not a scammer but be careful

[Faux Pas]

Doctors have laws thet oblige them to restrict spreading out their knowledge of patients cases. So do lawyers.
Anyone who does not have such professional limits has freedom to post their experiences. I wonder if Patrocle70 would have reacted equally if the story about him had been a glowing tale of romance.

Probably not. But a positive description of him being a great guy wouldn't be defaming in his eyes. I agree the doctor analogy isn't relevant. It's highly unlikely a doctor would post identifying pictures or a name to explain his treatment, especially without consent. If one did they would be subject to liability. This instance is more akin to a neighbor peeking in the window and telling all the other neighbors what they saw. Again, nothing illegal or immoral but, very unethical

[groovlstk]

This instance is more akin to a neighbor peeking in the window and telling all the other neighbors what they saw. Again, nothing illegal or immoral but, very unethical

What's the difference between what she did and some of the trip reports on RWD?

[Faux Pas]

What's the difference between what she did and some of the trip reports on RWD?

Nothing. It is the very same thing compared to TRs that reflect badly on any one identified woman

[BillyB]

I dealt with daisybride in Kiev.
 

They are a feeder agency of the Angelika network. If I remember correctly, they are located near the Mcdonalds at Independence Square.

If the lady you dated is only dating men for personal reasons instead of having the goal of marriage, she's not much different than the men who walk into marriage agencies with no intent to marry.

Although the management team was nice to you, they are in the business of making money. The apartment manager I had like me and told me if I ever wanted to use a marriage agency, he would vouch for me because if I walked in, they would not care who I picked to date and just collect the money. If he told them I'm a serious man, they would help eliminate the not so serious girls that I would want to date. I've never needed to use a marriage agency but it was interesting to know how different levels of service get applied to different men.

Just say 1, 2 or 3 and we'll get the Picture


1) http://www.daisybride.com/ladies/vk7303.shtml

2) http://www.daisybride.com/ladies/ut1134.shtml

3) http://www.daisybride.com/ladies/ak2812.shtml

[Patrocle70]

Shadow: some professions are bound by law to a kind of ethic. It is true. Journalist should follow some kind of rules too. Otherwise , if info is partially build up where would go our democracies ? I believe that part of the financial crisis that hit so hard now could be have been avoided by more ethics (i.e misuse of financial products and falsification of data).... If we don't teach young generation to behave with more ethics than "us" , then next crisis will be even harder.

Again, I didn't read at first her blog, thus my reaction was equal.

I didn't know where to post this topic, if you feel it is irrelevant then ok. For those who plan to use an agency, ask them for confidentiality (this is very standard thing) and then they should ask the Ladies to behave accordingly.

One more time, there are really nice Ladies in FSU worth meeting. Sad that some of them cloud the sky ... (conversely some men behave there really badly).

I took the plane with a man, he was going to Ukraine in a distant city. We were seated next to each other, one week later we sit together. We talked and I discovered that he was going to meet a Lady after one year of correspondence. When he came back, he was really happy. Planning a wedding and we celebrated that with whisky together... So hope is allowed. As for me, I am going to reconsider few things...

I wish to all a good evening and thanks for support, hoping that my experience could be useful to some !!

[BillyB]

hoping that my experience could be useful to some !!

Because of the vague info, any man reading this will avoid journalists in the marriage agency. That's not fair to the journalists who have sincere intentions to date and find a man to marry.

[Shadow]

Shadow: some professions are bound by law to a kind of ethic. It is true. Journalist should follow some kind of rules too. Otherwise , if info is partially build up where would go our democracies ? I believe that part of the financial crisis that hit so hard now could be have been avoided by more ethics (i.e misuse of financial products and falsification of data).... If we don't teach young generation to behave with more ethics than "us" , then next crisis will be even harder.

If we allow people not to disclose their thoughts because of perceived ethics from one side, we are heading for an even bigger crisis.
I see that you did not answer my questions, perhaps you would like to answer them so we can form a balanced view, as we do not have her side of the story.

Again, I didn't read at first her blog, thus my reaction was equal.

I didn't know where to post this topic, if you feel it is irrelevant then ok. For those who plan to use an agency, ask them for confidentiality (this is very standard thing) and then they should ask the Ladies to behave accordingly.

