Mystery Woman's Story - You dare question the King's indefatigable loyalty to his GF???

Estado
No está abierto para más respuestas.
Borderline_Systematic dijo:
Ive searched through as much of this thread as i can be bothered (so unsure if this particular piece of information was discussed) but @MysteryWoman I have a question.

How long have you been using an NDA as an escort?
Presiona para expandir...

Ever since i started working as an escort its a requirement, no companionship NDA Requirement means no work and means no clients. You need to give your clients a guarantee that their personal information such as ID, Address etc. And so much more not become public. Lots of escorts like myself get booked by Famous people from youtubers, politicians, to even ordinary business men who cant have their personal shit being leaked out as it can ruin their career thats why an Agreement like that has to be in place both client and escort have a copy, escort even has to show the copy to the escort service provider so that they know the ins and outs. Violation by either side nullifies the agreement and needles to say I have already walked a very thin line in regards to Phill a very very thin line staying just on top of it not to cross that thin line in spilling too much personal things that can nullify the entire agreement.
 
WE'RE REACHING CRITICAL LEVELS

1507311980426.jpg
 
MysteryWoman dijo:
Ever since i started working as an escort its a requirement, no companionship NDA Requirement means no work and means no clients. You need to give your clients a guarantee that their personal information such as ID, Address etc. And so much more not become public. Lots of escorts like myself get booked by Famous people from youtubers, politicians, to even ordinary business men who cant have their personal shit being leaked out as it can ruin their career thats why an Agreement like that has to be in place both client and escort have a copy, escort even has to show the copy to the escort service provider so that they know the ins and outs. Violation by either side nullifies the agreement and needles to say I have already walked a very thin line in regards to Phill a very very thin line staying just on top of it not to cross that thin line in spilling too much personal things that can nullify the entire agreement.
Presiona para expandir...

Alright thanks, was just curious as it was never part of your website information until after the DSP situation surfaced. Was wondering if it was something you started doing after altercations with him, or just something you needed to clarify on the website after it.
 
Borderline_Systematic dijo:
Alright thanks, was just curious as it was never part of your website information until after the DSP situation surfaced. Was wondering if it was something you started doing after altercations with him, or just something you needed to clarify on the website after it.
Presiona para expandir...

Its still not on my site its just a standard thing, its by default that a client does a booking, escort answers to discuss terms and date etc. Then an Appropiate NDA is made to include what is going to be covered by it, both client and escort can Add to it before both sign it then escort sends a copy back to client signed and all and escort shows a copy to the escort service provider if approved by all 3 then booking goes as planned. Thats basicly the business side of the escort, its more then just ok set a date and lets have fun.
 
MysteryWoman dijo:
Its still not on my site its just a standard thing, its by default that a client does a booking, escort answers to discuss terms and date etc. Then an Appropiate NDA is made to include what is going to be covered by it, both client and escort can Add to it before both sign it then escort sends a copy back to client signed and all and escort shows a copy to the escort service provider if approved by all 3 then booking goes as planned. Thats basicly the business side of the escort, its more then just ok set a date and lets have fun.
Presiona para expandir...
I was just refering to the extra information added recently to your contact and booking information that references the NDA.
 
Borderline_Systematic dijo:
I was just refering to the extra information added recently to your contact and booking information that references the NDA.
Presiona para expandir...

Yes i added that part at the booking page since so many where confused because it said no picture or video taking possible however it is possible if properly covered in the NDA at extra costs offcourse, so just to make that clear i decided to add that part
 
ANDS! dijo:
. ..however she has offered to have the other party call her. So how does that square with the above? If this person had offered to have this "Vidar" call her AFTER he prompts her to join this skeevy podcast you might have a point. People who are trying to hide their gender don't tend to do bluffs that are so easily called as that, which she did, before Vidar "outfoxed" her (which he didn't, hence the square-quotes).

