Lucky

Is it not enough that you have won the hearts and minds of your fellow posters?

citylaw, I would respect your position much more except for the fact that when you were recently banned, you asked me to post a thread at Daddy's calling attention to the problems at the site. I could not get back to you because that was when the malware issues here began. In the interim, you were allowed back at the site and I was banned. But, when you got back to the site, did you create the thread there that you had wanted me to create? No. Did you complain at all when I was banned? No. Yet we here are now supposed to be all concerned that you got yourself banned again. Now we're are all brothers in arms...at least until you are allowed back at the site. Then we will again be forgotten.

There is a website called biddingfortravel.com at which I participated for a long time and contributed quite a bit of information. The website is owned by a woman named Sheryl, and she rules the place with an iron hand and a short temperament. She has driven so many posters away that the site is of much less value since so few contributions come in. The purpose of the site is good. You post the bid that won you a hotel on Priceline, and this helps others make more intelligent bids on Priceline. You no longer bid so blindly. If you have no trouble following Sheryl's rules, the site might make your bidding much better. Sheryl does not like the fact that I find her rules cumbersome and say so. She beat deej to the punch long ago and banned me! It always amazes me that sites that depend on contributions of members can be so difficult to deal with. She is still in business, and I have no problem with you using that site to your benefit. I not only made money for her by using her link to Priceline, I travel a lot and provided many helpful bid information and other contributions to the site. Thankfully I am now a pretty savvy Priceline bidder and don't need the site as much. Are there any sites that you have problems with? Let us know so we can avoid them!

The problem for me is that the discussions on deej and the other site are coming here under a thread with my name on it. I don't care to be perpetually linked to the issues over there, so I will start a new thread for these discussions and ask that you respect the change and use that thread.

I've cleared the cache a million times and still get the warnings. Fewer of them, but it is still annoying.

It finally went away. It turned out to be a conversation that someone started even though I didn't know Yahoo had conversations.

Gosh. I didn't think he would actually read what I wrote...now he knows that I was worried about him.

That would be so cool if he did. My two posts there would get read! Gay movies would get discussed, and the Dead Sea Scrolls would still be dead.

Every once in a while this site goes through a flurry of posts about the other site. Attention is paid, and then those who came here to discuss that issue leave, and we are left where we were. This site will not grow if it just a place to bash the other site. My suggestion is to move on, post interesting things that others will want to stick around to read, and remember, only this site shows hard cocks.

Chicago theater audiences saw two plays in 2012 that were expected to be Broadway bound. Both played at the Goodman Theater, a leading Chicago house. One starred Nathan Lane, a proven Broadway winner, the other starred Diane Lane and the hunky Finn Witrock. Neither will ever be seen on Broadway in what is proving to be the toughest market in years. The NY Times reports: "Among plays, meanwhile, two admired revivals at the Goodman Theater — of “The Iceman Cometh” and “Sweet Bird of Youth” — will not be coming to Broadway because of lack of interest from producers. Two other plays that have been announced for Broadway, “The Miss Firecracker Contest” and “The Velocity of Autumn,” are awaiting word on theaters, said the producer of both, Larry Kaye." With 15 backstage unions to deal with, costs to mount a Broadway show are rising, and audiences are not willing to pay the increasing prices necessary to make a profit. Investors, too, are wiser, as they see several shows flop this season. The musical Diner, previously scheduled for April 10th, has been put off until the fall. "“Diner” is only one of several musical projects that were announced or aimed for Broadway in the 2012-13 season but were delayed or canceled, in some cases because producers were not able to raise money. The other shows include movie-to-musical adaptations like “Flashdance,” “Big Fish,” and “Honeymoon in Vegas,” as well as “Rebecca” and “Prince of Broadway.” Fans looking forward to the musical Rebecca were doubly disappointed. Not only did it not open as planned, but the investors turned out to be partially invented by a middleman now charged with fraud. So, I guess I was lucky that I went to Chicago and saw Nathan Lane in A Long Day's Journey into Night, and Finn Witrock in Sweet Bird of Youth. Not so lucky though that both plays were good. I thought Sweet Bird stunk. Only Finn's abs made it worthwhile.

