BonBons agency closed / phone records stolen

[fuji]

Lmfao! Your slanderous lies are offensive. You have 30 pple telling you answers & rebuttals yet u refuse to admit you'd rather girls harmed than risk your # being seen. And you don't even fucking hobby or live here. Get out of these threads. You're useless, vile, repulsive, and your attitude is disgusting!

I have never, ever said I want girls to be harmed. Quit lying.

 

[fuji]

To be considered as a petition!

Yes ban people for disagreeing with you. That pretty much confirms right there that you know you are wrong.

Here is the statement no one can dispute, including you:

Given that a driver knows the full address including street/room number, no additional security whatsoever is provided by the phone booker having that information.

It is a fact.

Note that in this thread I have not insulted anyone, I simply calmly reply with facts. Only your side engaged in name calling.

 

[GPIDEAL]

The risk arises when the information is organized and aggregated. Police aren't going to hunt down one guy whose name was on a gum wrapper. A register listing actionable contact information for five hundred clients is far more interesting to a vice detective.

And while a malicious driver could do anything, let's assume no one is malicious. The driver doesn't need a detailed booking record, he only needs to know where he is going today. The escort is also unlikely to make detailed records.

As for why they keep it: because they don't know any better. Negligence, not malice.

Why don't we assume that agencies aren't malicious either. Also, you under-estimate drivers. They have smart phones too and will use them to store info (I've forgotten SP room #s myself when I resorted to my memory, or lost a piece of paper in a dark car interior).

Many of the reputable ones have already made their websites and advertisements C-36 compliant.

Don't you think they have a good reason not to archive unnecessary information, which in turn, can be used or tried to be used against them too?

(While I'm all for the purging of unnecessary or outdated booking records, info such as a hotel room # or a phone # is not prima facie evidence that an offence has been committed under C-36).

 

[Jasmine Raine]

I want MP's to have no internal video surveillance. A video of me in a hotel lobby does not show what room I went to. The police aren't going to go all CSI over a prostitution bust. If you hand them a gift like high quality video of your own inside your own establishment of course they will use it, but they are not going to piece together video from nearby stores and hotel cameras unless an indictable offense like attempted murder has been committed.

Except that hotels have cameras in stairways and hallways as well and a hotel with have no issue handing that video over. Also MP's need to be able to keep the ladies safe and surveillance helps in that. Since you just said you don't want ladies harmed, I am confused how you think either of those arguments work in your favour here.

 

[MadonnaLove]

Fugi good luck finding someone that would actually book an outcall for you ….cause you will need all the luck in the world the way your going about it :frusty:

 

[GPIDEAL]

Yes ban people for disagreeing with you. That pretty much confirms right there that you know you are wrong.

Here is the statement no one can dispute, including you:

Given that a driver knows the full address including street/room number, no additional security whatsoever is provided by the phone booker having that information.

It is a fact.

Note that in this thread I have not insulted anyone, I simply calmly reply with facts. Only your side engaged in name calling.

Wrong.

The phone booker is a safety back up for such temporary info. The agency is ultimately responsible for the safety of their ladies. The driver is not the agency.