egafd.com

Hi Terry.

The person who gave me that information wasn't the type to lie, especially when it also didn't affect him in any way.

You said "Its quite easy to slag off something on hearsay", and "I'm not sure who you are talking about but surely that is a reason why things are talked about in confidence and not aired in public?",
but surely that's the point I'm making?

On those closed forums, anything could be said with no chance to defend yourself.

Please don't think this is a case of sour grapes from me, but I was even slagged off on the OPEN Forum at UKAP by one of it's admin staff (Jay K) for just having an opinion on here http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=5&i=40176&t=40176, all because I said "Hopefully it is just a case of bad communication on the webmasters part and that everything can be resolved."

Yet there were posted comments in that thread about suing, it being a scam, etc, but I was singled out for some reason http://www.ukadultproducers.com/board/s ... ostcount=4, so this alone doesn't give me much faith about what was said about me on the closed forums, (by the way, I was banned there after responding to Jay K's post and calling him a naughty name !oops!).

I can also remember a post a few months back when there was a rumour going around about a very abusive producer and a model was told on here to let UKAP know so it could be put on the closed forum.
Surely that alone should be shared news especially as if it were true, the models are the ones at risk and should know the score, and if it were the case that it was unfounded, the producer involved (who may or may not have been a UKAP member) would have had a chance to put the record straight.

Those forums could easily be kept closed to posting for everyone but producers, but viewable to all the other UKAP Forum members (and would only take a few moments to do with the VBulletin software).

Personally, I know longer give a damn about what's said about me.
I quit editing a while back and only keep my toe in the water via my own humble little forum and this excellent one.

You said Terry ?Lets face it, everyone talks among themselves so why should producers be excluded??

Because I feel that any ?unwarranted gossip? can affect people?s livelihoods.

As for ? This is precisely the sort of comment that warrants us having our own forum and if you really have a problem with it came and lay it on our door step. I can assure you will be given a non hostile answer.?

I can?t Terry???I was banned by an hostile administrator of the UKAP forum for standing up for myself against unfair comments.

All the best.

Blue

videokim wrote:

> 1. 86% take on the downloads is downright robbery & how do you
> justify this amount anyway so no it don't do us producers any
> favours.

We don't take 86%! You'd better phone me for clarification (and perhaps stop believing everything you're told).

> 2. Its common knowledge in the industry David as something to
> do with you & your business & what to what levels i don't know
> & dont care to know.

It's "common knowledge" is it? In other words, you're just repeating some vague rumour you heard somewhere.

> 3. If the above is not correct i do owe you an apology & i am
> sorry & if you are paying a better percent now your site is
> doing so well i'm sure lots of producers will say i'm wrong.
>
> 4. There is also talk from various sources that the BBFC will
> try to cert. British UK sites next year sometime & if this the
> case those who know this knowledge have a duty to warn their
> fellow workmates unless they stand to profit. If its not the
> case i am wrong but if it is the truth & certain people know of
> it they would not be able to hold their head up in public or be
> trusted again if they did not share this knowledge.

You're wrong. The BBFC do have some plans for online, which I've done my best to explain on webmaster boards. The BBFC has no statutory power to control anything online. Parliament would have to legislate before this could happen, and that ain't happening anytime soon - certainly not next year.

> I stand by what i said that i found you a nice bloke & yes you
> should be allowed to go to any event & for saying you should
> not was out of order
> and i am sorry.
>
> John

Cenobitez wrote:

> Jerry without pissing on your chips, but on the scale of sites
> of your variety (movies online) SB aint even the biggest or the
> oldest in the world is it ?

We're not the biggest movie site, nor the oldest. Nor are we the biggest site in the UK. We just do our best to provide top-quality streaming movies.

We need to spend money on marketing so we can sell our studios' movies and send them reasonable cheques each month. I'd doubt they'd be happy if we didn't market their films!

You're right, Hot Movies are far bigger and spend far more on marketing. But their site's not very good is it? !wink!

If everyone else is happy with you Jerry then so be it but i wasn't keen to find out about your meeting with the BBFC, you put on a united front with the producers then have a meeting with the BBFC without any of the loyal people who have helped your site grow 'why'. By the time others met the BBFC everything was done & dusted, you can now understand why i don't believe a word you say & if i am wrong only time will tell...just look at the Labour party recently.

John

Hi Newblue

The person you were referring to has responded to me in private. Again what is discussed remains private. We are not a career assassin group. Unwarranted gossip goes on all the time and with regards to the person we are talking about, it started with models. Not producers. Things are discussed by people all the time, you cannot change that and nor do I see a reason we should have an open forum for it. I dont know why people feel they should have the freedom to know producers affairs when people have password protected forums all the time. It was really set up so we could all keep in touch because its members live in all four corners of the UK and is a god way for us to get things across to other producers like share resources, locations etc. Honestly there is nothing dodgy going on inside. Y

As for the other thing, Jay K is but one member of UKAP so I cant comment on individual situations and dont feel it is fair that it reflects on the association as a whole. I'm sure if you would like I can mediate a meeting for you both to clear the air as I'm sure things may have been lost in translation so to speak. Let me know. If I called the moderator a naughty word I'm sure my arse would get tossed out too.

You also wrote:

I can also remember a post a few months back when there was a rumour going around about a very abusive producer and a model was told on here to let UKAP know so it could be put on the closed forum.
Surely that alone should be shared news especially as if it were true, the models are the ones at risk and should know the score, and if it were the case that it was unfounded, the producer involved (who may or may not have been a UKAP member) would have had a chance to put the record straight.

