Very Possibly My Final Post

I am saddened that this board has permitted 3 individuals to make accusations against a good business for 1 1/2 months and then when 3 SGF long time members come forward to view what happened, within hours, the thread is locked. Within just a few hours, 133 people viewed that thread, most likely to see what these people had to report.
Was the bar incorrect or the Veteran SGF member trying to make the bar look bad to bolster his position. I have appealed asking that the thread be reopened so that the people who were nice enough to take their time and report on what actually happened since they viewed the tapes and were prepared to do so without revealing names or identitiesexcept their own usernames as they were reporting what they saw.

To not allow this but to allow 1 1/2 months of attacks is just something I cannot comprehend or allow. Should my volunteers not be allowed to post their findings, well I will have to say goodbye as this is not a place where I wish to be nor will I wish to support.

Thank you

[thonglor55]

[This thread was originally called Unfair Practices]. Surely you realise that many of us are much more interested in what have been traditionally called "unnatural practices" than unfair practices? However I for one - and others have written likewise - am grateful for the Beachcrest/Surflover spat, rolling through and disrupting multiple threads, as a source of amusement over my cornflakes. Whether the original incident is true or not I neither know nor care, and you can rest assured that its report in no way influences whether I patronise your particular brothel to indulge in those unnatural practices - although arguably my curiosity might be piqued to the extent of visiting the scene of the alleged crime, if only to ensure that my image is captured for posterity on your estimable CCTV system :hiding:

[Khor tose]

To not allow this but to allow 1 1/2 months of attacks is just something I cannot comprehend or allow. Should my volunteers not be allowed to post their findings, well I will have to say goodbye as this is not a place where I wish to be nor will I wish to support.
Thank you

Why not either: a. Start a new thread
b. State you now have the evidence of who did what and let it go at that. Unless some members see the CCTV
they will not believe you anyway.
c. Send Elephant Spike or Jinks a PM and see if you can get them to allow this.

To quit the board in a huff over a supposed false accusation seems futile at best.

To not allow this but to allow 1 1/2 months of attacks is just something I cannot comprehend or allow. Should my volunteers not be allowed to post their findings, well I will have to say goodbye as this is not a place where I wish to be nor will I wish to support.
Thank you

Why not either: a. Start a new thread
b. State you now have the evidence of who did what and let it go at that. Unless some members see the CCTV
they will not believe you anyway.
c. Send Elephant Spike or Jinks a PM and see if you can get them to allow this.

To quit the board in a huff over a supposed false accusation seems futile at best.
A. I started a new thread to allow the people who vunteered to be judges, to view the tapes and report. The thred was immeadiately locked.
B. I have syou should not be allowed to liable a business and then the business not be able to show its side.tated who saw what and how, and the three volunteers to view the tapes WERE SGF members of many years.
C. I have sent Elephantspike and JINKS a PM to share my views about locking a thread after allowing 3 threads, maybe 4 to go on and on for 1 1/2 months of these same accusations from one alleged incident. But within HOURS of me posting that I will have a thread for these witnesses to come forward and state what they see on the tapes without revealing names, it was locked.

I dont feel this is going off in a huff but appreciate what you think. It is standing for what I believe in and that is that

[gerefan2]

whether I patronise your particular brothel

Mmmm... not sure you are right there thonglor ...you see sex has to take place on the premises for it to be defined as a bothel. I can provide the reference, if required, but a few seconds googling will do it for you.

Anyway I do not believe that happens. Well they dont advertise it. Maybe justme would know?

Are you are mistaking his place with an establishment near Sunee Plaza, with a very similar name, that may well fit the definition?!

Jesus, Mary and Joseph dear, calm your gay nerves. Except for you, Beachlover and perhaps Surfcrest, no one actually gives a shit what happened.

[elephantspike]

Justme: Start a new thread.

jinks: don't lock it.

Once in A While: I agree.

