discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
TetradonI'll act nicer if you'll act smarter.
"If the last 50 reviews covered the drink and LD prices then most guys on here would not get so irritable when review 51 skips it."
We've been through this countless times, and yes, plenty of guys have said the checkbox review items should include drink and lapdance prices. Including op, who specifically said don't approve a review if it doesn't include drink prices and layout. But he's far from the only one.
"Btw I'm rather surprised that you of all people find drink prices to hold such little relevance given that you like to drink with your girls and often try to force well liquor on them because the decent stuff is so damned expensive."
I can't remember ever making my decision as to which club to go to based on drink prices. Or the shape of the bar, or location of the bathroom, for that matter. Yes, I like places with cheaper drinks. But if I'm going to a new club -- which is the case if I'm looking at tuscl reviews -- what I'm looking for is how attractive the girls are overall, dance prices and mileage, and any g-2 on specific girls to get dances from or avoid (without detail that would get them in trouble). In the end, I agree with Tetra's notion that "not providing info on the girls is the unpardonable sin", THAT is what should get reviews bounced. Yes, it sucks if the cheapest shots are $15 each, but I'll always deal with that once for hot girls.
discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
TetradonI'll act nicer if you'll act smarter.
"I agree that some bad reviews are getting approved. I disagree that every review needs to include cover charge and lap dance cost. Those items should already be included in the club description. Reviews should add anything not already in or different from the club description. Approve reviews that provide useful information. Sure, that’s subjective but so what."
I am 1000% with you. We're in the minority -- most guys want endless re-droning of drink prices (really, that's what you need to know?), lapdance prices, what shape the bar is, where the bathroom is in relation to the bar. Even if the previous 50 reviews all covered it.
Could not agree more that no providing info on the girls is the unpardonable sin. And a first-person recounting -- which girls gave amazing lapdances, which so-so etc. -- is waaaay more useful than knowing the drink prices. The girls are the whole reason we go there.
That said, post-covid, everything has changed -- it will be useful to keep a running tally on where each club is as far as dances, etc
discussion comment
4 years ago
Assuming I don't already have a target at the club: I am old enough not to have FOMO: if I see a girl who makes my pulse quicken 5 minutes after I walk in the door, I will grab her and be happy with it. If no one really stood out, I might wait an entire rotation ... unless some girl approaches me, in which case, every girl who approaches me gets a shot at being my "lucky" girl for the night :) In other words, I don't wait some certain amount of time or wait through a rotation or anything else. I start looking as soon as I come in, and when I come across a great girl, I get her to my table without worrying that there might be something better coming later (I'll be back to the club again; I can always pursue the "something better" later on)
I'm a "sit and drink with the stripper" kind of PL, so that doesn't really end things. I go to clubs with a low and slow hustle, so she'll be drinking with me for an hour easily before we do our first dance, chances are I'll also buy her lunch and it may well be more than an hour total. If we don't really vibe, I send her off (with a fair tip if I've taken a lot of her time) and am on to the next one.
So my real answer: I grab any girl I find exciting as soon as I can. But it's an hour before our first dance -- I only do VIP dances, not lapdances -- and a lot can happen in that hour, I might be moving on.
discussion comment
4 years ago
I am not going to throw out my first pour, or stick my finger in the water first, but I can listen to a guy with that accent talk about whisky all day
discussion comment
4 years ago
"Let’s see we’re all talking about retards and investments and Juice is nowhere to be found..."
That's a good point. Of the all the things juice pretends to do, you'd think pretending to be into crypto would be high on the list
discussion comment
4 years ago
We might all be slightly retarded for being on this forum
discussion comment
4 years ago
While you're in the dictionary, looking up pedantic and obtuse might be useful! And also getting a general feel for how actual people just sometimes throw "retarded" around to fuck with each other... this requires social interaction to observe
discussion comment
4 years ago
FTS: yes I did. Both the faith-based "believers" and the irrational haters are retarded. One can dispassionately look at bitcoin as just another interesting investment instrument and decide to jump in or stay out, without having to become a true believer or irrational hater ("retarded" is just my shorthand for both those things). I can recognize the believers by the irrational exhuberant posts they used to make before the first bitcoin crash; faith crushed, they mercifully mostly kept quiet since then; and now coming back to crow.