One more time, there are really nice Ladies in FSU worth meeting. Sad that some of them cloud the sky ... (conversely some men behave there really badly).

I took the plane with a man, he was going to Ukraine in a distant city. We were seated next to each other, one week later we sit together. We talked and I discovered that he was going to meet a Lady after one year of correspondence. When he came back, he was really happy. Planning a wedding and we celebrated that with whisky together... So hope is allowed. As for me, I am going to reconsider few things...

I wish to all a good evening and thanks for support, hoping that my experience could be useful to some !!

If you wish confidentiality, then you are the one who should ask for it. Hiding yourself behind an agency, who can not function without giving the information you gave them to the ladies, is not going to do it.

When you talked with the man you met, did you tell about how the meeting went and showed him a picture of her ? If so, what is the difference between you telling one stranger and her telling 1000 strangers ?

[Jumper]

seriously -
you guys will debate whether it's takes and immoral or unethical
act  to be considesed * scam*? or be listed as such?
semantics at best?

I mentioned if the tables were turned.
would the man be scamming her ? yes.
regardless money asked for or not.

Any man pretending marriage, yet simply looking for a good time is equally scamming.  and, right or wrong ,they get listed

pro daters typically just get gifts,,, it's still a scam,and they get listed.

If she wants to post his informtio nin a blog, yoi uae right shre can.,
if he wants to sign up  for a marriage agency,
with no intent to marry,
she should be listed as somene not to contact.


To comapare it to a TR is not the same?

if you think it is the same:
let the next guy post a trip report ,telling that he went thru marriage agencies,,
Told the women he would meet , that he was seriuos and had intents to marry,but ultimatly only met them to write a TR about his experience..
and listed thee personal details and photos..
and maybe he is a journalist..or aspires to be one..

Most everyone would bust his chops, and wouldn't have any problem with the women listing him as a type of *scammer*



Listen, I' m not saying to break the gallows out for her..

but to pretend she wasnt scamming this man, is silly..
unless you play semantics with the word "scam"

[ECOCKS]

I find this awfully amusing in light of last year's uproar over TR's with pictures and commentary.

So NOW that the girl put up your information with previously posted public-accessible pictures, it's an un-ethical and immoral act according to some?

Interesting spins and takes.

Me'thinks, the shoe is on the other foot in this story.

[Shadow]

AJ, if she was listed only to get experiences for her blog, you can see it as scam.
However if she is listed for true reason of finding a husband and just happens to write an experience on a blog, that is a very different perspective.
As the OP has not answered the question about this, the data is at least inconclusive.

ECOCKS: As you might see my position has not changed from that debate. And yes, I find it smilarly amusing.

[Faux Pas]

I find this awfully amusing in light of last year's uproar over TR's with pictures and commentary.

So NOW that the girl put up your information with previously posted public-accessible pictures, it's an un-ethical and immoral act according to some?

Interesting spins and takes.

Me'thinks, the shoe is on the other foot in this story.

The woman here in essence did write a TR about her visit with Petrocle and posted it on her blog which is the very same medium as TRs on this forum. There is no difference in that regard from her report on her blog to a trip report in this forum.

Where there is a difference, and it is not immoral or illegal is in her direct ridicule and poking fun at him. Defaming his character as basically an old goat chasing young skirts. Her intention on what she may or may not do with her information (i.e. write a book) at a later date makes no difference. It is not illegal or immoral for her to share her experiences with whomever she pleases. To some it would be unethical to do so for the purpose of defaming him, for others it wouldn't. Ethics are a matter of personal choice. Informing people that she went out with Petrocle and her opinion of him is harmless enough

Most trip reports on RWD are not for the purpose of denigrating or identifying the woman/women. Those that do (intended or not) IMO are unethical and no better than this lady had done to Petrocle. The next guy may not have any problem with those particular ethics.

I have no problem with TRs. It's no mistake that I have never written one. Should I ever write one I would not hesitate to post photos of the report or the woman(s) I visited. I would however, be careful not to denigrate or defame them. That is a matter of "my" ethics.