[thonglor55]

whether I patronise your particular brothel Mmmm... not sure you are right there thonglor ...you see sex has to take place on the premises for it to be defined as a bothel. I can provide the reference, if required, but a few seconds googling will do it for you.I'd be most interested for you to argue for such a narrow definition. A "few seconds googling" turned up on the first Search page results (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=brothel+definition) the definition that I would take as mine: "a building where prostitutes are available". Availability does not require sex with the prostitute to be carried out in situ. As you can see I have thoughtfully provided the hyperlink to the Google results for you. However before our bush lawyers get carried away, I'd take the principal purpose test for the building, as prostitutes are available in some bars and indeed shopping malls but that is not the principal purpose of those buildings. It's a bit like guns; their principal purpose is to kill, despite the nonsense the gun lobby spouts about "people kill, guns don't kill". Indeed one might argue the sole purpose test for guns, although there are those who think shooting at some sort of inanimate target constitutes a "sport".

[Beachlover]

1. Why didn't you just wait for that person to start a thread, Justme? If someone reviewed the footage and said they would post a review later, it'd be a cleaner and less cluttered process if they start the thread. Now there's all this clutter leading up to the main event.

2. Who are the "3 individuals"? I know there's Surfcrest and possibly Scottish... who's the third?

3. I don't think you should go nuts and take Scottish literally. He's attacked you using personal details on you almost from day one. I enjoy his posts but he obviously has some arsehole axe to grind against you - what or why, I don't know. He's using the event to take a jab at you, which would be fair enough, except that his assertion that the footage "doesn't exist" because you won't post it on YouTube is illogical. There are several well justified reasons for not posting the footage for all and sundry to see.

4. If you enjoy posting here, don't let an incident like this ruin it. I suspect Jinks doesn't read into everything. He just looks at the mass of posts and does whatever's easiest (e.g. minimum effort) to keep it under control. No point going nuts because whatever decision he made, he probably hasn't gone and understood the situation fully.


Why not either...
Justme already stated that he has the evidence. Police have reviewed it but he was advised the process of locating and identifying Surfcrest, confiscating his passport and then bringing criminal (attempted fraud) civil (libel) proceedings against him would be long and expensive and chose not to go ahead because of this and his health issues.

Not sure if you followed the threads leading up to this but what happened was
(1) Surfcrest made a series of personal attacks on this bar owner...
(2) then went to visit his bar for the first time...
(3) at the bar he claimed he was shortchanged...
(4) staff checked the CCTV footage, told him he was wrong and offered to show him the footage on the spot...
(5) he refused to see the footage and left the bar...
(6) within an hour or two, he posted a story here claiming the bar scammed him...
(7) the bar owner reviewed and described the footage showing what Surfcrest said was a lie and asked him to return to the bar to view the footage and retract the story...
(8) Surfcrest has done neither... instead he's continued to attack the bar, trying to badmouth it for having cameras (all bars do) etc.

Obviously, he can't go and post the footage here so what he's been wanting to do is for either Jinks or another unbiased member of this site to go and review it and offer their opinion on the evidence. Really, none of this would be necessary if Surfcrest just retracted the story and stopped claiming to be innocent.

none of this would be necessary

None of this is necessary. Nobody cares. Can't imagine why you think it's any of your concern. When are you going to see someone about that OCD?

[bigben]

Nice summary there Mr. BL. :salute: :salute: :salute: :salute: :salute:

[lonelywombat]

OMG not again. Why not post in posting guidelines and let this forum recover.

[Patexpat]

Justme - on the face of it check out Thai defamation laws - they are a wonderful thing. The accused has to prove they didn't defame you, rather than you proving they did.

Issue a law suit, and settle out of court. I would have if my business was being defamed LONG before now!

You should get an initial mediation meeting within 90 days or so.

Justme: Start a new thread.

jinks: don't lock it.

Once in A While: I agree.

I feel it necessary to point out to SGT members that Unkie PM'd me today saying that he had threatened to withdraw all his advertising and funding of SGT unless the Mod/Admin of SGT unlocked this thread so that he could continue this propaganda war about who scammed who between him and Surfcrest..

Note that the thread has duly been unlocked.

I simply give you the information - and can obviously cut and paste Unkie's post publicly to that effect, or forward it privately to any doubting party.

Meanwhile, it is up to the rest of you to make of this what you will.

All I will say is that when I suggested in the past that Unkie seemed to have undue influence on the content of SGT, that suggestion was rubbished. It seems that point has now been well-and-truly proved.

:occasion9:

Justme - on the face of it check out Thai defamation laws - they are a wonderful thing. The accused has to prove they didn't defame you, rather than you proving they did.