Uprightcitizen: What finally got me to jump in is exactly thinking of it as a hedge!
discussion comment
4 years ago
skibum: exactly the right, and only, attitude to have. As I said in my original post, "That said, it's all on paper, this is a hold for me,", it's meaningless until I cash it in. ESPECIALLY with something so volatile with so much risk. That said, I'm holding because I think it has the potential to have a few hundred percent to go -- but I'm pretty much bragging to no one about where things stand, because I recognize it's basically nothing.
discussion comment
4 years ago
I didn't call you retarded. I just described retarded people. If you saw yourself in that description, not my doing 🤣
In any case, there are lots of well-educated people -- economists, etc -- who don't believe in Bitcoin also. I don't make my investment by cherry-picking people who say what I believe on faith. Like I said, though, I think bitcoin is high risk high reward, and I'm in a position to have some high risk high reward investments, and some of those investments are in bitcoin.
I have a buddy has decided bitcoin is a bad investment for political reasons, and the last thing he said to me before I invested at $13k is, "okay I'll watch and laugh as you lose all your money". He might see himself in my description of retarded people also lol...
discussion comment
4 years ago
I made a modest investment -- won't hurt to lose, won't make me rich. But I am happy with my investment doubling in just a couple of months. That said, it's all on paper, this is a hold for me, I'm going to bet that there's a few hundred more percent to go. That said, my investment is modest enough that I won't cry if it retreats (I bought at around $13k). This is clearly a high risk, high reward investment. If you are a "believer" or "hater", you're fucking retarded. It's an investment, size up the risk and rewards for yourself, see if you have enough wealth to have built up some "high risk high reward" investment money, and go from there. Faith or hate is stupid.
discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
TetradonI'll act nicer if you'll act smarter.
Good point L_W. I think all is fair in OTC, and I can certainly see how, in the middle of a global pandemic when many clubs are closed etc., OF can be a tool in your pursuit of a stripper, towards whatever your needs are. Tetradon seems to be doing something similar. Even 8TM using it as a way to keep a little of her attention or show a little appreciation, I kind of understand. My post was more about the guys joining OF for the reasons in that youtub.
discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
TetradonI'll act nicer if you'll act smarter.
There was a previous thread on this, as pointed out by Dolfan. My opinion remains the same: this video helps answer the question "why do guys join OF when there's so much free porn?" What it doesn't do is address the sneering judgement, how pathetic must someone be to join OF? In fact, for me -- and I'm guessing most of you -- it reinforces that judgement. I expect most guys who are engaged hands-on with sexworkers -- PLs, homongers, SDs, etc -- all feel the same way. Knowing that the reasons in the video are why guys join OF is just a head-shaker.
Hey, do whatever you want that meets your needs. But man, understanding why guys join OF almost makes me feel sad. Absolutely no judgement towards the girls. "Go make yo money girl" as our local pretend pimp might say
discussion comment
4 years ago
Beat, I get favorited on Seeking also, but as far as the women who favorite me, a more loathesome rogue's gallery I have never seen. More seriously, pretty universally the "hey" and "whats up" initial messages are useless, often escorts or other undesirables (well, unless you desire an escort), and we all get favorited but again, often escorts, women far away, scammers, online sex girls, etc. You're reading waaaay too much into favorites and low-effort initial contacts. But, of course, the overall point -- that attractive young women will message us back -- is definitely more true on SA than on Tinder for most people
discussion comment
4 years ago
Seeking doesn't have "matches", so I'm not sure what's being compared. An SD puts in search parameters, does a search, and gets hundreds or thousands of women back who meet the search parameters, but that's not a "match" the way many dating sites mean it. Similarly, you can go on match.com, put in search parameters, do a search, and get hundreds or thousands of women back -- again, not really a "match", just a bunch of women who meet the search parameters. The difference, of course, is when you start messaging all these women.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Are there sugar sites where you get "matches"? Never heard of that.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Let's say I'm some dude whose entire life is trolling a particular forum on the internet. I can't decide if I want to pretend to be a badass pimp, or a 15 year old woke girl lulz. How should I go about it?
discussion comment
4 years ago
"I checked math and I assume OP meant to say every minute."