[Shadow]

Where there is a difference, and it is not immoral or illegal is in her direct ridicule and poking fun at him. Defaming his character as basically an old goat chasing young skirts. Her intention on what she may or may not do with her information (i.e. write a book) at a later date makes no difference. It is not illegal or immoral for her to share her experiences with whomever she pleases. To some it would be unethical to do so for the purpose of defaming him, for others it wouldn't. Ethics are a matter of personal choice. Informing people that she went out with Petrocle and her opinion of him is harmless enough

FP do you have any information that we do not, as what you describe here is something I can not read from the posts of Patrocle.
Jumping to conclusions ?

[Faux Pas]

FP do you have any information that we do not, as what you describe here is something I can not read from the posts of Patrocle.
Jumping to conclusions ?

I have no other information than he posted here. My assumptions are based on his words so yeah, I have taken liberties to illustrate my point.

please look over that albeit well intended 

[groovlstk]

AJ, if she was listed only to get experiences for her blog, you can see it as scam.

I still don't see it as such and will not until the OP makes it clear that this woman's intention was ridicule and cruelty and nothing more.

Countless men have posted accounts of bad babes in the scammers thread here, always with the disclaimer that they are doing it for the greater good, as a warning to other single guys. Who's to say this woman's blog doesn't serve the same purpose for local single women?

[ECOCKS]

Ethics are a can of wiggly worms, full of judgment, religion, culture, politics, environment, laws, yada, yada, yada.

Society has ethics, individuals have convictions. Some are hypocritical, replete with double-standards, moral outrage and indignation at the damage they have suffered.

In this instance, the woman exercises her freedom of speech and posts previously publicized pictures that the individual himself posted. Not to rehash the old argument from last year but while she did nothing illegal, my belief is that she is merely inconsiderate.

The Internet is a powerful tool but has multiple sharp edges. It's an enabler for scams, gossip, dis-/misinformation and provides a pulpit for any to preach whatever message or view they wish to espouse. Cutting across political, cultural and legal boundaries is patently uncontrollable and, in the end, almost entirely governed by the individuals own morals, ethical standards, judgments and convictions.

FP expresses this well as he describes HIS decisions in contrast to what is allowed, whether from the board's policy, local laws or society's judging.

So, in the end, I see it, mostly, as "do unto others as you wish they would do unto you..."

[BillyB]

I find this awfully amusing in light of last year's uproar over TR's with pictures and commentary.

So NOW that the girl put up your information with previously posted public-accessible pictures, it's an un-ethical and immoral act according to some?

I don't see an uproar or people coming out in numbers against the woman posting a blog with photos of the guys she dates. Maybe it's not against the law over there but it's poor taste when she posts men's names and ridicules them. I know one member here who posted a trip report with photos of the ladies he visited but didn't bad mouth them. He was blacklisted by the RW at antidate. They have no tolerance.

The biggest issue I see here is we have an agency that is collecting money by way of letter writing and dating fees from men who are communicating and wanting to see that journalist who's primary intent is to write a book, not marriage. If I wasted my money on ladies like that, I would expect a refund and the agency to rectify the situation with her profile.

Patrocle70 intent was to help people avoid the woman but instead he will have single guys reading his thread avoiding all innocent marriage minded journalists in Kiev since the one in question is also listed at another anonymous agency. Patrocle70, without a name, photo and/or profile link, you aren't doing the men or sincere RW journalists any favors.

[groovlstk]

Patrocle70 intent was to help people avoid the woman but instead he will have single guys reading his thread avoiding all innocent marriage minded journalists in Kiev since the one in question is also listed at another anonymous agency. Patrocle70, without a name, photo and/or profile link, you aren't doing the men or sincere RW journalists any favors.

LOL, so after you get done saying what this woman did was in poor taste, you urge the OP to do the same thing? 

[BillyB]

LOL, so after you get done saying what this woman did was in poor taste, you urge the OP to do the same thing? 

It's not the same thing. Big difference between using people for free dinner and entertainment and then ridiculing them in a blog compared to warning people a person does not have sincere intentions. Groove, you're a big boy, you should know that. Big difference between a newspaper listing a photo and a name of a criminal to help protect people from crossing his/her path and the Jerry Springer show full of trash talk.

[ECOCKS]

I don't see an uproar or people coming out in numbers against the woman posting a blog with photos of the guys she dates. Maybe it's not against the law over there but it's poor taste when she posts men's names and ridicules them. I know one member here who posted a trip report with photos of the ladies he visited but didn't bad mouth them. He was blacklisted by the RW at antidate. They have no tolerance.

