CupidsEscorts Tweets a Client's Information

[doggystyle99]

LE would only get involved with rape, forcible confinement, physical assault, robbing and other such acts. They won't get involved in an act of nonconsensually sticking a finger up her butt, removing a condom or other acts of this nature. They don't have time and such "poor etiquette behavior" would have to be proven in court... not easily done.

Actually they would, Stealthing is sexual assault and law inforcement would happily get involved. As well they would throw the book at him for purchasing sex for money.

 

[Smallcock]

I’m conflicted about how this particular incident was handled, but a bigger issue that worries me is that there seems to be a kind of bubble chamber culture developing on Twitter where some SPs are more open to posting client information than they used to be.

For example, a few months ago, a reasonably well-known Ottawa independent SP posted a client’s real name and phone number to Twitter just because he had been a no-show two times in a row. I get it, she was angry, but she also could have destroyed this man’s career.

Once this kind of culture starts developing, screening is going to get harder because everyone is going to be paranoid about being outed. And it undermines trust in general... if this kind of info sometimes gets tossed around on Twitter, it makes the mind wonder what kind of information about clients is being tossed around between SPs in slightly less public forums, like private multi-person chat services, where info could easily be leaked by any disgruntled participant.

It'll kill the outcall market. I would never do outcalls now (was never a fan but did partake a few times in the past), and never use your real phone number and name.

I also never book SPs with screening processes that require real name, social media profiles, and so on. That's blackmail waiting to happen.

 

[yermama]

I also never book SPs with screening processes that require real name, social media profiles, and so on. That's blackmail waiting to happen.

Some of them want to see your driver's licence when you don't even know their real first name.

 

[apoptygma]

You didn’t answer, do you feel it was wrong for Weinstein to be named?

Is there credible information behind the Weinstein accusations?
Is there credible information behind this accusation that you so ardently support? Aside from a single, now-deleted tweet?

 

[Brill]

Is there credible information behind the Weinstein accusations?
Is there credible information behind this accusation that you so ardently support? Aside from a single, now-deleted tweet?

So it’s a matter of numbers, not the issue of outing.
If several make the same accusation it’s okay to expose a man who hasn’t been convicted?

 

[art van dele]

It’s a he said she said situation and no-one knows what exactly happened. But based on what I heard, Jillian is a self righteous impulsive bully.

 

[apoptygma]

So it’s a matter of numbers, not the issue of outing.
If several make the same accusation it’s okay to expose a man who hasn’t been convicted?

Actually, as far as I'm concerned, it is NEVER OK to 'out' someone with unverifiable evidence.
You really think that is OK?

BRILL IS A CHILD MOLESTER. HE DIDDLES YOUNG BOYS.

And you continue to deflect... if you are so confident that this man is guilty, please explain to me why the only tweet outing him is now gone? Please... I'll be patient and await your response.

 

[Brill]

Actually, as far as I'm concerned, it is NEVER OK to 'out' someone with unverifiable evidence.
You really think that is OK?

BRILL IS A CHILD MOLESTER. HE DIDDLES YOUNG BOYS.

And you continue to deflect... if you are so confident that this man is guilty, please explain to me why the only tweet outing him is now gone? Please... I'll be patient and await your response.

I guess we disagree. I think rape victims should be allowed to say “beware of Bob at this address, he violated me”. I don’t demand proof.

 

[apoptygma]

I guess we disagree. I think rape victims should be allowed to say “beware of Bob at this address, he violated me”. I don’t demand proof.

And you are the reason why Amanda down the street will cry rape, with no evidence, and no one will believe her.

 

[james t kirk]

Are you saying Harvey Weinstein shouldn’t have been named because he wasn’t convicted of raping Hollywood actresses?

We have this thing called the justice system.

And last time I checked, the number one code is "innocent until proven guilty".

Harvey hasn't even been charged with a thing. So if there is evidence against Harvey, charge him and let him have his day in court. If not, then he's not guilty and that's the end of the story.

Right now, all I see is Chairman Mao type justice and I don't like it. We have courts and lawyers and police. Not twitter.

 

[apoptygma]

I guess we disagree. I think rape victims should be allowed to say “beware of Bob at this address, he violated me”. I don’t demand proof.

Oh, and you still haven't explained why the tweet is missing.

 

[Brill]

We have this thing called the justice system.

And last time I checked, the number one code is "innocent until proven guilty".

Harvey hasn't even been charged with a thing. So if there is evidence against Harvey, charge him and let him have his day in court. If not, then he's not guilty and that's the end of the story.

Right now, all I see is Chairman Mao type justice and I don't like it. We have courts and lawyers and police. Not twitter.

It’s not Chairman Mao justice, it’s public opinion which has been around since the dawn of time. Get used to it.

 

[mandrill]

Oh, and you still haven't explained why the tweet is missing.

There is a suggestion that the tweet violated Twitter's own code of privacy and had to be removed to avoid a Twitter ban.

 

[apoptygma]

There is a suggestion that the tweet violated Twitter's own code of privacy and had to be removed to avoid a Twitter ban.

If that is true, that speaks volumes.

 

[Brill]

Oh, and you still haven't explained why the tweet is missing.

I’m not her pimp, she has free will.

 

[apoptygma]

I’m not her pimp, she has free will.

Very convincing.

 

[Brill]

Very convincing.

Why would I lie about not being her pimp?

 

[doggee_01]

+100
I'd never stealth but I'm not booking with cupids anytime soon either

i have used cupids since before jillian owened it! but posting someone info well that bothers me. maybe he did maybe he did not we were not there there are better ways of dealing with this sort of thing

 

[yermama]

Oh, and you still haven't explained why the tweet is missing.

There is a suggestion that the tweet violated Twitter's own code of privacy and had to be removed to avoid a Twitter ban.

If that is true, that speaks volumes.

That is definitely not true. The account has other tweets from 2016 that show a client's full name, face photo, phone number, the place of work, and email address.

 

[james t kirk]

Actually they would, Stealthing is sexual assault and law inforcement would happily get involved. As well they would throw the book at him for purchasing sex for money.

I don't think LE would "happily get involved". And as far as throwing the book at him, they would throw it real hard at the owner of Cupids. You can count on that.