GOB and his Peyote Dream

[chivo]

Well frankly you guys are going way too overboard. Libel? Allegations? Sue (short for 'Susan'?)? By whom and for what?
 

Of course.
 
Now whether one thinks GOB stepped over the line is up for debate, but let's get real with the lawsuits. I'm one who gets a little tired with the self righteous and their never ending attempts to push their morals on others.
 
I thought the story was somewhat funny and creative. Yes, sometimes people have thin skins and at times the story hit a little to close to home. But really, does anyone think that Jack's "business" will be affected by this? Nonsense. The people who will use Jack's service will use Jack's service and I seriously doubt they will be swayed by this obvious attempt at humor if they even read it at all.

Any man who is swayed needs to just stay home. I mean could you imagine a normal RW having to deal with this type of mentality. 

[Muzh]

Of course.
 
Now whether one thinks GOB stepped over the line is up for debate, but let's get real with the lawsuits. I'm one who gets a little tired with self righteous and their never ending attempts to push their morals on others.
 

Chivo, isn't it ironic that the "satire" was a self-righteous way to impose their morals on others?

[BC]

BC, do you really not see a difference between the GQ description of Jack the person and GOB's description of Jack's business?   
 
Did the GQ article mention any connection between prostitution and Jack?  Of course not because there was no proof and GQ has deep pockets.

Gator,


The reader shares as much responsibility as the writer.. often more so.  Yes, I can choose to read the connection to prostitution, just as I can choose to read the same between the lines in the following quote from the article.  Jack hunts economically depressed areas of FSU for women who meet the needs of his business model and store 'shelf'. The word pimp can be used in different context, just google "pimp my" and watch the results flow in. The bottom line is that his business is exploiting women, maybe not for sex directly but is it not the sex appeal that lures men to FSU in the first place? As such Jack is indeed 'pimping' women, directly profiting from their economic weaknesses.  This business thrives on economic disparity, just as prostitution does.

“Tver has been kind of fished out. Tver is kind of a Moscow suburb. Those girls are getting that Moscow attitude.” Indeed, the best place to find Russian brides is no longer Russia. It’s Ukraine. And not just anywhere in Ukraine. Best to head straight for the postindustrial wasteland of Kharkiv or Lugansk, in the east. “We take advantage of the economical situation,” Bragg explains. “In any area where the economics are declining, these girls are looking to leave.”

I can read GOB's OP and chuckle, laugh, cry foul, whatever just as any other reader can but what the hell, it's a dirty business and we all know it.  Why such defense against the obvious?  Legal threats?? Really...


In real terms it's up to Jack to raise an objection to the owner of this site that can be evaluated and decided upon. That hasn't happened as far as we know and in fact I doubt Jack even cares as the exposure (advertising) value by populating the recent post section of the board with posts referring to him and his business is worth more, much more than requesting deletion. Heck I'd even testify to that. It's even part of his business model, sorta like the used car salesman on tv that goes around 'smashing' good deals with sledgehammers.


BTW, I did object to one of his subsequent posts and it seems he did offer an apology, at least on that point.


'nuff said folks.. lighten up a bit.

[chivo]

Chivo, isn't it ironic that the "satire" was a self-righteous way to impose their morals on others?

Interesting point.
 
Nevertheless when one starts throwing the threat of lawsuits around that IMO takes it to another level.

[GoodOlBoy]

  “We take advantage of the economical situation,” Bragg explains. “In any area where the economics are declining, these girls are looking to leave.” 
 
GOB

PS....I bet the AW on the "jury" would love that one. 
 
BTW Johnnie Cochran Jr.  dbneeley....What does that old silly legal doctrine about "clean hands" say?? 

[Muzh]

BC:
 
Can you tell me the difference between this;
 

The reader shares as much responsibility as the writer.. often more so.  Yes, I can choose to read the connection to prostitution, just as I can choose to read the same between the lines in the following quote from the article.  Jack hunts economically depressed areas of FSU for women who meet the needs of his business model and store 'shelf'. The word pimp can be used in different context, just google "pimp my" and watch the results flow in. The bottom line is that his business is exploiting women, maybe not for sex directly but is it not the sex appeal that lures men to FSU in the first place? As such Jack is indeed 'pimping' women, directly profiting from their economic weaknesses.  This business thrives on economic disparity, just as prostitution does.

and these fora and gentlemen?
 
Why are we concentrating on economically disadvantaged countries like the former Soyuz and not in the US or Canada or Western Europe where the economy is stronger?
 
Ah, but it is Jack and his services that are wrong and filthy and immoral.
 
Let's hear your justification. Why did you go to the FSU?

[Muzh]

  “We take advantage of the economical situation,” Bragg explains. “In any area where the economics are declining, these girls are looking to leave.” 
 
GOB

PS....I bet the AW on the "jury" would love that one. 

And which AW would that be? Your exwife?

[GoodOlBoy]

....prostitution....