Issue a law suit, and settle out of court. I would have if my business was being defamed LONG before now!

You should get an initial mediation meeting within 90 days or so.


Absolutely correct,

And certain people in Pattaya have taken a lot of advantage of this loophole or twist in Thai law. The same ones who state things as fact and when the opposite is proved, they are attempting threats for people to back off with comments such as I am watching this and reporting it to my lawyers etc etc

I have far bigger issues that I could publish on here including documents that would prove beyond doubt who was the guilty party in my case, I have chosen to rise above it now, I did my share of making you all aware of the REAL facts in my case, but it ended up just like the Thai judge in Pattaya,when people have no intention of listening, then you are wasting your time!

At one point I thought my protests were getting lost in translation but No, he wasn't listening from the start, he had an agenda!

What a shallow lot Gays can be,eh?

One of you guys made an accurate observation and that was if there were a streetful of young good looking Thai prostitutes outside the guilty party's front door, no one or the vast majority would give a shit about the deeds or goings on committed by those foul individuals,, and you know what, sad to say it, the POSTER WAS RIGHT!

I can't remember his exact terminology but it was words to the effect of the above.

We get up,get over it and move on. In my opinion,that is what I would now be doing with regards this footage from the bar. I think the whole issue got forgotten in the row that followed.

As Once in a While says, no one really gives a fuck.

justme,

You appear to have a very successful operation that you promote well, I would be doing that if I were you, that's the best slap in the face you can give to anyone.I don't think you need to be announcing your departure as this board is ALSO a useful tool for your advertising and you know that.

Do any of you recall my ' House full' next show stars at.................... which we put outside the door of Throb and Splash??

Well, Mark and I got more of a kick out of displaying that sign than a champagne weekend at the five star Oriental Hotel in Bangkok if it were offered!

That is how you respond to peoplw knocking you!...................... :laughing3:

[jinks]

jinks: don't lock it.

Once in A While: I agree.

OK, Thank you for the release, you can read and edit all the crap on this subject.

Neil, don't bother me again :drv:

Before I finish reading all the mail, I want to respond to Scottish-guys baseless accusations, again.
I hold NO special priveleges with this board due my advertising. I pinted out that a persona has come on this board (Surfcrst) and made a liabless accusation. In fact, due to BLs comments, he has brought it up time after time. Due to Scottish Guys insistance that it did not exist, I decided how it could be viewed and talked about in a proper setting. The thread was immeadiately locked. To me, that reaked of Surcrests ability to defame a business and the business not be able to defend itself properly.

As to OIAW assertion that nobody could care less, I find that interesting as immeadiately after the accusation of being scammed it was HE who made several posts taking Surfs side and tellin g me that I should have given him another 50 baht to make the situation go away. And, if nobody were interested, there would have been no volunteers and there would not have been 133 clicks on the thread in 5 hours! I wnt to clear my name and that should not be so difficult to understand. and you should want to know if one of your VETERAN MEMBERS would stoop that low to make his war between him and us look good.

[newalaan]

OK, Thank you for the release, you can read and edit all the crap on this subject.So why was the thread locked in the first place? If it was locked because of a fear of litigation...fair enough. If it was locked just because some mod did it on a whim over nothing more than a personal preference then it should never have been locked in the first place.What are the mods trying to protect us from? For goodness sake if members don't want to read about the fiasco...then PASS on the posts and the thread!

I feel it necessary to point out to SGT members that Unkie PM'd me today Why? I'm an SGT member and I couldn't give a fuck about who PM's you or what's in it, why should anybody else. WTF has it got to do with you anyway? Are you the owner of Happy Place.......err NO! Did you have a problem with change of a Bt1000 note there....err NO! Just another feeble grab at being the centre of attention again.

I know there's Surfcrest and possibly Scottish... who's the third? 3. I don't think you should go nuts and take Scottish literally After reviewing the facts, i STILL can't see what this thread has to do with the pathetic attention-seeking old queen known as scottish-guy.