I'm not suggesting this proves their story, simply that your insistence that it discredits anything is wrong. Like I said, she goes on and proves her gender. . .and? You're telling me folks wouldn't just move on to the next thing. "Oh ok, well now why don't you give us details!" You know that's exactly what would happen so why pretend that her not making some shotgun acquiescence somehow changes anything.
Presiona para expandir...

Vidar calling her doesn't actually prove anything. Unlike her comment, it's her stipulation that it be a private (But recorded) phone call that opens things up to being twisted around manipulated. Vidar's stipulation created transparency, which seems like it'd be in everyone's interest (Again, assuming that MW's goal is to give Phil a reason to pay her.) No amount of evidence is going to convince DSP's die-hards that this is genuine. Even the supposed video wouldn't convince them unless he's holding up his ID in it. But she'd convince some of them.

This is all just theoretical cash-extraction game theory though, I'm sure there other logical ways to go about it.
 
carolburnett dijo:
The hair thing bugs me too. It looks to be a blonder red + filter, whereas the christmas pic is clearly a deep dyed red. However, red hair dye tends to fade super fast depending on what product you use to dye it, the type of product used after to keep the dye in, and how often/soon you wash your after after dying it. And actually for blondes it is harder to dye to red than say a brunette. So it's another one of those doesn't prove it, but doesn't disprove the story for me pieces.
Presiona para expandir...
You two chucklefucks did not read the thread. She already addressed her hair color.
 
If we wanted the same conversation and questions asked repeatedly Vidar wouldnt be threadbanned sheesh. Let's let her tell her story on this big name podcast, and if this podcast is big enough it will get picked up by other big named people. In other words let her milk the big names for attention and not the 4 inch no names.
 
Yellow Yam Scam dijo:
Vidar calling her doesn't actually prove anything. Unlike her comment, it's her stipulation that it be a private (But recorded) phone call that opens things up to being twisted around manipulated. Vidar's stipulation created transparency, which seems like it'd be in everyone's interest (Again, assuming that MW's goal is to give Phil a reason to pay her.) No amount of evidence is going to convince DSP's die-hards that this is genuine. Even the supposed video wouldn't convince them unless he's holding up his ID in it. But she'd convince some of them.

This is all just theoretical cash-extraction game theory though, I'm sure there other logical ways to go about it.
Presiona para expandir...
And why is it okay that Vidar be phils mouthpeice?

Fuck Vidar, he is not Phils little minister of propaganda. He is nobody he is phils biggest fucking money giver and that's it. He bought his place in it and let's not forget anyone who mentioned the stream today that Vidar was on in Phils chat was banned on sight by.. guess who? Vidar. He didn't want Phil knowing about it. This is why he still does shit like this because people view him as it being just as good as speaking to Phil when it's not. Phil is a bitch and shys away from any and all confrontation outside of his little bubble. Vidar knew the terms and said no, but all of a sudden he asks her to come on there and it's an issue? I'm sorry that is manipulation. He knew the terms and decided to be a little sneaky cunt about it. Nope, not buying it. Fuck Vidar and the interview with TXT was a bit interesting, this is a guy (vidar) who subs to this dude (TXT) for six months in a row , sorry I dont buy that sort of fence sitting when Vidar is giving you money in the form of a subscription and whatever else. That is not being impartial. Also he went on TXT's stream because TXT expressed how he wasnt really buying the escort story, so she woulda been going in the lions den and Vidar never gives you a word in edgewise..

Who the hell is Vidar to command anything? Really who? This is why he gives phil all this money, to be the fucking deformed gatekeeper.
 
Última edición:
Yellow Yam Scam dijo:
Vidar calling her doesn't actually prove anything. Unlike her comment, it's her stipulation that it be a private (But recorded) phone call that opens things up to being twisted around manipulated. Vidar's stipulation created transparency, which seems like it'd be in everyone's interest (Again, assuming that MW's goal is to give Phil a reason to pay her.) No amount of evidence is going to convince DSP's die-hards that this is genuine. Even the supposed video wouldn't convince them unless he's holding up his ID in it. But she'd convince some of them.
Presiona para expandir...

