Should she report him to Antidate?

[Mishenka]

Sheeesh... What is it with all the bible bashing in here lately?

Misha... yours is BY FAR the least offensive of the three BS rants I've just read this morning - but forcing ones MORAL judgements on someone else is just wrong...

Kuna, thanks for your input,  however, this is not my moral judgement.  It's God's.  I am no one to argue with Him. He always wins.  I'm not a Bible Basher, or preacher.  Im simply state the truth of the matter.  I gave an example of absolutes.  Look at the spirit of the message instead of doing what so many do by taking things out of context and missing the point.  The point is this, "a man will reap what he sows" period.  This guy will not get away with this as if nothing happpend.  One way or the other he will get his just reward.  End of story.

Misha

[BillyB]

yes, it is true
and decent man never insults a woman, more like he will ignore her, or you wish to discuss this?

Kvinna, thanks for answering my question. While I believe every man in this forum has said something rude to women, possibly RW, at least once in their life, I don't believe they should be listed name and photo on your forum for RW to avoid. Sometimes even the most decent people say things out of anger or retaliation. I'm also fair, if you or other RW insult a man, or talk bad about Western men in general, I don't think you or them belong on an anti scam site for speaking your opinion. You may not be able to control what other anti scam sites do but you can create high standards at yours. People respect high standards. It's up to you.

[William3rd]

William, you can keep beating your drum repeatedly that you're on the winning team or you can practice what you preach and not protect scum as you accuse me of doing. Start listing names, personal info, and photos of all who's done you wrong. This is your chance to show you're not a hypocrite.

Whatever are you referring to? Are you medicated? Smoking something? What utter claptrap. . . .

I am not going to participate in whatever it is you are trying to turn this into. Your position was not the majority position and as far as this latest game, I do not see the purpose. You completely miss the point, ignore the facts,  and now want to change ths issue completely. For someone who seems to claim some conservative roots from time to time, you sound like a whiny liberal trying to cloud the issues.

Have we been talking about your Dad or something? Gotta be a blood relative. Just gotta be.

[Scuba Don]

to get back to the main point, hell no.  Never turn any man over to these anti-men women.  Have u guys
gone insane?

[BillyB]

I am not going to participate in whatever it is you are trying to turn this into.

This isn't rocket science. If you can't do what you recommend others to do, don't give advice. Can you at least recommend legal action as a means to get justice? The last I heard, that's the method recommended by most attorneys.

Anybody else out there willing to do what they just recommended/voted on? Hell no, kvinna has more balls than you guys. At least she does as she says.

[LiveFromUkraine]

Wow, what a heated discussion this turned out to be.  I am not so sure why everyone is getting their panties all twisted but it is good to debate neverless.

The problem that I see is we only have one side of the story.  I can't see how anyone can pass judgement by hearing only one side of the story.  In my experience, there are always two sides and the truth is somewhere in the middle.  Now the guy should have not cut off correspondence.  Who knows why this happened.  I do think that before everyone decides to hang this guy it would be nice to know what was going on from his perspective.  It is possible that after hearing his story, some of you may not want to hang him or call him a scum bag.   Then again maybe we will want to pour gasoline on him and torch him.  The main thing is we won't really know unless we heard his story which normally happens in a court of law.  I wonder why that is? 


I just wanted to add my opinion to the flames of debate. 


Thomas

[William3rd]

And you, BillyB are about as far from being a rocket scientist as you can get. . . .

I will stick with my vote and my opinion.

I take it I will not be receiving your Xmas card this year? That will be fine. . .

If you send me your dad's info, I will post him for you since you dont have the balls to do it yourself.

[Kvinna]

Kvinna, thanks for answering my question. While I believe every man in this forum has said something rude to women, possibly RW, at least once in their life, I don't believe they should be listed name and photo on your forum for RW to avoid. Sometimes even the most decent people say things out of anger or retaliation. I'm also fair, if you or other RW insult a man, or talk bad about Western men in general, I don't think you or them belong on an anti scam site for speaking your opinion. You may not be able to control what other anti scam sites do but you can create high standards at yours. People respect high standards. It's up to you.