No it shouldnt be shared news because we dont know the full facts of the situation. What if it was a disgruntled model crying wolf? We dont know and I think it was wise that we dont join in witch hunts where police intervention would be more suitable but this seems like a direct contradiction already considering you think we can destroy careers with gossip.

Besides have you ever enquired about joining up? This offer is open to every single producer in the industry (and before Sir James throws a spanner) we cant be open to the kind of Johnny Camcorder that is not interested in doing stuff with his material except for his own private use. their are guideline to help with this decision and they were at least a website and or released material on the market. thats all. Otherwise it leaves us open to anyone who has not really produced anything getting in because they are plain nosey and causing all kinds of complications.
.

videokim wrote:

> If everyone else is happy with you Jerry then so be it but i
> wasn't keen to find out about your meeting with the BBFC, you
> put on a united front with the producers then have a meeting
> with the BBFC without any of the loyal people who have helped
> your site grow 'why'. By the time others met the BBFC
> everything was done & dusted, you can now understand why i
> don't believe a word you say

John, your facts are all wrong. I'm bored of responding to shite - why don't you get the facts straight first?

I don't think their main man is crazy/camp/silly enough to have a mano-a-mano lapdance in an all male lapdancing club, and let photos be taken, so you gotta be the top of the list just for that.

I heard a rumour today (well heard it as in I started it) that your real name is Jerry Evil, and you used to have a barnett hair do, before the evil gene kicked in. I also made up that you was kicked out of college for being 'too fricken evil' you changed your name, got a tan and started a new life, but the groovey evil gene is breaking thru again.

I also heard that this Volcano is really a marketting and advertising plot, where you are retrofitting it out with a 'super strictly broadband heat beam', which you called a "SB Laser" and are planning on using this "SB Laser" to punch a hole in the protective layer of the planet which you are calling the "SBZone" then scrawling StrictlyBroadband.com onto the surface of the moon.

But Michelle B decided to go public because she was getting no where privately. Jaygay tried to talk her down and tried to turn it all around on her because one of his mates was associated with her joke of a site (that was really just a big plug for dolltheatre).

90% of the replies -fans and industry people alike- were backing Michelle B up, and so Jaygay ran off to his little forum slagging her off, and others who stuck up for her. Any rebuttal on his own site led to editing or deletions.

All this from one of the closed forums primary members.

You know what they say Terry: If it looks like bullshit, smells like bullshit, and tastes like bullshit, it's usually what?

At least this open forum made sure Michelle B had a voice. I'm sure she'd have been slaughtered like a spring lamb in those closed forums...........mind you, she probably wouldn't have been accepted as a member, so I'll take that bit back.

NewBlue stuck up for a girl asking for advice, like a gentleman. Jaygay stuck up for a few greaseballs -who still have all of Michelle's content she paid 1/2 to and it's been nearly 2 years btw- so maybe these closed forums could sort that little problem out for the young lass?

Keep us all updated, yeah?

Cenobitez wrote:

> I don't think their main man is crazy/camp/silly enough to have
> a mano-a-mano lapdance in an all male lapdancing club, and let
> photos be taken, so you gotta be the top of the list just for
> that.
>
> I heard a rumour today (well heard it as in I started it) that
> your real name is Jerry Evil, and you used to have a barnett
> hair do, before the evil gene kicked in. I also made up that
> you was kicked out of college for being 'too fricken evil' you
> changed your name, got a tan and started a new life, but the
> groovey evil gene is breaking thru again.
>
> I also heard that this Volcano is really a marketting and
> advertising plot, where you are retrofitting it out with a
> 'super strictly broadband heat beam', which you called a "SB
> Laser" and are planning on using this "SB Laser" to punch a
> hole in the protective layer of the planet which you are
> calling the "SBZone" then scrawling StrictlyBroadband.com onto
> the surface of the moon.

At last, some accurate information. !grin!

First of all I?d like to say thank you to Sam for seeing the bigger picture.

Terry, you referred to ?Jay K is but one member of UKAP so I cant comment on individual situations and dont feel it is fair that it reflects on the association as a whole.?
The problem is, he isn?t just one member???he has control over the running of the UKAP board, so his actions do severely reflect on the UKAP Forum.

In the instance I spoke of, he deleted my response and altered it with one of his own. It was only when I made a post about it on BGAFD that he decided to remove his altered post???this is hardly the act of someone who should be in control of producers and models affairs as I personally wouldn?t be comfortable with him handling mine.

You said of the alleged abusive producer, ? No it shouldnt be shared news because we dont know the full facts of the situation. What if it was a disgruntled model crying wolf? We dont know and I think it was wise that we dont join in witch hunts where police intervention would be more suitable but this seems like a direct contradiction already considering you think we can destroy careers with gossip?

Yet in another situation, you?d allow a person who runs the UKAP forum to use it to turn on a model, just because of his own agenda (because of one of his friends).
This alone reflects on how closed forums could be potentially damaging and sculptured to sort people?s plans.

In the years that I?ve seen you on this site, you?ve always come across as a friendly, level headed, straight forward businessman. My view on you hasn?t altered and in a perfect world, if it were you alone running UKAP, I would be more comfortable with it.

But his isn?t a perfect world Terry and I know you probably have far too many work commitments to handle the daily running of UKAP so I?m afraid my personal view will never change and it?s just a case of agreeing to disagree.

I still believe that UKAP should be totally open and far more accessible to smaller producers.

Kind regards.

Blue