It proves the exact same thing that you suggested going on this show would, just in a limited sense. And of course it would be recorded, why wouldn't she record it (or he for that matter)?

I wouldn't go on this podcast either; you can quibble with her not having a snappy reason for it, but it has little to no benefit for her. She goes on and then what? Get's asked the same questions she has answered before and demures on the questions she has indicated that she can't answer. You would learn absolutely nothing beyond what has already been put out there. It has nothing to do with transparency as you already get that with both people agreeing to record the phone call.
 
ANDS! dijo:
It proves the exact same thing that you suggested going on this show would, just in a limited sense. And of course it would be recorded, why wouldn't she record it (or he for that matter)?

I wouldn't go on this podcast either; you can quibble with her not having a snappy reason for it, but it has little to no benefit for her. She goes on and then what? Get's asked the same questions she has answered before and demures on the questions she has indicated that she can't answer. You would learn absolutely nothing beyond what has already been put out there. It has nothing to do with transparency as you already get that with both people agreeing to record the phone call.
Presiona para expandir...
Exactly, what did we learn from Vidar tonight we didn't already know? He gives Phil money, doesn't know why he watches him, doesnt know why he gives him so much money, doesnt know why he defends him so much. he is a half a fag, sometimes jerks off when Phil is in the background on stream. Oh and that he doesnt know what a fundraiser is and doesnt know why Phil is wrong about holding one for himself. Literally 3 hours of him repeating the same shit he always has and the same canned answers and semantics games he has been playing since SoK days. Nothing.
 
Última edición:
xenomorph dijo:
TXT was a bit interesting, this is a guy (vidar) who subs to this dude (TXT) for six months in a row , sorry I dont buy that sort of fence sitting when Vidar is giving you money in the form of a subscription and whatever else.
Presiona para expandir...
Is this actually provable the vidar subs to txt? That would be like Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump being interviewed on a network which they privately fund

Edit: i take txt's answer as a yes than
 
Última edición:
xenomorph dijo:
Exactly, what did we learn from Vidar tonight we didn't already know? He gives Phil money, doesn't know why he watches him, doesnt know why he gives him so much money, doesnt know why he defends him so much. he is a half a fag, sometimes jerks off when Phil is in the background on stream. Oh and that he doesnt know what a fundraiser is and doesnt know why Phil is wrong about holding one for himself. Literally 3 hours of him repeating the same shit he always has and the same canned answers and semantics games he has been playing since SoK days. Nothing.
Presiona para expandir...

Yeah but we learned the dimensions of his bed.
 
xenomorph dijo:
Exactly, what did we learn from Vidar tonight we didn't already know? He gives Phil money, doesn't know why he watches him, doesnt know why he gives him so much money, doesnt know why he defends him so much. he is a half a fag, sometimes jerks off when Phil is in the background on stream. Oh and that he doesnt know what a fundraiser is and doesnt know why Phil is wrong about holding one for himself. Literally 3 hours of him repeating the same shit he always has and the same canned answers and semantics games he has been playing since SoK days. Nothing.
Presiona para expandir...
To be fair it is not all on Vidar. Why do people keep giving him a platform to speak when nothing ever comes of it? If asked Vidar will do an interview because he loves the attention, but once there you either throw softball questions at him and you get nothing or you ask him a real question that makes him sperg out and you get nothing. Don't think he is holding anything back either, he just isn't a plethora of information.

As for @MysteryWoman not going on, whatever it was her choice. From the beginning this thread gave everyone a very clear line of before January 12 and after January 12. Phil hasn't paid her yet which is the only reason she is here in the first place, so why jeopardize that and risk scaring Phil off or saying something that could be a violation of the Nda somehow? She could get $2,000 or bet it for a chance to talk to @BSV. Seems like an easy choice.
 
Estado
No está abierto para más respuestas.
Atrás
Top Abajo