I see you like to distort facts... OK
so a such letter

YOU DESERVE TO LIVE ON A FARM SIDE BY SIDE WITH THE GOATS IN THE MUD EATING FROM THE GROUND YOU SUB HUMAN! AND WHEN WE IN THE WEST FEEL SORRY FOR YOU WE MIGHT AIR LIFT SOME SAUSAGES TO YOU SO YOU CAN STICK ONE IN YOUR ARSE AND ONE IN YOUR FOUL MOUTH LOL! HITLER WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG.GOD I FEEL SORRY FOR YOUR DAUGHTER HAVING A MOTHER WHOS WORSE THAN PROSTITUTE!

is only some one's opinion?

PS. I can post here a lot of such opuses

[Simoni]

Wow, what a heated discussion this turned out to be.  I am not so sure why everyone is getting their panties all twisted but it is good to debate neverless.

The problem that I see is we only have one side of the story.  I can't see how anyone can pass judgement by hearing only one side of the story.  In my experience, there are always two sides and the truth is somewhere in the middle.  Now the guy should have not cut off correspondence.  Who knows why this happened.  I do think that before everyone decides to hang this guy it would be nice to know what was going on from his perspective.  It is possible that after hearing his story, some of you may not want to hang him or call him a scum bag.   Then again maybe we will want to pour gasoline on him and torch him.  The main thing is we won't really know unless we heard his story which normally happens in a court of law.  I wonder why that is? 


I just wanted to add my opinion to the flames of debate. 

Thomas

I will weigh in here now.  With the minority.   Was going to keep out of this silly debate.  But it just goes on and on, and AD says more and more silly things.  Thomas pretty much sums up my feelings--we have only one side of the story.  If we had two stories, truth would likely be in the middle.

And, never ever, for man or woman, should one upset person get someone banned. Also, Gator asked if he should be reported to AD.  Have you read what these "ladies" wrote a few months ago?  Or even in this thread?   Men are listed for insulting a woman, and the woman defines what insulted means?

Based upon these factors, I say NO.  He should not be reported to AD.

Too little facts, and the wrong place to report.

[BC]

To tell an AM to "Suck up the money " is fine. He probably spent no more than a couple of weeks pay on his trip. She probably spent many months pay. So if her average pay is $300 per month and she spent $600(or 2 months pay) it hits her much harder than the American.

  If for example someone who made 10-20x my salary  made me pay for a ticket with very hard earned and much needed money in the promise to reimburse me and not only cancelled last minute, but did'nt reimburse me even for a half I would be very upset.

    And IF in my lifetime I had so little regard for someone else's time,money,trust and effort and I disrespected them in the same way this man did, I could not be angry if someone called me out to be a thief or a scammer. I live my life in a way i do onto others in the exact way I would like them to treat me. There is no excuse in the world to treat anyone as if it's "your world and others simply live in it. You cannot be called on your actions and do not need to feel sorry for them . Those actions are from very selfish people . Perhaps he needs a reality check to what sort of harm his actions leave.

Sort of a double edged sword..  Just because a millionaire got scammed for 20 bucks doesn't make it any less of a scam..  Sure he probably won't give a rats @ss about it or might make a big deal over it.. whatever floats his/her boat.

The 'suck it up' I mentioned upthread should apply regardless of income. Meeting someone for the first time is going to be risky all the way around, much more so if some kind of advanced funds are involved..  I classify this as a sort of 'sending money to someone you don't know' category..  In effect she 'loaned' him the funds for her travel expenses and he didn't pay up.

It was an unwise decision to do so and we see the results.

[William3rd]

credit reports only report one side of the story. Bankruptcy filings on show one side of the story. Arrest records only show one side of the story. Default judgments only show one side of the story. Foreclosures only show one side of the story. The smuttly little tales of high school boys-or romance tour participants- about their supposed conquests dont show both sides.


Everything does not go to court. And nobody has to show any evidence at all. If someone who has a decent rep posts their story, then let them.