I like them, I just can't afford them!

Thanks, guys. I like this thread so much better than one where I am talking about problems at the other site. Let's let that one slide into the past and take advantage of several new posters here to build this site into a friendly and intelligent place to interact with other gay guys who also like escorts!

Yes, I am following this. The boy giggling on the tape must be one of the stupidest kids in the world. I hope they suffer the consequences of their behavior.

Let's stick to the funny stuff, shall we? I had my friend glutes take a picture of me in the cornfields today:

Well, if Townie is going to be there, all the more reason to try to add it to my calendar!

Surely Mr. Aces can find a computer somewhere. I hope that he wasn't in despair when he left. After all, his fortunes had taken a turn for the worse. But he has friends here, and when you need friends, this can be the place to be.

I don't know Rod Hagen, but I think he made some salient points and that he did it with respect. it didn't come across as whining to me. I have always felt that the contest was arbitrary. I don't know BudFoxx either, but everything I have seen so far tells me that he has the chance to be a funny and charming guy. Or is crazy as a fox? We'll see.

RA1, I had missed your comment, but now that I have seen it, yes, you should have been banned! Seriously, it does give some real perspective to what causes a ban, or more the arbitrariness of it. None of us though will end up lionized in biographies. One of the things that seems consistent with a biography is that we learn how flawed the person was. Any biography of me would have a (corn)field day with all of my flaws. If we didn't have them, we wouldn't have learning opportunities. It is just not an honor to a person to whitewash his life. To say he was flawless is to say he wasn't human. To love a person, flaws and all, is the better tribute than to have loved a cardboard cutout.

The movie is based upon the survival of a real family, a Hispanic family, But of course they are white in the movie. The NY Times review says it better than I did: Survivors are also witnesses, and “The Impossible” shows us, through the eyes of one unbelievably lucky family, some terrible things, including mangled bodies and parents in despair. But as Maria and Henry’s ordeal unfolds, the film’s focus starts to feel distressingly narrow. Virtually everyone shown suffering after the tsunami is a European, Australian or American tourist, and the fact that the vast majority of the dead, injured and displaced were Asian never really registers. At one point Maria and Lucas are cared for by residents of a small village and later they are helped by Thai doctors, but these acts of selfless generosity are treated like services to which wealthy Western travelers are entitled. And the terrible effects of the tsunami on the local population are barely acknowledged. This is not to dismiss the real anguish of people like the family on whose miraculous survival Mr. Bayona’s movie is based, nor to scold the director for making this movie instead of another. But there is a troubling complacency and a lack of compassion in “The Impossible,” which is less an examination of mass destruction than the tale of a spoiled holiday. You could also say that it is a movie about the consequences of global inequality, but unfortunately only by accident.

"Overall though, it is a positive story about the strength and perseverance of parents under unbelievable adversity in order to ensure the safety of their loved ones." It is that. But I agree that the Thai guys should not see it. Not because it might be too traumatizing, but because it takes a major event in their country and makes it about rich white people. The Thais are pretty much kept in the background. The movie isn't so much about the tsunami as it is about this family. I didn't have any reason to care about them over anyone else who suffered. I would rather have seen a more general movie about the tsunami. It does highlight the problem of being in a foreign country, unable to speak the language, and needing serious help

I think a little bit of Ice on my face would do it.

If some new folks come here, that's all well and good. Steven Draker and I have a history, but I like him and hope that he feels comfortable posting here. I would encourage a warm welcome given to anyone who decides to post here, even Daddy should he choose. For me, the whole thing is unfortunate, but I am not very good at holding grudges. I am just ready to move on.

