Rants Raves and Stupid Shit in Seattle.

[Admin2]

I tend to agree but cases are often won by technicalities. Does using the 'dream' format create enough plausible deniability that something is 'for entertainment purposes only?' Don't know, but that would be decided as part of any pre-trial motions to expunge vs having a jury decide it. If it reaches that point and your forum history is admissible you're already fucked. There are plenty of sites that translate mongering 'code' so I see it more as habit than having any protective effect. The real trick is to make it as difficult as possible to figure out who you really are from your online presence.

I feel confident enough in the barriers I have in place to go over some of them.

1- I never access this or other mongering sites without using a VPN that has a proven track record of not logging sessions and not cooperating with LEO.

2- I sign up for these forums with emails I use for no other purpose than to create accounts on the forums.

3- I never log into those emails without using my VPN.

4- I never reference this forum anywhere save on this forum, same goes for other sites.

5- I never reference any personally identifying information from the forum or those email accounts.

I try and make a barrier with enough technical doubt as to my real identity as possible. You want an air gap between your recorded activity online that could be incriminating and your true identity. Could someone find out who I am if they tried hard enough,? Probably. But with a few simple steps I've made it so hard and inserted enough doubt using those 5 steps (and others I won't reveal) that I feel confident the effort isn't worth it.

You make sure to avail yourself of the anonymity we intended you to have when we started the forum.

Smart move.

A2.

[AussieFury]

Anyone have evidence that this "code" actually protects anyone?

I have evidence to the contrary. In a Bellevue promotion case a couple years back, the jury had no problem at all "decoding" the masterful encryption of "one dollar sign equals one hundred dollars. " It wasn't even questioned by the defense. I mean, what's a defense atty supposed to say in a closing argument? "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury: yes, my client said "$$" on a hobby board when writing about how much he paid the hooker, and even though everyone reading it understood that $$ means two-hundred dollars, he technically didn't say "two-hundred dollars" so you must acquit!

$$ and $$$ aren't code for $200 and $300. They're shorthand. Abbreviations. Let's all just use numbers.

[Morgan Creamin]

Have to admit that I've never quite understood the reason for these abbreviations. Presumably it's to protect against LE action, but any code that you and I understand, they will too, and certainly a jury would.

I highly doubt that "I had a dream that I had FS for $$" is much less incriminating than "I paid $200 for sex" (but maybe I'm wrong. Anyone have evidence that this "code" actually protects anyone?

I tend to agree but cases are often won by technicalities. Does using the 'dream' format create enough plausible deniability that something is 'for entertainment purposes only?' Don't know, but that would be decided as part of any pre-trial motions to expunge vs having a jury decide it. If it reaches that point and your forum history is admissible you're already fucked. There are plenty of sites that translate mongering 'code' so I see it more as habit than having any protective effect. The real trick is to make it as difficult as possible to figure out who you really are from your online presence.

I feel confident enough in the barriers I have in place to go over some of them.

1- I never access this or other mongering sites without using a VPN that has a proven track record of not logging sessions and not cooperating with LEO.

2- I sign up for these forums with emails I use for no other purpose than to create accounts on the forums.

3- I never log into those emails without using my VPN.

4- I never reference this forum anywhere save on this forum, same goes for other sites.

5- I never reference any personally identifying information from the forum or those email accounts.

I try and make a barrier with enough technical doubt as to my real identity as possible. You want an air gap between your recorded activity online that could be incriminating and your true identity. Could someone find out who I am if they tried hard enough,? Probably. But with a few simple steps I've made it so hard and inserted enough doubt using those 5 steps (and others I won't reveal) that I feel confident the effort isn't worth it.

[Efurufe]

No, you couldn't grasp the concept of "$x4". $60 is very different than $160 or $. 60.

What is "$x4"? Definitely a new notation for me.

I read it as $400, or possibly $140 (similar to ' 4'.

Have to admit that I've never quite understood the reason for these abbreviations. Presumably it's to protect against LE action, but any code that you and I understand, they will too, and certainly a jury would.

I highly doubt that "I had a dream that I had FS for $$" is much less incriminating than "I paid $200 for sex" (but maybe I'm wrong. Anyone have evidence that this "code" actually protects anyone?

[RumHams]

Another pooner used a notation I had never seen before, and when I questioned him on it, he got all bent out of shape.

No, you couldn't grasp the concept of "$x4". $60 is very different than $160 or $. 60.

[MartyByrde]

See, I thought you meant something else. It's fine to use some abbreviation for whatever weird reason you feel you need to, but it's points like this when it gets needlessly confusing. $ is not necessarily synonymous with "1", and especially not when you put it in front of a whole number with no decimal or spacing or anything to indicate it's representative of a numerical value as opposed to a symbol designating a nation's currency standard. Just put a damn "1" instead. If we were talking about some in-shape 20-ish, then hell yeah, I'm all in. But 160 in itself is nothing special (unless it's an open menu). Especially when the the referenced girls themselves are far from special. Willing to wager you could get that even outside the COVID season we find ourselves in, and honestly I'm surprised it's not lower for them right now.

FWIW, I'm not displeased you shared. Just a little disappointed the rates weren't what I was anticipating them to be. That said, desperate times call for desperate rates from desperate women. If anyone does have any fantastic deals, no matter how sad, I'm all ears. Sometimes you got to do what you got to do.

From a true "mathematical" sense, you are correct. But within the hobby, something like $$. 50 is "usual / acceptable", and it means $250. Another pooner used a notation I had never seen before, and when I questioned him on it, he got all bent out of shape.

So, for $160, an acceptable notation within the hobby is $. 60, or as you said, one can just say $160.

And as for that being a "special" rate, in these economically depressed days, as I have mentioned, for an all inclusive hour, the most it should be is $$. 0, ie, $200. And for me, all inclusive would need to include BBBJ, DATY, DATO, and BBFS. Rimming would be good also, but not necessarily a requirement.

[Admin2]

Thread starter.