So, the posting of internet horror stories and yet giving an opportunity to be heard is more than fair.

Time to leave this thread. I mean, it has been more than fun. If it goes much further, it might end up relegated to the flame room and it deserves better than that. . . .

[ScottinCrimea]

Wm3rd,   That is exactly how I see it.  No one is asking to castrate the guy, ot throw the bum in jail, only report some facts so someone else doesn't get hurt.  The minority here seem intent in distorting the facts, making it an all or nothing argument and turning everything into a hyperbole.  We see yet another example of defending the wrongdoer and attacking the victim.  What's so wrong with putting this guy on some watch list?  It won't make a bit of difference to him, in fact, he probably won't even notice, but it might make a big difference to his next potential victim.  Sure the woman was naive and foolish, but so are a lot of guys who get scammed.  How many times have we seen threads here where someone posts a profile name and number with pictures warning members to "stay away from this one"? - for example the recent one from Poltova.  I haven't heard a single complaint from anyone here when this happens, more "Thanks for the warning" and I haven't yet seen Admin remove any of these posts.  It seems the 20% minority here have a double standard.

[Admin]

Wm3rd,   That is exactly how I see it.  No one is asking to castrate the guy, ot throw the bum in jail, only report some facts so someone else doesn't get hurt.  The minority here seem intent in distorting the facts, making it an all or nothing argument and turning everything into a hyperbole.  We see yet another example of defending the wrongdoer and attacking the victim.  What's so wrong with putting this guy on some watch list?  It won't make a bit of difference to him, in fact, he probably won't even notice, but it might make a big difference to his next potential victim.  Sure the woman was naive and foolish, but so are a lot of guys who get scammed.  How many times have we seen threads here where someone posts a profile name and number with pictures warning members to "stay away from this one"? - for example the recent one from Poltova.  I haven't heard a single complaint from anyone here when this happens, more "Thanks for the warning" and I haven't yet seen Admin remove any of these posts.  It seems the 20% minority here have a double standard.

We have had occasion to remove, or edit, some of the posts in the Scammers forum. I was also pretty explicit about the cautions to anyone posting a scammer in that particular forum. While posting obvious scams and scammers provides a service to the community, our members are normally pretty good about challenging reported scammers and exposing those who are merely vindictive.

I think, in general, the type of debate we have seen here is healthy. Readers are able to see both sides of the 'argument' and then draw their own conclusions and set their own path. Obviously, there were some heated comments which I believe are not helpful - and it always pains me when I see people who I regard highly 'having a go' at one another. I never quite know how (or if) to respond in those instances.

Nevertheless, Gator presented us a scenario which evoked a number of opinions and some useful exchange. It has provoked some of us to contribute our thoughts - and hopefully, to consider the other thoughts which may not have been entirely in alignment with our own.

I can safely say that William3rd, ScottInCrimea, and KenC have every right in the world to be wrong in your position on the matter. 

Cheers!

- Dan

[LiveFromUkraine]

Wm3rd,   That is exactly how I see it.  No one is asking to castrate the guy, ot throw the bum in jail, only report some facts so someone else doesn't get hurt.  The minority here seem intent in distorting the facts, making it an all or nothing argument and turning everything into a hyperbole.  We see yet another example of defending the wrongdoer and attacking the victim.  What's so wrong with putting this guy on some watch list?  It won't make a bit of difference to him, in fact, he probably won't even notice, but it might make a big difference to his next potential victim.  Sure the woman was naive and foolish, but so are a lot of guys who get scammed.  How many times have we seen threads here where someone posts a profile name and number with pictures warning members to "stay away from this one"? - for example the recent one from Poltova.  I haven't heard a single complaint from anyone here when this happens, more "Thanks for the warning" and I haven't yet seen Admin remove any of these posts.  It seems the 20% minority here have a double standard.

I don't agree with the distortion of the facts.  The truth is you don't have all the facts.  You have one person's point of view.  I think a lot of us are saying to get all the facts so they are not distorted.