Here is my post about Hooboy: My start date was either March or May of 2000, so I interacted with Hooboy but never met him. We did speak when he called to confirm my first review. But, I used a different name for the review than Lucky. I think Danny Cruz got my first review. If we are going to accurately remember Hooboy, then included in that would be his late night posts which did not often make sense. I once sent my friend deej a private message to urge him to remove a post that was not well-considered. But that was not the main thing to remember about Hooboy. If he had not started this site, and its forum, I would have missed out on hours of free entertainment, not to mention the making of many friendships and encounters with so many interesting guys. So for that, I owe him thanks. His last comment to me was about my pic that I had taken by a good friend with my arm around Lukas Ridgeston. He had always wanted to meet Lukas. here is the post I did NOT write: 9 Hours Ago #20 Lucky Prince Join Date Dec 1969 Posts 13,330 Go get a room you guys... Originally Posted by Steven_Draker In my culture when remembering a deceased person we remember and mention only the good things. We forget about the bad ones. It's considered traditionally bad omen and presently more associated to lack of tact to speak ill of a dead person. Thank you for bringing our attention to that article, jimboivyo. I wasn't aware it was there as I didn't scroll down. I've always preferred accuracy and honesty. No human is perfect, and to point that out is more of an indication of respect, it is a statement that you liked the whole person, and that's not detrimental, it's positive. Originally Posted by Lucky I've always prefered accuracy and honesty. Originally Posted by WilliamM I agree. I attended a memorial serice just before Christmas during which the main speaker mixed in good points and eccentricities. It was the first time his wife and daughter seemed like themselves, and even laughed out load once or twice. It was done with great skill, and made the service truly memorable...something it would not have been otherwise. Originally Posted by WilliamM Sorry Lucky, I realized after I posted that your comment was not serious. But, I do stand by my post. William Originally Posted by lucky It wasn't? That is a surprise to me. When I hit reply with quote to the above, I got this instead of that post:

I like suckers too..especially cocksuckers!

Since Oz has invited me to tell my side of the story, here it is: There was a post there on Hooboy, and I decided to add my experiences, however limited they were, because Hooboy's creation of that site changed my life. I mentioned the few times we interacted in a positive way. However, I think it says more for a person if we paint an honest picture of him, and make it clear that we loved him, warts and all. So, I added in my post an experience where I saw something he had posted that didn't seem right. I asked deej to pull it, and he did. Criticism came from Steven Draker, who said that in his culture, you only said positive things about a deceased. jimboivyo said that BN wrote this to celebrate the man and his memory, not to 'accurately' let folks know every intimate detail of hoo boy's (sic) life. I didn't mention every intimate detail, just one experience I was involved in. A short discussion ensued on whether it was proper to include less than positive things. At first WilliamM agreed with me, but he later said that he thought I wasn't being serious. We communicated and he realized that he had misread the thread and apologized to me, but he didn't change his comment. I was given no warning or spoken to at all about adding this comment. in fact, it is still up in that thread. Nonetheless, later that night I was surprised to see a post go up using the name Lucky as the writer. It was titled something about you guys should get a room, and included comments from Steven, me, and WilliamM. I was shocked that someone would write a post using my name. It had to be an admin, and I later learned that it was Daddy. I complained about this misuse of my name. I said that the integrity of the site had been breached, and that I deserved an apology, If one was not forthcoming, my days at that site would end. Minutes thereafter, without a word of warning to me, or an opportunity to discuss whatever was bothering daddy, I got a notice that I was now banned for life. Later someone asked Daddy why I was banned and he responded that it was because I didn't apologize. My response, to myself, is apologize for what? The Hooboy comment received no scorn from management, and, again, is still up. Surely they weren't too bothered by that. The apology was due me, not Daddy, and he banned me rather than apologize. I informed a friend that if Daddy told me that he was hurt by my comment, I would apologize. It was never my intention to hurt anyone. I never heard from Daddy, the ban remains. Posters must have the right to feel that the use of their screen name is sacrosanct, and will not be abused by management. Daddy violated this basic premise and seemed to have thought that by banning me, he would not have to face up to his misdeed. I hope posters concerned about integrity of their posts do speak up.