they are not media that are oriented to sexual tourism. But thanks for the quasi-accountability, yet nothing creditable in terms of an apology, though I know you enough to give the benefit of the doubt that you would have thought twice if you could have forecasted the idiots that sprang maliciously upon two entities using the ammo of your post. I wouldn’t have known about these hijinks save for today’s Samaritan reaching out. Water under the bridge, for you and me. I’ve said my piece. There should be no deleterious consequences for you.

I’m fine. I am happy to tell you all about it. Don’t concern yourself with how it’s played out openly here. I haven’t read him for a good period of time now. Whatever he is up to cannot be controlled. I have dealt with forum members here at least as disturbing, and I have documented records of all my interaction. I like the forum in many ways but it’s kinda small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. There are a few bright lights and Oz is the salt of the earth, but some others, meh. My main close call was almost but not staying with a member that turned out to be impersonating a lot of high-profile professions (status is not important to me) and had the temerity to assert his expertise in biological weaponry when I began to demo growing progressively more incredulous about the bullshit (I myself have high profile faculty status as a filter for reality).

Dear Oz and other admin: Somebody I know contacted me today and reported that he caught a reference about me that two GayGuides members wrote on a site named Company of Men. He sent me two screenshots appended below. Apparently this has now trickled over to our board here GayGuides. Evidently, a member being the same person on both boards, named Unicorn (possibly a physician?) and a member being the same person on both boards, named Marc in Calif, have asserted in writing that a 3rd party that posts in Company of Men and me are one and the same person. The kind person that just contacted me also added that, ironically, the reference to my posting at Gay Guides was contained within a topic about the ethics of outing gay men and their sexual behaviours. I believe that a fellow named José Sopulcsnos (I like pinga) is also implicated, and solacesoul though I do not read him lately. My friend alerted me about the latter (SS) and you can always track his recent content. I am not able to corroborate that Unicorn and Marc in Calif are, respectively, the same fellows on both boards. I HAVE noticed that one Marc in Calif was throwing shade on me so persistently on Gay Guides that I had to try to set limits by putting him on Ignore and calling him out. I don’t mind that things get troll-ish spicy and conflictual at times on social media but the stalking and doxxing takes it too far. I am not cross-affiliated there at Company of Men although I think that the two “alleged” culprits and some others at Gay Guides are members of both boards and are comfortable utilizing the same handles. I have not revealed my Gay Guides membership status or handle @Riobard anywhere anytime on a public domain accessible forum outside of the confines of the Gay Guides board. I have not identified my true name on any open board post. As you can determine from the images, the main one in question named the Gay Guides site and my Gay Guides pseudonym in the same sentence, and the other person seconded the reveal with the ‘me too’ confirmational emoticon? How dumb is that?! This is very disturbing, boldly and maliciously conflating a member at Company of Men, a supposedly anonymous and ‘safe space’ board, with my identity here at Gay Guides, a supposedly anonymous and ‘safe space’ board. Apart from the stalking and doxxing, I am not particularly concerned with the gossipy put-down, but I am worried about some related implications. Is my content and my association with sex trade going to be reported on another board from ours without my consent? If I directly approach the two or more men in question is that going to exacerbate things because they may become defensive or they may get a kick out of creating more drama? If they are reprimanded or banned by the Gay Guides moderator team will that similarly blow back on me? Should or can they be banned and blocked without a clear reason conveyed to them? Are readers over at Company of Men going to think that Gay Guides lacks the firewall of anonymity? After all, short of a member choosing to break his own anonymity, isn’t the only way to confirm a person being common to two sites the administrator’s possession of identifying data? Will readers make false assumptions based on the supposition of a direct link between me and some 3rd party member that from the over at Company of Men? I don’t see the handle but my friend contacting me today said the member there was sirbobby-something. Would the best solution for me be to stop posting on Gay Guides? What was the point of the breach other than for ostentatious shits and giggles? The list of questions goes on. To boot the posts are in a public forum that thousands of readers access. The two culprits are naming a Company of Member as being the same person as @Riobard (me). For all I know that individual does not post material that identifies himself as a transactional sex tourist abroad in the same way that I do in Gay Guides. Again, two people where neither referenced the other’s affiliation in social media fora elsewhere. Should the member at Company of Men be alerted I wonder? I am more concerned for him because his reputation may be more vulnerable, whereas I expect anonymity in principle but may be comparatively immune to major damage. It’s not up to another posting member to bully another member with unsubstantiated assumptions of who they actually are. The governance is one of reciprocal regard for privacy.

Hmmm . Must be a robust trust fund in the mix here, inn’t. At 50 I was working all day for a living. Not the 5 AM club that a wannabe braggadocio elitist on our forum once described, but my schedule considerably taken up by clinical, research, and academic assignments, not the least of which related to developing finesse in terms of handling narcissists. One decent achievement being the dismissal of a narcissist ranked hierarchically greater than me in an inter-professional system. Humpty’s narcissism set himself up for a great fall. One thing central to my role was the timeless question about the peculiar ways in which people may misdirect energy, including the machinations of narcissists and other characterologically flawed souls. With some 55 weekly hours freed up, along with financial independence, now a bit more luxury in terms of pondering such life questions. Apparently even the most steadfast of narcissists eventually burn themselves out, a fairly good outcome for the narcissist as well as those in the line of fire of such narcissism. One can facilitate this process by appealing to, that is, inadvertently triggering their intrinsic narcissism. Or maybe prayer, if you’re into that kind of thing? The particular paradoxical bind for the narcissist, once narcissism has been irreversibly established, is that both a lull in narcissistic expressivity and, in contrast, an inflated degree of pomposity continually expressed, represent the central organizing core of narcissism. Sort of damned if he does or doesn’t. There is little that can disabuse one of the impression that the narcissism was an indelible signature feature. In some ways, the topic heading ‘I Hate You All’ unintentionally thematically dovetails with the narcissist’s dynamics, though the OP Blk Supe is clearly the polar opposite of a narcissist and I will happily read his content any old time. I write all this while munching on a tasty crunchy cucumber optimally cooled.

