AsianLover

I didn't say it was legal. I said it happens.

I'm willing to expose myself to the rhinovirus and be a test subject. Oh, the sacrifices I'll suffer in order to advance science and benefit all of mankind.

Yes, I'm well aware the photos are fake. I didn't even bother wasting my time with image searching the photos because I've seen enough Asian "Gravure Idol" photos to KNOW these were stolen images. My question was, how do these "escort" companies work, considering that they are clearly not offering the girls pictured, and considering that they sound more like a brothel-type operation?

One warning about Airbnb... I was listening to a local radio show the other morning and a woman who rents an Airbnb called in and admitted that she has hidden cameras throughout her rental home. She stated that she does this to prevent unauthorized activities and damage/theft to her property. She also stated that she's used her surveillance to break-up parties by people staying at her Airbnb. In other words, she doesn't just loop-record the cameras for evidence after-the-fact: she actively monitors the people while they are staying in her Airbnb. Apparently, the Airbnb terms-of-service permit security cameras in common areas like living rooms, etc. But this woman admitted also having hidden cameras in the bedrooms, which is a HUGE invasion of privacy. I think one should assume that, when staying at an Airbnb, you may be under surveillance in any room of the house, possibly even bathrooms. I know that hidden cameras have also been found in hotel rooms, but those are rare and not installed by the hotel. Just something to consider.

Colorado Companion Saw an ad for "Denver New Asian Escorts." They've got listings for girls on a number of other sites. I'm sure the photos are not of the actual girls. I'm just trying to understand how the scam works. One ad claims: "Gorgeous. No young No pay." Do they hope that once you get there and you discover the companion is not a beautiful young lady comparable to what's in the photos, that you won't walk away and you'll just accept the unattractive/older woman they offer? Or are the girls actually young and fairly attractive, but just not the stunning beauties in the photos? Also, the ad sounds like it's describing a brothel. So how do they pull that off? Or is it just an AMP posing as an escort agency? Either way, it feels like it would be rather high risk. Here's the agency site and one of their ads: http://denverescorts1124.escortbook.com/ https://colorado.bedpage.com/WomenSeekMen/denver-co/6429035.html

Sapphire was talking about leaving digital "footprints" (i.e., browser history, cookies, etc); she made no mention of being "caught in the act." Also, I said "Incognito Mode" is a good first step not a "total solution." Congratulations, you crafted both a straw man fallacy and a red herring with just 7 words and a stupid video. I sense that you enjoy arguing for the sake of being argumentative.

I'm not sure if that's sarcasm. Could you elaborate on your comment?

If he's already using a shared computer to look up listings, then presumably he knows how to access TOB without leaving traces. "Incognito Mode" is a good first step.

I'm not sure how not leaving a review helps a married man maintain his anonymity. Unless he's using his real name or something.

Also, the 16th Amendment allowed the federal government to grow to behemoth levels, as well as gave the federal government profound and far-reaching control over our personal lives.

America was founded on the principles of individual liberty and personal responsibility. Our governments, particularly the federal government, were supposed to be limited in scope and power. The primary roles of the federal government were to provide national security, negotiate treaties, and facilitate interstate commerce between the the sovereign states. Our founders rightly considered government a "necessary evil" and sought to constrain its size and power via the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Most people these days think that our rights come from the Constitutional Amendments; that is a fallacy. We are born with inalienable rights bestowed upon us by our Creator (however you wish to define "Creator"). The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to prohibit the government from infringing upon our inalienable rights. In other words, our rights do not come from government and are not granted to us by the Bill of Rights. We have natural rights by birth and the Bill of Rights is a constraint upon the government to prevent the government from infringing upon our rights. Additionally, most people today have been misled to believe America to be a democracy. Our Founders abhorred the idea of a democracy because that leads to mob rule, where 51% of the people can vote to take from or oppress the other 49%. That is why America was founded as a Constitutional Republic, where the power of the government is [supposed to be] constrained by the Constitution and individual rights are protected, despite what the "democratic" majority may want. As much as our Founders feared the power of a central government, they also realized that some government is necessary for the maintaining of law and order, to provide security, to facilitate trade, and to establish proper relations with other countries. Abolishing all government would leave a power vacuum. And from the anarchy that would ensue, an oppressive government would be spawned. So having limited government is a good thing. To delete all government would be to invite tyranny. The problem we have today is that, over the years, we citizenry have failed to elect people who have an honest desire to uphold the Constitution. We have allowed the federal government to seize powers never intended for the federal government to have. We don't need to delete our government. But we do need to constrain it to ONLY its Constitutional duties. Wouldn't that be a great thing?

I had a similar experience the first time I tried snowboarding... at Whistler in Canada, no less. I traveled there with a friend from Seattle. She already knew how to snowboard; I had never snowboarded nor skied before. She pointed me down the mountain and said, "Go for it!" Lots of falling down the mountain ensued. (For the record, Whistler is not the best place to learn snowboarding. The greens are like blues.) In retrospect, I wish I had taken lessons. I enjoyed getting the hang of it on my own, but I think I would have enjoyed it more if I got some experienced guidance to get started. I have since taught some other friends to snowboard, and they were able to pick up the sport much easier as a result. So my advice is to take at least one day of lessons (or even just a half-day). I think you'll really enjoy it more and build your skills faster, especially since you don't live close enough to snow to keep trying on your own. Good luck! As far as the best resorts for beginners here, I've only recently moved to Colorado so can't give you first-hand advice. However, I've been asking the experienced locals and have been told: Eldora is close-ish to Boulder and more convenient to get to than the resorts along I-70. And it has easy greens for beginners. However, the day pass lift tickets are rather expensive compared to other resorts. And apparently it can get quite windy at Eldora. Echo mountain is one of the first resorts you hit off I-70 when heading west out of Boulder. It's a smaller resort and newbie friendly. I don't believe they offer lessons, but apparently they do have pros on the slopes who give free guidance to learners. Day passes are reasonably priced. Arapahoe Basin (usually referred to as "A Basin") was recommended as also a good place for beginners. And it's one of the next resorts after Echo when heading west on I-70. Copper Mountain was also recommended for beginners. But it's quite a bit farther west, about the same distance as Breckenridge. Again, this is just what I've been told, so YMMV. Haven't had a chance to try any of them yet so I can't give you my personal take.

And baby carrots. Don't forget the baby carrots.

I would l love to hear you elaborate on these incidents. Were the reviews left for the first three less than good? And why did the one provider get upset about a VG review?

These explanations are certainly plausible. I'm sure Stang03 is hoping this is the case!