My honest opinion is she needs to take responsibility for her actions.  She messed up and now will learn from it.  She may be lucky this turned out the way it did.  She was going to a foreign country with a man she never met.  Who knows what could have happened to her.  No one knows if this guy is a sicko.  She should have had the man come to her where she had a support network of friends and families to help out if something bad happened.

I could give care less if she reports him on anti date.  I do suggest we report her on the "I was an idiot and will now blame someone else for my mistakes" list.   I am so tired of hearing people bitch about being scammed when they should have known better.

I don't have any sympathy for a 59 year old getting scammed by a 20 year woman either.  I still wonder who is trying to scam whom in those situations.



Thomas

 

[LiveFromUkraine]

credit reports only report one side of the story. Bankruptcy filings on show one side of the story. Arrest records only show one side of the story. Default judgments only show one side of the story. Foreclosures only show one side of the story. The smuttly little tales of high school boys-or romance tour participants- about their supposed conquests dont show both sides.


Everything does not go to court. And nobody has to show any evidence at all. If someone who has a decent rep posts their story, then let them.

So, the posting of internet horror stories and yet giving an opportunity to be heard is more than fair.

Time to leave this thread. I mean, it has been more than fun. If it goes much further, it might end up relegated to the flame room and it deserves better than that. . . .

Foreclosures tell a story of the bank not getting paid.
Bankruptcies tell a story of people filing bankruptcy and so on.

I really have no idea what the hell you are talking about. 

Thomas

[William3rd]

Thats all right,  Thomas- I dont even care what you are talking about at this point in this thread.

But there are no rebuttals on any of these things.

[LiveFromUkraine]

Thats all right,  Thomas- I dont even care what you are talking about at this point in this thread.

But there are no rebuttals on any of these things.

I think you are right.  Everything has been said.  I am always late to the party.   


Thomas

[William3rd]

 

[BillyB]

kvinna, yes, there are men who say horrendous stuff to women. That is wrong and those women who have dignity and confidence to know what is said isn't true have no need to defend themselves to idiots. Getting into a shouting match will only make things worse. Some bad things were said to me at your forum when I was called stupid and ridiculed for believing in the holocaust. I did not get into a game of insults but I let people know the holocaust is one of the most documented events in history. Also it has plenty of witnesses to verify the events. In the big picture, denying such tragic events is worse than insulting RW or even me.

What's so wrong with putting this guy on some watch list?  It won't make a bit of difference to him, in fact, he probably won't even notice, but it might make a big difference to his next potential victim. 

So what's wrong with some of you guys putting people who did you wrong on a list to protect others from engaging in contact with? Your argument is about helping others isn't it? It's okay for other people to do it and take risks but it isn't when it affects you.

Why? Because you don't want your parents to someday confront you when they find you on a site where people voted you a@@hole of the month.

You don't want your wife, children and friends to someday ask you why they found you on a forum's "most dangerous child molestor" list and rated you a level 2 stalker because someone reported you there.

You don't want your neighbors giving you the evil eye because a person ran around your neighborhood putting hundreds of official type letters in mailboxes stating you're a recent registered sex offender. Hopefully that news doesn't get back to your place of work.

And forbid if the person you smear takes action physically and violently against you and your family.

When you decide to attack people of bad character, without the law involved, you must realize they will retaliate in a bad way. Bad people don't follow the rules of fair play and you may find yourself stooping to their low levels of attack or simply letting them beat you yet again.

It's all good when it happens to others but not you. This kind of stuff and similiar has happened and is happening. I wish some people in this thread would step forward to verify what I say but I understand your silence. I also want to reassure those men that I will not send anybody to any links that humiliate you or expose your personal contact info.

The bottom line here is give advice that you'd take yourself. Practice what you preach. I don't see much of that happening here in attempts to help others. How's the collection going to assist the RW to get real justice by legal means?

How many times have we seen threads here where someone posts a profile name and number with pictures warning members to "stay away from this one"? - for example the recent one from Poltova.  I haven't heard a single complaint from anyone here when this happens, more "Thanks for the warning" and I haven't yet seen Admin remove any of these posts.  It seems the 20% minority here have a double standard.

