Models as escort - discussion

[alec]

A topic for discussion in advance of Phil K drawing up a FAQ for this forum.
Just a thought triggered by the recent discussions of models who are also escorts. I have no idea whether any of these are true, but someone posted to alt.fan.televisonx that the Tiffany one was untrue and photogirls is known for using pictures of well-known models who are certainly not used by them. They were threatened with legal action by Lana Cox for using her first name along with a picture of Adele Stevens.
It seems to me that it is dead easy to use a girl's photo on a website, start an e-mail account under a different name, then when the girl and her presumed activities are mentioned in a news group or forum, post messages saying that you have used her services and how good she is etc., etc.
Crucially - since bgafd wants to retain the good will of models and avoid irrelevant spam (whether obvious or not), shouldn't these messages be discouraged or even deleted? If a model is not an escort she will be very annoyed at the rumours. If she is she still might not want to publicise the fact too much, depending on her individual circumstances, clientele etc.
We are also victims of our own success in terms of hits which is making the forum struggle in terms of speed and reliability. Elimination of such topics would also help this a bit.

[joey]

On the whole, the idea of making this off-topic makes a lot of
sense to me, after all there is a board at www.punternet.com
which is specifically for discussing UK escorts and is to some
extent more reliable than here (no offense meant!) because
it is moderated and you cannot post without confirming
your email address. The debate about Tiffany has also featured
there.
But I would also say that if an escort site exists featuring
a model and that has not been mentioned before then the site
is of interest - and if a website is using an unauthorised
photo of the model for an illegitimate purpose then if it
is brought to the attention of the model or her agent through
this board, then that is a good thing. They are then in a
position to do something about it.
Also, I would add to the posting guidelines that posts which
reveal (or claim to reveal) more details about a model's
home address than simply the town are not a good idea, simply
because you don't know who may one day read them and what
they would do with the information.

[alec]

Agree with all three points subject to the posting of the url for an escort site not generating a long discussion thread.

[joey]

Plus, obviously, ban all mention of "photogirls" whatsoever.
Unfortunately if the site is seen to be popular, given the
ethical norm of the industry spam of some form or another is
almost inevitably going to happen.
You will need to moderate aggressively and often to stay on
top of it.
The punternet board I referred to above has had to take
steps to deal with this sort of issue (and much worse ones
too, as you can probably imagine.)

[jj]

Absolutely O/T, IMHO.
Being silly like wot I am is relatively harmless: info. about 'escort services', real or otherwise, may not be.

[buttsie]

If you let one group do it then all of a sudden it will be a free for all-spam included for sure.

Will this forum be held responsible by a punter who doesn't get what they were promised?

As has been pointed out there are already sites for this



cheers
B...OZ