Going through my files of a few weeks ago. Dude from garotocomlocal. Short on reviews. Well, I asked didn’t I? And he answered. His ‘zap photo not nearly standing up to his ad. Maybe Gramma ruptured the old spleen again riding her motorcycle. Or I mistakenly sent him a photo riding my private helicopter. LOL. Or I’m just culturally tone deaf. Or one is paying for an assumption that he shows up on time. Or the other 600 ads aren’t real. Or … who cares what’s the diff?

I am obviously, for the record, now dismissive of resident narcissists and learned to ignore the tiresome clownish fake news cycles put forward by the court narcissist, but I understand that upwards of 50% among the innocent naïve will cast for a narcissist. All I get is a notification of what I presume to be a disjointed ‘tweet’. But the evidence seems solid that there must be thousands upon thousands of folks willing to feed and egg on any particular narcissist desiring the role of grand poobah narcissist. So far, I don’t seem to be ducking any eggs by casting a contrarian vote against a narcissist. What is satisfying, though, is to have a quasi-real-life narcissist to contend with, enabling a channeling of all the built-up energy that arises from observing a range of figurehead narcissists that would make the world a better place by crawling back to the origins of their central mantra, that being “the sun rises and sets in my pocket”, and giving us a well-deserved break.

This is no different from the info posted here some 15 weeks ago, directly sourced from government public information releases and I believe it may have been a stand-alone forum topic There may have been a slim chance of amendment based on negotiation but looks like none of the four nations will budge.

Probably. I suggest following the ‘usual suspect’ social media feeds, or the guys often post an event on their personal profiles. I think Hot House has been renovating without too much disruption. I did not get to the club last month. Perhaps the final product will be done by Pride. Enjoy. Try not to get trampled … I am referring to stripper fan base, not the parade.😉 In April a dancer that has been more on the international circuit offered to come over to my apto for BRL700. I might have sprung for it but there were other very good options; not necessarily about the money, the differential is not so vast even if his dancing were to have exceeded his other talents. I wouldn’t blink about dishing that out at a northern strip club let alone the privacy of my own bed. I did wonder, though, how many times the concierge would sign “thumbs up” when I paraded one young ‘gym friend’ after another through the walk of unabashed. He couldn’t have predicted getting the gratuity I provided upon my departure. A keeper.

Cast about half and half Yank & Canuck, I think. But I’d go for Brit Hunnam.

Right, “othering” is a sad and disturbing trend seen everywhere and your parallel is on the money.

Mauritania is another example. Shira Law (sp?). Death penalty on the books, not applied since mid-1980s). This decade a group of men getting harmlessly a bit tipsy at a party and arrested and jailed because they were perceived as behaving as though they were imitating female characteristics. But look at the Uganda legislation details. There is a lack of logic in certain components, and I’m not referring to the batshit crazy ideology related to homosexuality. The published discussions about how to detail the legal applications are also gong-show grade even outside of the homonegativity value system. Let’s say for the sake of argument that the law was about spitting saliva in a public place, a simple rule about comportment. There are peculiarities in how the law is applied. For example, if two adults (18-74) agreed that innocuous spitting was fine in each others presence they are both indictable. If one is a consenting age 75+ and the other younger (18+), let’s say 72, then the younger is exclusively liable and the older person obviously in mutual agreement with the harmless release of saliva into the gully is exempt and considered as victimized in the act. So one day arbitrarily subject to execution, the next day apparent impunity. What a fiasco in terms of basic conceptual logic, though unsurprising parallels to flimsy underpinnings of draconian sexual diversity censorship. Stupid is as stupid does. The legislation is akin to a war crime. Let the sanctions roll, I would say, but one worry is that the hard won western sourced cross-pollination of HIV-related support and management might be set back. Since HIV is also central to the new legislation, cutting off Uganda based on rights violation principles might inadvertently exacerbate key elements of the health agenda. Tricky.

Word. Thank goodness there are prolific contributors like you that report travel experiences as things that occur due to simple openness to what comes. You can write an interesting and entertaining piece and still walk through an entrance without getting a swollen head stuck. (Yeah I just realized … teehee.) There’s no emoji for “this guy’s a safe space and I would give him the time of day” but I would plunk it here as well as for the aforementioned superhero. I noticed that perhaps you didn’t fully grasp an earlier post. It was intentionally aimed at a menace that definitely did get it. It would have required a being-there component and some historical tracking of forum content; otherwise might come across as serving Twilight Zone-level narrative. I don’t need to pull anybody in to the specifics, and my personal life resources competently cover off processing, but open to inquiries via DM. The guiding principle would be that some truths are stranger than fiction and there’s a lesson in it. As a fellow person from outside the national majority you might get a kick out of it. I’m open to Friendlies regarding sharing experiences; Belligerents unwelcome.