All I will say is that when I suggested in the past that Unkie seemed to have undue influence on the content of SGT, that suggestion was rubbished. It seems that point has now been well-and-truly proved. And it's being 'rubbished' again. Complete and utter shite. What constitutes 'undue influence on the content'? What a crock of drama queen shit. Do you really think Justme is the first member to appeal to the mod or elephantspike to have a decision reversed,or the first to have action taken against another handle on this board? You are deluded. Justme's thread was un-necessarily locked by the mod(i presume). He appealed to get it unlocked. It's now unlocked. Quite right too. Yeh that's REAL undue influence, out of hundreds of posts over months/years of membership....ONE instance of him appealing a mod/owner decision
Justme - on the face of it check out Thai defamation laws - they are a wonderful thing. The accused has to prove they didn't defame you, rather than you proving they did.Issue a law suit, and settle out of court. I would have if my business was being defamed LONG before now!Just what we need...a complete idiot suggesting litigation.What is 'wonderful' about Thai defamation laws? It's that 'wonderfulness' of Thai legal system which has been the basis of innocent people being incarserated.
OMG not again. Why not post in posting guidelines and let this forum recover.Why all this queeny screeching, it's worse than standing next to a femme gay boy who has just broken a nail.Recover from what lonely? This forum needs every thread it can muster. If you don't like the content which is fairly clear from the subject or the first post...Just PASS BY...ITS NOT DIFFICULT.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph dear, calm your gay nerves. Except for you, Beachlover and perhaps Surfcrest, no one actually gives a shit what happenedYou mean except for BL surfcrest and 'once in a while' since you are even bothering to read a thread you could easily pass on let alone taking the time to post on it.
None of this is necessary. Nobody cares. Can't imagine why you think it's any of your concernNor yours for that matter but you don't 'not care' quite enough not to get involved.

Undue influence, Newalaan (and I will refrain from name-calling - as you have just done to about half a dozen members), is when you succeed in manipulating the moderation of a public Forum by threatening to withdraw your financial support unless you get your own way.

I see it quite simply, sorry if you don't

:occasion9:

[thonglor55]

OK, Thank you for the release, you can read and edit all the crap on this subject.So why was the thread locked in the first place? ... If it was locked just because some mod did it on a whim over nothing more than a personal preference then it should never have been locked in the first place.jinks has a lot of "form" in that regard.

[a447]

I see it quite simply

Maybe a bit too simply, Scott.


threatening to withdraw your financial support unless you get your own way.

If Justme is providing financial support, then he is entitled to approach the moderator and ask to be treated fairly; in this case, being able to defend his business against what appear to be incorrect assertions by Surfcrest, leading to potential damage to Happy place. I think there is a huge difference between "getting your own way" and seeking natural justice; i.e. the right to reply.

If Justme is providing financial support, then he is entitled to approach the moderator and ask to be treated fairly; in this case, being able to defend his business against what appear to be incorrect assertions by Surfcrest, leading to potential damage to Happy place. I think there is a huge difference between "getting your own way" and seeking natural justice; i.e. the right to reply.


I see, and if YOU or I were to make the same approach, on a matter that potentially prejudiced either of US, we would receive exactly the same decision, right?

:sign5:

[a447]

if YOU or I were to make the same approach, we would receive exactly the same decision, right

Hopefully, if the Moderator thought it to be the correct decision.

Justme advertises on this site and, as such, this forum should not be used to denigrate its sponsors' businesses. Especially if, as in this case, there was no proof that Surfcrest was ripped off. On the contrary, there seems to be adequate proof that he WASN'T.
In a free economy, we can take our money and invest it elsewhere if we are not happy about how things are run. Our choice. I don't think people should be condemned for exercising their right to go somewhere else. Isn't it all about not biting the hand that feeds you? I mean, how would you feel if a boy you had offed and handsomely rewarded turned around and criticised your performance in bed? You'd surely just find another guy, wouldn't you?

Whether you do or dont should not be the question. The fact is, if you are liabled on this board, whether you are you or me or MADAME, you have the right to either have the liabless claim deleted or the right to assert your evidence. In this case, it was more important to show that a long time veteran member of the board had gone to extremes to bring more support to his 6 day war by stooping so low. The other peroson is right, it should bring question to anything he has ever said or may say in the future.
Whether I was involved or not, I would want to know if someone on the board was capable of committing such a devious act. And no, we are not talking about whether someone is 29 or 62, blonde hair or brown and has ever been to Thailand or not. We are talking about something much more devious than that.
Many of us are still wondering why you are so passionate about this, rather than a simple observer.