I didn't see any "minority" here say, in the thread you pointed out to, "Thanks for the warning". Don't deceive people, direct people to a recent thread where talked about a guy posted a scammer and we(minority) insulted the guy who listed her as a scammer. BTW, that thread also serves as an example of what can happen to a RW if she posted a man at antidate in attempts to smear him. The woman who reported him said the guy sent her a video of his dick. That could be used as proof he's a man to avoid but does the video even exist? And why did she agree to meet him after receiving the video and was surprised he turned out to be a sex tourist?

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=6053.0

[William3rd]

Lest we forget- before the most recent diatribe- 4-1 voted to give up Barrabas

[Scuba Don]

scottincriminia- the minority is correct here, and r more than 20%!  Look again.

[William3rd]

And the newby scuba-with nine whole sentences under his belt, if you count the incomplete sentences, weighs in claiming war is peace, lies are truth and minorities are majorities.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Gator]

We spent two evenings with this woman, and I am 100% convinced the story is true, totally true.

Some more information:

1.  This woman had talked to the Brit almost every day, from a half hour to two hours each time.  Based on the length of time in communicating and what he said , she was totally convinced of his sincerity.

2.  All promises to repay money were made verbally over the telephone.  The emails discuss the meeting in Istanbul and what to see but not money.

3.  The Brit is a history buff and a trip to Istanbul-Constantinople  was more interesting to him than going to Moscow and would be more special and romantic.

4.  She thought about reporting him to the agency (EM); however, he had removed his profile just after sending her a SMS.

5.  The cost of the non-refundable tickets amounts to half of her monthly salary.


My best guess is that the man got cold feet and changed his mind about meeting RW. 

The woman is moving on and doing her best to forget the episode.  She will not report this man to anybody.  She is not vindictive.  BTW, she will meet only WOVO type of men.

For those few who claim that they do not have enough information, IMO intent is obvious considering the economic situation of RW, the fact that they met via a marriage agency, and the discussion of the emails to make a trip..  Rest my case.

Some of the 20% voted "no" not because you do not have enough information but because you dislike blacklists in general o AD in particular.  Thinking how this woman could be slandered if she went public with no recourse makes me think that blacklists are not the best way.  Something is needed, however, and a more balanced educational program is part of that.

For those of you needing more information, I wonder if you feel that Iran's nuclear programme must be considered peaceful because no nuclear weapon has been discovered.  Then again, I recall a UN investigation team testifying that Iraq did not have WMD and it turns out that Iraq did not have WMD. 

[Mishenka]

Gator, its a sad story, lessons learned.  We could all get together and send her some flowers. :-))

Misha

[Kuna]

Kuna, thanks for your input,  however, this is not my moral judgement.  It's God's.  I am no one to argue with Him. He always wins.  I'm not a Bible Basher, or preacher.  Im simply state the truth of the matter.  I gave an example of absolutes.  Look at the spirit of the message instead of doing what so many do by taking things out of context and missing the point.  The point is this, "a man will reap what he sows" period.  This guy will not get away with this as if nothing happpend.  One way or the other he will get his just reward.  End of story.

Misha

There ya go again!!!  You're preaching NOW!

I don't even know who your God is...  The one that supports indiscriminate murder through Jihad... the one that demands genital mutilation or the one that supports the hiding and protecting of pedophiles in His church.

I'm a Christian but I'm always suspicious of those that quote the Bible or overtly preach God's word because I've found they are usually only justifying their own position.  Most "devote Christians" I've met that do that are usually a bit shady... and I have some examples if you'd like to open a new thread.

I'm not saying ALL practicing Christians are dishonest any more than I would say ALL practicing Muslims support terrorism...


The funny thing is... no, it's not funny... it's hilarious that you come in here professing God's word and just two days ago you were in here talking about wild sex and erotic times with your ex-gf in shop dressing rooms.

Sex outside of wedlock???  Damn it's hot downstairs...  Better start praying your little butt off for fear of the sins you have committed!

It's hypocritical to say the least...  but only an indication of your current state of mind (rather than your actual character - I HOPE!)

Kuna