TIL: some people on tuscl can do math
🤣
discussion comment
4 years ago
gamma: you're consistently -- purposely? -- misreading. I am consistently and clearly talking about US deaths only. You keep bringing up worldwide stats, and I'm not sure why. The US, its policies and covid19 impact is what we're discussing. 500k is the lower range of estimates for US deaths for swine flu. 285k is the credible estimate of covid19 deaths in the US. 2700 is the credible estimate for covid19 deaths yesterday and it's been at about the level (but rising) for a few days. Yes, by the time this is over, we'll be at a US total -- not per capita, as again I pointed out consistently -- death count that is on par with the lower swine flu estimates for the US.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Gamma: again, the most correct and accurate number, generated by actual scientists and medical personnel and not conspiracy sites who have no idea of how deaths are tracked or how to correctly ascribe deaths to causes, is 285k dead in the US, and at 2700 deaths per day (expected to go up sharply), we are easily on track to touch the lower estimate for the swine flu (500k) before the vaccines take shape. I am not saying worldwide -- many countries in the world have fared far better, the US has been impacted worse than most countries. For the US, we almost certainly will tally a near-swine-flu total death count.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Rick: I think skepticism is good! It's not that I have blind faith, but I do feel strongly it's scientists and medical professionals who are in the best position to study, measure, and judge, and more importantly, determine which studies are credible. Peer-review has gotten science to where it is -- there's definitely problems at times, but they are a far better source than random political sites who have very little understanding of how medicine or science work (e.g., not understanding why a death certificate with both cancer and covid19 would correctly be a covid19 death, exactly the same as with flu). And there's a lot of corroborating evidence. If I were a betting man, I'd bet that in 10 years, we'll find the scientists are right and (some) politicians are non-scientific non-medical groups were wrong: covid19 total deaths will be about on par with the 1918 swine flu and one of the worst epidemics in US history (which isn't a huge prediction, we're almost there if you believe the stats). Shit, hopefully we're both still around and I'll bet you an OTC with either of our CFs :)
discussion comment
4 years ago
Rick, I agree it isn't easy to do studies like this. It's published in JAMA, the study is well respected by those who are experts in this. I -- and I imagine you, and everyone commenting -- am not personally an expert or able to spot good studies from bad, so I rely on experts. Still, this is just a bit of corroboration that the deaths being contributed to covid are right where we'd expect. Another piece of corroborating evidence: ICUs space isn't alarming down due to filling up with people who got hit by buses. A line from the study: "Although total US death counts are remarkably consistent from year to year, US deaths increased by 20% during March-July 2020." The study comes to the conclusion that it's as likely covid deaths are being undercounted. And there is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding by some in how disease deaths are classified: if you have cancer, get the flu or covid, and die sooner than would have been expected from cancer, you are considered to have died from the flu or covid; almost no one dies from the flu virus, they all die from a subsequent opportunistic infection, but we still call it a flu death. I am certain you're right that -- just with every disease -- there are mistakes made in death certificates, and a monetary reward for doing so is a confounder.
That doesn't negate (or support) your views on policy -- that's a separate, political discussion about tradeoffs. But there is no reason to think the data isn't right on.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Tracking deaths is always challenging, for every disease. Many/most who dies from the flu actually dies from bacterial pneumonia. Many had cancers or heart disease that would have killed them anyway -- but these are comorbidities that make the flu far more deadly, and if the flu likely reduced their life expectancy, it's marked as a flu death. Bacterial pneumonia deaths with flu present are ALWAYS flu deaths. That's how flu death statistics work, that's how covid19 works. Beyond conspiracy sites, the actual medical community isn't sure whether covid19 deaths are under- or over-reported yet. In a study published on expected deaths in the US vs actual deaths, from March through August, it was found that there were 225k more deaths than expected -- these studies are not easy but that lines up pretty well with covid19 deaths. No, it is not a "fact" that covid19 is being over-reported; as with every disease, there are certainly mistakes, but the actual professionals who look at this don't believe it is, it's non-professionals who have a political motivation for believing it and many of whom seem to have mistakenly believed that comoribidites listed on covid19 death certificates mean it's not really a covid19 death, who believe it. So many cities do not have their ICUs filling up due to people getting hit by buses.
Like I said, policy is a different topic entirely, it's a political one.
discussion comment
4 years ago
"COVID has just overtaken heart disease as the #1 killer in the U.S. For most rational people, that statistic represents a hell of a lot more than a scam."
I think the question of policy -- which is a political question -- is a different question than "how is it impacting us". There's lies and statistics, but the way things are looking: when covid first came out, people were howling that it wouldn't kill as many people as even a typical flu year (typical flu year is 40k deaths, in a really bad year 60k). Current covid19 deaths are at 285,000 and it's not been a full year yet. Yesterday 2700 died, which means if that number stays the same, covid will kill an entire flu season's worth of people every 15 days. However, we do NOT expect that number to stay the same, it's going to go up significantly as the people who caught it over Thanksgiving start dying (and take another bump if there are areas where the health system gets overwhelmed, which is again looking possible in some cities). All of that to say -- let's call March 1 a year, we may be in 400,000+ deaths -- which, yes, puts it right in the ballpark of the lower estimates for swine flu total deaths over a longer period (500k-700k). With luck, that will drop drastically as the vaccine rolls out.
Smart policy in response to this is a completely different question. But statistically, this is swine-flu class in total deaths, though not in per capita. Almost half a million dead is a big number no matter how you slice it, I would lean towards saying "probably not a scam"
discussion comment
4 years ago
Finkle is Einhorn, Einhorn is Finkle!