..Justme advertises on this site and, as such, this forum should not be used to denigrate its sponsors' businesses...

That is abundantly clear



..Especially if, as in this case, there was no proof that Surfcrest was ripped off.

What proof could any customer claiming to be short-changed, reasonably provide?


.. On the contrary, there seems to be adequate proof that he WASN'T.

Well we don't know about that yet do we? What is "adequate" is a matter of opinion.

What you have said is that you saw some <quote> "blurry" pictures with dates and time stamps - and from those and from the blurry figures (3 instead of 4) and the blurry colour of the note, you and your bf have deduced that a 500B note was tendered and not 1000 as Surfcrest claimed.

I assume you checked the date against Surfcrest's post, were aware of what Surfcrest had said he was wearing and checked that the Client tendering the money fitted that description.

If you did those things and then came to the conclusion you have, then I'm willing to accept your opinion, and await the other two opinions we have been promised.

Eminently fair of me I would suggest. Especially considering I have to thole JustMe pm'ing me constantly with his whining.


..I don't think people should be condemned for exercising their right to go somewhere else.

That's not the issue - if he wants to go elsewhere fine - but don't try to pressure the board management.

:occasion9:

Your claims of being libeled might carry a bit more weight with me if you would stop libeling me. I have not ever taken Surfcrest's side in his dispute with you.
You are by far your own worst enemy and your obsessive need to be right and have the last word just makes you look pathetic.
But do carry on as many of us enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself over and over and over and over again and do thank you for the months of entertainment you have provided.

OIAW is right - people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I have never said Surfcrest is innocent or guilty either. Only 2 people can truly know that.

What I have said is that I doubt the existance of the cast-iron, 100% conclusive CCTV evidence we are told exists.

When and if the 3 upstanding SGT members give that assurance then I have said I will apologise for doubting its existance - but we are still quite a bit away from that at this moment in time.

In fact, until this occurs I will refrain from posting on the matter (unless attacked)

A447, you do have a print out of Surfs accusation on this board and what he said he was wearing.
It started out saying that I could pass for John Goodman. This post and the time stamps on the pictures we saw that 40 minutes after he walked outt of the bar, he wrote his attack.

I wonder at which point a447 will wish he never got sucked into this train wreck?

[newalaan]

Undue influence, Newalaan (and I will refrain from name-calling - as you have just done to about half a dozen members), is when you succeed in manipulating the moderation of a public Forum by threatening to withdraw your financial support unless you get your own way.I see it quite simply, sorry if you don'tWow! yes you've definitely won the biggest letters competition, well done, that really will make up for the total lack of substance in the rest of the post, I take it that was their intention..to distract us away from the rest of the fodder. Do you now want some recognition because you have 'refrained' from name-calling in one of your posts? I take it that was your point in bothering to bring it up. Pity there is nothing else in the post which would indicate you have grasped the actual points being made. Either that or they've just wizzed over your head, although that in itself would be quite a detour.

First, there should have been no need for Justme to have needed to appeal to the owner to thave the thread unlocked, it should never have been locked in the first place.

Secondly, your dramatic over-the-top claim of 'manipulating a public Forum' is so niave and laughable I hope we do get another reply from you in the same vein, it's amusing! Once again you are so wrapped up in trying to substaniate your absurd notion that you've completely missed the point. Which is.....

Everybody is entitled to appeal to the mod/owner or whoever to have an un-necessarily locked thread, unlocked. Are you saying just because Justme is a bar owner and advertising here he should not have the exactly the same rights and considerations extended to ALL members? That is VERY discriminatery scottish-guy, why should Justme not enjoy the same treatment as you? Then to further accuse a member of 'manipulation' just because a fair request of his, which is ONE incident out of HUNDREDS of posts over MONTHS/YEARS of membership was upheld, is even funnier. I have said before you are much more amusing when you don't mean to be.

A 12-year-old would know you would need to see at least a number of such cases before one could even think of suggesting such an outlandish proposition. Unless of course you DO have a number of other instances forming a pattern where Justme has been the only one to make requests and have them ALL agreed to.