Gator this word was NEVER used by GOB in his fictitious piece.
This word is repulsive and one that I would NEVER use to describe an FSUW.

The word pimp can be used in different context, just google "pimp my" and watch the results flow in.

Congratulations BC.
You were the first one to figure out GOB's "meaning" of the word.
 
 
As I stated earlier, it is interesting for poor old dysfunctional GOB to see the visceral reactions here to a fictitious piece.
 
GOB

PS...What was it you both said earlier to me Dan/Daveman......oh yeah I remember now DSM-IV/AXIS III.   
 

[GoodOlBoy]

And which AW would that be? Your exwife?

Obviously you don't read RWD very much.
My former wife is deceased [removed name-calling].
I was a widower when I met Marina.
 
 
GOB

[Boethius]

Boethius,


Under U.S. law, even public figures are afforded protection from the most vicious kinds of lies.

Go read  Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell 485 U.S. 46 (1988), a unanimous (8-0) decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, to determine just how much "protection" public figures are afforded.
 
You referred to Larry Flynt's position as a pornographer.  However, Hustler was sued by Falwell, not vice versa, and Hustler won that case on appeal.

[Misha]

The word pimp can be used in different context, just google "pimp my" and watch the results flow in.

True, in the Urban Dictionary alone, the word has 281 possible meanings 

[Muzh]

Obviously you don't read RWD very much.
My former wife is deceased jackass.
I was a widower when I met Marina.
 
 
GOB

My condolences about you wife, I didn't know.
 
Still the question remains, which AW?
 
P.S. Punctuations are very helpful.

[GQBlues]

.....I mean could you imagine a normal RW having to deal with this type of mentality. 

LOL. TFF! Welcome to Deduska Wonderland!
 

"I'm going to sue you, your brother, your neighbor, sue your mailman, even sue your dog, sue that stupid goldfish in that stupid bowl if that's the last thing I do! Sue, sue, sue..."

Alan Arkin, The In-Laws, 1979
 
 
" Svetlana’s a gorgeous girl, but she doesn’t have great tits, and I like tits."
 
Yup, that's likely where we can safely rest all our cute little moral self and use the above as a beacon of respectability.

[Boethius]

Still the question remains, which AW?

G.O.B. made a good point.  Put a bunch of small breasted unmarried fat women on that jury, and the goose would be cooked.

[Faux Pas]

Go read  Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell 485 U.S. 46 (1988), a unanimous (8-0) decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, to determine just how much "protection" public figures are afforded.

I'm not so sure Jack would qualify as a public figure. I wouldn't dare challenge your or David's legalese but, owning a private business and a centerpiece of a couple of news pieces might not fit the criteria does it?

[GoodOlBoy]

G.O.B. made a good point.  Put a bunch of small breasted unmarried fat women on that jury, and the goose would be cooked.

For some reason the term: "Dead man walking" comes to GOB's dysfunctional mind. 
 
GOB


PS....Also the term "Malicious Prosecution" might come into play?
 
BTW Mod's...where is that "I Dunno" icon at?

[Boethius]

FP, the case also applies to "limited purpose" public figures, and I'd argue in the context of this particular industry, Jack is a "public figure". or at least, a "limited purpose public figure". 

[BC]

BC:
 
Can you tell me the difference between this;
 
and these fora and gentlemen?
 
Why are we concentrating on economically disadvantaged countries like the former Soyuz and not in the US or Canada or Western Europe where the economy is stronger?
 
Ah, but it is Jack and his services that are wrong and filthy and immoral.
 
Let's hear your justification. Why did you go to the FSU?

I didn't, at least until we met a couple times.  Our relationship started when we met traveling.  No internet, no letter writing (at first), no agencies, no websites.  My justification was to visit her home, daughter, family and friends to see how things develop.

I have never supported the 'biz' side although am realistic enough to know that economics plays somewhat of a role in every relationship. The economic disparity being leveraged by [dot]businesses[/dot] is distasteful and often degrading.  Simply not my cup of tea and I don't mind sharing my views. 

Did I mention immoral or filthy?  No, I'm much better off simply calling a rock a rock along with mixing a little business ethics along with it. 

As to men, women and this fora? Well my message is to forget about the businesses involved.  You don't need them, especially when your chances are just as good or better not even looking for a wife.  That's my message.  Do I put them in the same barrel as biz?  No, for one simple reason.. they have the ability to listen and make choices, Biz is only about selling selling selling.

[Muzh]

As to men, women and this fora? Well my message is to forget about the businesses involved.  You don't need them, especially when your chances are just as good or better not even looking for a wife.  That's my message.  Do I put them in the same barrel as biz?  No, for one simple reason.. they have the ability to listen and make choices, Biz is only about selling selling selling.

I agree with the above. However, and as you said, the reality is a bit different. As I explained to my wife when she asked me to describe the US: One word; convenience.

[Muzh]

Also, look at how many of these posts concern money. How much will it cost the guy? Might well accept the fact that this is a business.

