Acceptable Reviews, Articles, And Discussions On tuscl
I posted a discussion on Canada-US SC differences a few months ago: what is legal in Canada can be illegal in US. A significant difference in the SC cultures in the two countries is the difference in the prostitution laws in each country: legal in Canada, illegal in US. There have been many discussions here about what should and should not be described in reviews in the light of possible LE interest.
Because of this disconnect in the laws in the two countries, I try to be circumspect in my reviews but I rarely succeed. My behaviour has been conditioned by my life in Canada, and quite simply, I often completely forget myself when I post a review or article or take part in the discussions.
A recent post about drugging a dancer got me seriously rethinking just what should and should not be posted here on tuscl. IMO something like that should be stomped on with severity. Ergo, should I keep quiet about my acts that other people might have similar strong feelings about.
For you tuscl guys with strong opinions, give me some advice, please. Continue as I am doing. Try harder to restrain my comments. Stop entirely.
Because of this disconnect in the laws in the two countries, I try to be circumspect in my reviews but I rarely succeed. My behaviour has been conditioned by my life in Canada, and quite simply, I often completely forget myself when I post a review or article or take part in the discussions.
A recent post about drugging a dancer got me seriously rethinking just what should and should not be posted here on tuscl. IMO something like that should be stomped on with severity. Ergo, should I keep quiet about my acts that other people might have similar strong feelings about.
For you tuscl guys with strong opinions, give me some advice, please. Continue as I am doing. Try harder to restrain my comments. Stop entirely.
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
17 comments
I must have missed this post. Wrong, illegal, despicable.
As for consensual fun, I used to be more circumspect when I wrote about my activities. Maybe I should return to that mode. I never mention the names of dancers who provide extras but I do mention the clubs. Could that bring law enforcement down on the clubs?
i've always had a policy of not naming names and i will continue to not name names of the good girls but i have recently somewhat altered my policy and outed a couple robs. i will sometimes continue to out some robs but i will never out the good girls and i will never be explicit regarding any extras or extra mileage that i've received in a club.
One thing I will do, along the lines of not naming names, is to obscure details that might give away a dancer's identity, or my own. Sometimes I will also wait an appropriate amount of time for that same reason.
In terms of specific services at clubs, why make it easy for LE? Might they know anyway? Very possible. But why continually confirm it? In the northeast I have noticed a strong correlation between a tidal wave of posts about BJs and FS and subsequent club raids. While this could be coindcidental, one would have to be stupid to believe that LE never reads these reviews. Why make it easier to justify the time and expense of sending in undercovers?
And that doesn't even consider how easy it is to tie our message board comments, which tend to be more liberal, back to the clubs we visit based on the reviews we enter.
It would even be a fairly safe bet to assume that any law enforcement personnel who are aware of this site could check out their local clubs without reading even one comment, just by checking the top 100 and the value ratings.