What I have said is that I doubt the existance of the cast-iron, 100% conclusive CCTV evidence we are told exists.When and if the 3 upstanding SGT members give that assurance then I have said I will apologise for doubting its existance - but we are still quite a bit away from that at this moment in time.In your fantasy world maybe we are a 'bit away' but to everybody with a functioning brain we are RIGHT THERE already as it's perfectly clear that a447 has cleared up the whole sorry saga, anybody trying to push it further could be accused of trying to keep themselves in the spotlight, attention seekers that is, and as far as I can see anybody with an ounce of credibility and common sense would accept the matter is closed. Apart that is from the apology from Surfcrest, Oh and of course yourself given that you have just promised one.

NewAlaan - you win a prize:

After 40+ years of being a poof, I've finally found a DICK I don't like

Those letters big enough for you?

Bye.

:laughing3:

[Beachlover]

your [Scottish Guy] dramatic over-the-top claim of 'manipulating a public Forum' is so niave and laughable...
Newalaan's right. Scottish, you say you've never attacked Justme's bar but the fact is you've been attacking justme/Unkie from day one. You attacked him, brought up intimate details about his life, which weren't public knowledge and gave him shit at every opportunity. The moment the slightest bit of moderation went in his favour, you went off on a rant accusing the mods of favouring him. Now you've done it again! What a load of shit.

I disagree unfair favouritism for advertisers but get real... There's been no "unfair" favouritism here. Unfair advantage might've been the case if Justme had asked for Surfcrest to be booted off the board or to have posts deleted. He's done neither. All he asked is for A447 to be allowed to tell his account of the footage and clear Justme's bar of wrong doing. This is perfectly reasonable. The way the thread was locked was completely wrong and probably done because the mod hasn't followed these events (can't blame him). He hasn't asked for Surfcrest's posts to be muzzled or for special treatment in any other way.

Your accusation of "special treatment" is a complete load of bullshit driven by this arsehole axe you seem to want to grind against Justme.


What I have said is that I doubt the existance of the cast-iron, 100% conclusive CCTV evidence we are told exists.When and if the 3 upstanding SGT members give that assurance then I have said I will apologise for doubting its existance - but we are still quite a bit away from that at this moment in time...
You've previously said something along the lines of "the footage clearly doesn't exist". That's a clear assertion, which you based on flawed logic.

I don't remember you mentioning this "3 upstanding SGT members" thing... You previously called for one member to view the footage. Now you're moving the goal posts and changing the criteria.


If Justme is providing financial support, then he is entitled to approach the moderator and ask to be treated fairly; in this case, being able to defend his business against what appear to be incorrect assertions by Surfcrest, leading to potential damage to Happy place. I think there is a huge difference between "getting your own way" and seeking natural justice; i.e. the right to reply.
Very well said.


more important to show that a long time veteran member of the board had gone to extremes to bring more support to his 6 day war by stooping so low. The other peroson is right, it should bring question to anything he has ever said or may say in the future.
Totally agree. When someone goes out of their way to defraud and damage the reputation of a bar who's owner he dislikes on this board... That's well beyond "stooping low".


All we need is a public apology from Surfcrest and this long episode is at an end.
Yep... Like Surfcrest is ever going to apologise! :rolling:

This is a scrawny creep of a man who once said, "when I'm wrong... I have no problem admitting this", yet he has never admitted to being wrong, despite contradicting himself and proving his own earlier assertions wrong on a number of occasions. Him and his "multiple billion dollar" brain must confuse each other a lot. :rolling:

:sharm:

Dear Beachy and the non-entity whose name I can't remember.

Thank you both for your kind words.

Beachy - I appreciate that it must have taken you quite a while to think up the various insults with which you peppered your post and believe me I am truly grateful to you for taking time out of your busy schedule.

To the other intellectual, I offer my congratulations on your witty riposte. How I wish I could even get close to such heights of sophisticated banter as "Scot Dwarf with Sheep Cell Implants + Ideas of Importance = Scottish Guy. Truly I am in awe.

:occasion9: :occasion9:

[giggsy]

WINNERS AND LOSERS

Well it seems everyone else can share their oppinion on what has happend then why don't I.

Winners

Unkie/Justme Happyplace bar. They say any publicty is good publicity and your bar has finally come out well from all this and with other members giving good reviews about your bar it seems that it might have been worth it in the end. Although it might have impacted on your health with all the effort and worry it has caused.I agree to you not showing the video footage on utube as it would have been detremental to all concerned. If I was you I would now rise above all this and get back to advertising you bar in a good way and aiding members of SGTwith valuable advice only a bar owner living in Thailand could know about.