Billy:

I am usually in agreement with your general direction but am a bit over to the right of you on this one.

Yes there are two points here.

The agency first since it's easier. If Pat would post the blog, some determination might be possible as to whether her side of the date is malicious (as in your use of the word "ridicul[ing]") or merely a different version/POV. Certainly, if the agency allows someone to be listed who openly boasts that she is doing this as a lark or deliberate ploy for purposes other than long-term relationship, then she should be removed from the site. Also, an honest agency would refund the guy's money related to meeting her.

As for the woman's post. You seem to prove (bolded statement) that according to their standards, this type of behavior is hurtful. Is it so odd to question that maybe they resent having their pictures posted and public discussions of their behavior, whether they visited a guy's hotel room/apartment, how they dressed for a date, their eating habits, etc.? Just maybe we should consider the feeling and views of both the individual and the society they live in since that society has full access to the TR?

I think this situation is directly relevant to the original questions we had a year (or so) ago. Not all TR's are oriented towards the positive events. Some that are positive in our eyes may very well involve compromising the woman or other people involved.

Action necessary? Not unless the community or owners wish to step up to the plate and address the issue according to their own beliefs. Still (to use an example), just as a place that refuses service to people who wear a gun into the business has every right to do so (usually), those who are unhappy with this attitude can chose to take their business elsewhere as their only real remedy. Equally, they can chose to tell their friends any negative views about that business in an effort to influence the business reputation and profits. Just don't be surprised when incidents like these occur. It's the nature of things.

[groovlstk]

It's not the same thing. Big difference between using people for free dinner and entertainment and then ridiculing them in a blog compared to warning people a person does not have sincere intentions. Groove, you're a big boy, you should know that. Big difference between a newspaper listing a photo and a name of a criminal to help protect people from crossing his/her path and the Jerry Springer show full of trash talk.

Billy, I may be a big boy but I'm not a simpleton who sees the world as black and white. 

Sure, you and a few others have already convicted this woman despite the fact that A) you haven't read her blog, and B) Have no idea what her intentions were. Yet you accept the OP's account without question even though I suspect even he doesn't know why she did what she did.

One thing is pretty clear to me: attitudes towards Western men have changed thanks to a decade of sex tourists, misfits, and old farts who think it's their God-given right to screw around with women half their age, and innocent guys like Patrocle70 will pay the price.

[Gylden]

This situation is quite simple really. I don't understand what all the fuss is about?
We should? I will say thanks to Patrocle70 for sharing his story and having enough integrity to stick to HIS morals!
I am sure no one would like to find themselves in this particular situation and it is good (that he posted), as a reminder to everyone that there are a huge variety of things which could go wrong.
At the same time, posting the link to her blog would not be wrong by any reasonable standard, as she has allready put it out in the PUBLIC view. We pass around links all the time in this manner. Don't need her picture from any meetings or personal information, just the link to the blog.

OK well from my view point!
 

[BillyB]

Yet you accept the OP's account without question

I've already question his motives. I doubt his motives are to ruin the woman's life because he's doing a poor job of it. He's just here to tell what happened to him and warn men of a Ukrainian journalist writing a book. Since he won't pinpoint who she is, we are all going to be scared to date any journalist.  :hairraising:

I suspect even he doesn't know why she did what she did.

He said she gave him a link to her blog and told him she was going to write a book about stupid foreigners. Patrocle70 may not be the star of the book but it sounds like he will be in the book.

[Patrocle70]

Hello,

I have been away for some time for business and health reasons.

I would like to thanks those who understood me and or respected my decisions.

I wanted to share my experience because I thought that it was a new case and may be useful for others. I respect that for some a blog can relate many things (It is not the fact she didn't like the meeting that is problem for me, I am grown up man... ). My concern was the disclosure of private information ....

I know some people lived worse experience (wedding cancelled last minute) but in my case I still feel shaken. It is so difficult to build a relationship with a Lady who lives far away that a little thing can blow everything. I understood that I should make a long break with "my quest of the golden Lady".

The agency wrote me today that they will ban this Lady from their site. I am really happy about their decision because I considered them as a serious agency. May be it is another sign of me being naive but I prefer a positive attitude than just "Burn them all"...

I would like to close the subject here.

Have a good day !!