[Daveman]

 
As I stated earlier, it is interesting for poor old dysfunctional GOB to see the visceral reactions here to a fictitious piece.
 
GOB

PS...What was it you both said earlier to me Dan/Daveman......oh yeah I remember now DSM-IV/AXIS III. 

 


But, notice I said it from a distance where the retired marine isn't close enough to kick my ass! 

[GQBlues]

Some of you folks labor under the impression that merely labeling something as "fiction" or "satire" removes the possibility of suit for libel or slander.


That is completely false.


In this case, GOB made a specific reference to a known individual, and accused him of criminal and immoral activity ....

Seriously David, you are reaching...
 
Taken from the position you've staked above, are you implying GOB have legal grounds to sue Dan for libel for implying or insinuate he involves himself with criminal activity like using hallucinogenic drugs?
 
The whole premise of lawsuits in this thread is just silly.

[GoodOlBoy]

Seriously David, you are reaching...
 
Taken from the position you've staked above, are you implying GOB have legal grounds to sue Dan for libel for implying or insinuate he involves himself with criminal activity like using hallucinogenic drugs?
 
The whole premise of lawsuits in this thread is just silly.

Agree GQ.
It sounds like our boy Roy Black dbneeley slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
 



 
GOB

[Admin]

Seriously David, you are reaching...

Taken from the position you've staked above, are you implying GOB have legal grounds to sue Dan for libel for implying or insinuate he involves himself with criminal activity like using hallucinogenic drugs?
 
The whole premise of lawsuits in this thread is just silly.

>>Taken from the position you've staked above, are you implying GOB have legal grounds to sue Dan for libel for implying or insinuate he involves himself with criminal activity like using hallucinogenic drugs?<<

Actually, I gave thought to that very point when I changed the topic's Subject. The prospect of litigation is never far from my mind having been threatened with it so often, and having seen a few that went to litigation in the past.

In terms of this 'situation' what *is* clear to me is that GOB is intent on projecting his moralistic perspective onto RWD. Some will resonate with the position GOB has staked out - particularly those who, for whatever reason, do not like Jack (and Jack does himself no favors in this regard as he clearly feels no great need to be liked by others). Much of the problem, in fact, is sorting out the hard issues from the like/dislike factor - and I will give examples:

GOB is, as I just wrote, a judgmental moralist (IMNSHO). His expressed opinion of Jack is that Jack is a "pimp" and the innuendo in much of what he writes suggests (at least suggests) that GOB considers Jack as a peddler of flesh (my words, not GOB's), and casts aspersions on Jack at nearly every opportunity.

There are others in the crowd who think little of Jack - among them are BC, OlgaH, Boethius, GQBlues (did I miss anyone?).

When I first noticed GOB's post in the original topic, I gave consideration to a variety of possible responses. I ultimately chose to split it off with nothing more than poking a bit of fun at GOB with the Topic Title change. I was only slightly surprised to learn from GOB's admission, that he was, indeed, under the influence of a substance when he composed the original post.

There is no doubt in my mind that GOB's post was mean-spirited and fully intended to disparage Jack directly through a thin veil of misplaced humor.

While I believe GOB means well, his arrogant and moralistic judgment imposition is wearing thin - AND - he is not too interested in taking the hints that have been provided.

Earlier in this post I mentioned sorting out the hard issue(s) from those centered around the like/dislike factors. There are two 'hard' issues in play here. One is the ongoing baseless allegations of wrongdoing by Jack - specifically, that he engages in any form of sex trade activity. This has been the subject of at least one previous topic at RWD and according to the principles of res judicata, we are not going to revisit it further. One of the claims against Jack is that he has been maligned in numerous venues across the internet with some of these same allegations. True enough - and I have first-hand experience with Jack's competitors or simply Jack-bashers who post such tripe knowing it is not factual. I do not believe RWD should become a dumping ground for this sort of garbage. There is simply no factual evidence that Jack is guilty of the sorts of allegations being lodged by GOB or others.

The other 'hard' issue is, BC makes a strong point that Jack's use of RWD to drum up business may be in violation of the RWD TOS. This is the topic that Jack posted, and from which THIS topic was split -- http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=13500.0.

One of the rules I try to apply when reading other's posts is to read them as written. Over the years I have found that when I try to 'read between the lines' or interpret something that was not clear, I often get it wrong. As a result, if I find something unclear, I ask questions.

As I read Jack's OP, I did not see it as him drumming up business - though I do see how others might feel that he was. I also did not ascribe the nefarious ulterior motives that others ascribed.

I'll stop here - at least for now. There is more that might be written but I need a break.

- Dan

[GoodOlBoy]

In terms of this 'situation' what *is* clear to me is that GOB is intent on projecting his moralistic perspective onto RWD.

Yeah Dan, you got GOB pegged alright.
 
I always wanted to be like my boy Jimmy (Swaggart) and yes Dan I am using RWD as my pulpit.
 
GOB