New alaan
The voice of reason yet again. I've agreed with everything you have written on this thread so far.

Beachlover
Again this "scam-gate" topic started by Surfcrest has embroiled you and with Surfcrest shown to be a vindictive liar his rantings against you now hold even less substance then before (if they held any at all).

Losers
Surfcrest
What has happened to you dude.I used to like and respect your postings on SGT. You seem to have gone on a 2 month holiday and as they say about youngsters "got in with the wrong crowd". I hope you now can apologise to all concerned and get on with enjoying your visits to Thailand and SGT in future.

Scottishguy
Again I like and respect your postings but you are making a fool of yourself on this particular vendetta you are having with Justme.Forget it. Move on. Life is too short etc.

Wishing you all a great royal wedding day wherever in the world you spend it.

Thank you all for bearing with me to bring this matter to its final chapter.
I want to apologize publically to JINKS. I know your interests were SGF snd you wanted to bring this to an even quicker w=end but I did need to bring thid to a "proper" end and have my bars reputation restored. I apologize if you felt that I may have "gone over your head" or as SG says, used any undue pressure but I felt the thread should have been allowed to stay open for this purpose. The deed is now done and over.

To Scottish Guy, I truly believe I know why you have been so vindictive and you and I know what I feel and who I believe you are, lets let that die and go each others way. You can find the strength just to ignore me and I know I can ignore you.

Surcrest. I really dont know what to say to you. You asked for proof and now you have it. I hope you can figure a way to fix this but it is now up to you.

Again thank you all and PLEASE do me a favor and just dont post and let this and the other thread about leaving under the protest of Unfair Justice, well please let them die a peaceful death now and restore SGF to its former glory.

FOr all who read this and would like to help me celebrate the final chapter being closed, saturday night April 30th, bring in a copy of this post and get a 50 baht drink. Any drink!

Thank you!

[thonglor55]

... and have my bars reputation restored.You can't seriously believe that that's what you have achieved? All you've "proved" is that in this particular instance that particular boy didn't rip a customer off. Worse, you're now revealed as a complete joke. It won't stop me coming to your brothel, or encourage me to stay away; it's just been a laugh from end to end.

I am sorry but YES, that is what I believe, and you and others have the right to believe what you wish. Some people believe that when you die, there is a heaven or hell. Some of us believe that we get put into the fire at the Wat and someone does something to our ashes and, puff, its over. End of story.

bring in a copy of this post and get a 50 baht drink. Any drink!

I would have thought that such a monumental victory could have at least warranted a free drink.
It's not everyday that a whore monger spends that much time and energy defending the good name of his house of prostitution.

bring in a copy of this post and get a 50 baht drink. Any drink!

I would have thought that such a monumental victory could have at least warranted a free drink.
It's not everyday that a whore monger spends that much time and energy defending the good name of his house of prostitution.

While I considered that,(free) I also figured that the line of people would be out the door. So I figured selling at near cost.
Thanks for the good names, I see they continue without missinfg a step. Start to finish. :sign5:

[While I considered that,(free) I also figured that the line of people would be out the door

You would certainly know your customer base better than me.

[kittyboy]

bring in a copy of this post and get a 50 baht drink. Any drink!

I have always been too cheap to spring for JW Blue label...I recall from a previous post that it is available in your bar...expect me during the 3rd week of may.

bring in a copy of this post and get a 50 baht drink. Any drink!

I have always been too cheap to spring for JW Blue label...I recall from a previous post that it is available in your bar...expect me during the 3rd week of may.


Sorry,

The offer is only valid for this week and you must be accompanied by both parents!.. :laughing3:

[thonglor55]

The offer is only valid for this week and you must be accompanied by both parents!Or Surfcrest and Beachlover?

Kitty boy I will give you a rain check. Introduce yourself and no problem.
BL and Surf can get a free drink but I think neither will show. :sign5:
Oh and scottish can have one!

[bao-bao]

Kitty boy I will give you a rain check. Introduce yourself and no problem.
NOW you've gone and opened the floodgates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99DhQQ5DxO8&feature=fvsr

Sorry - the YouTube embedding thing isn't working for me here today.