Another Alexa rating update:

[BURKE89]

[This message has been edited by BURKE89]

Planet Love: 51,490.

Russian Women Guide: 97,364. (small = good - big = bad)

I only check these #'s for my own kicks, to see the current '#'s' of National Review's death - in a fine little place called... Washington D.C. or N.Y.C.

...to harsh - yet, my animosity has been directed upon Mr. Frum's varied polemic - against the liberty-loving (un-patriotic) lads & gals: Novak, Buchanan, Geyer, Resse, Margolis, Sobran et al.

Geesh...

[squirecam]

... in response to Another Alexa rating update:, posted by BURKE89 on Apr 13, 2003

I think most of the boards contribute positive ideas, and there is room for all of them. I dont think one is the "best" as many of the ones I visit have some good information.

I do like the fact that Jack is free to post here.

Sad to see that this board has to deal with the asian vs latin vs RW/UW crapola.

Anyways, just a few cents worth from the "other" side.

Squirecam

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Another Alexa rating update:, posted by squirecam on Apr 14, 2003

why isn't Jack allowed to post on RWG?

What transpired to affect this? Perhaps you're privy to such illumination.

Vaughn

[squirecam]

... in response to Squirecam..., posted by BURKE89 on Apr 16, 2003

Let's just say that Jack can be a controversial figure.

I wish he were allowed to post, but thats just the way it is.

As for criticisms of agencies on RWG, they are allowed. I know this, because I allow them. I also start them.

Boards should be for the purpose of exchanging information, not promotion. On that I think most of us will agree.

Squirecam

[Jack]

... in response to Squirecam..., posted by BURKE89 on Apr 16, 2003

I can answer that for you Burke!

It seems that some of the more prominent monthly advertisers for RWG did not like the fact that I was revealing some scams that I had encountered while hand delivering letters to some of the more popular ladies on there website. Strange, several of these beautiful ladies had never lived at the addresses being sold! Or that one of the most beautiful ladies on the European Connections catalog had met a man at one of there socials and this man was so excited to meet her. When she said she did not know him, he showed her several letters that she had written him. She said she never wrote one of those letters. Can you say E-700 scam?? Or hand delivering a letter to a lady who has been in one agencies catalogs numerous times over the past few years only to find that the lady has been married and living in Italy for the last fours years! Or discussing how Mordinson's has the same 4 or 5 ladies who are getting engaged some 2 or 3 times each year, but always back out at the last minute after several months.

See Burke, when you are getting paid advertising bucks each month by these agencies, who in some cases are out right scam agencies and in other cases do some very un-ethical things, they do not appreciate these bad things being discussed, and being able to be proven. Especially if they are paying for only good things to be said about them in hopes of being able to scam more men. I think it's a sad state when the all-mighty dollar is more important than being able to share the truth about scam activities and in essence is helping to led guys to being scammed.

I was well liked by many of the guys on RWG and many used my services, and they still do. I am probably working for some 15 posters over there right now.  I maintained a four star rating even after the likes of the old timers dorfus jb, cameragirl, woodpecker and the LTP losers who couldn't go toe to toe with me gave me there best 1-star ratings and complaints to the owner. How would you like to be a monthly paying scam advertiser and seeing all these good compliments being said about a non-advertising competitor? They didn't and told the owner of the board if you want our monthly dollars, you get rid of this poster.

[BURKE89]

... in response to I can answer that!, posted by Jack on Apr 16, 2003

I've never doubted the fact: you've assisted many men in this quest.Bueno, great... et al.

It's only been methods: period!

I imagine, prior to senility setting in (my own), you've rectified these issues.

Both Patrick & Spencer: are decent individuals. From my limited experience: Patrick is more apt to allow free thought in his forum, than the latter. He (Patrick) cleans the irrevelant spittle... prior to archive entry; while Spencer; has a propensity to 'gut-it' in short-order.

I don't know your enemies, despite the fact - I'll typically stand with a Texan - American; however - I remember... your arguements with the 'Marks.' Jack - IMHO, when MarknTX, mentioned a fair 'logical' point regarding your spat, with the other Mark... Well, you went into full-flung assualt, and I lost the concept of a business-man.

Oh well, I'm not subtle in my business dealings, either.

So....

[Jack]

... in response to Jack..., posted by BURKE89 on Apr 17, 2003

Burke,

I think most everyone here feels like Patrick is more than a decent individual. The time and effort he has put into the Russian, Latin, Asian board is immense and greatly appreciated.

Spencer is also a decent fella, we had a few good communications off the board previously and I was very shocked at his action. Unfortunately I think that his dependency on monthly advertising dollars has effected the ability for many of the posters on RWG to openly criticize suspect or scam actions by the agencies who pay for him to stay in business.

To comment on my argument with MarkH, if you remember, and maybe you don't or weren't here, going back to the very start of this disagreement with MarkH was a short trip to a particular city where there were several ladies lined up and waiting to meet him. On the way to this city MarkH fell for some young hotties in Kiev and blew off going to see the several ladies who were waiting on him in the other city. That was Mark's right to do that just as it was my right to write MarkH and tell him we would continue to support him on his current trip but once we put him on the airplane back home that I did not wish to have any further business dealings with him. End of story. I do not have to, and will not work with such individuals. As it is his right to do as he wish's on his trip, it is also my right to choose the type of sincere clients I want to work with. As I said, that was the end of the story, I would have never brought it up again however a few weeks later Mark was painting a much different story and how disappointed he was with the effort we did for him in Kiev when there was NO effort to be done for him in Kiev, it was all in Dnepropetrovsk where he never went to! So as I eluded to what Paul Harvey says, "the other side of the story", our disagreement and hostilities became apparent. If a certain individual agrees with the actions MarkH took, then I certainly take note of such individual and realize that this is a person whose morals towards Russian women or the pursuit of Russian women do not agree with mine. And Burke, I don't regret anything I did or said with regards to this incidence.

With regards to the other individual you have spoke of I cannot say his name or anything directly to him per a condition Patrick has applied to both of us, which I fully endorse. I will say that I think everyone here realizes when someone has good information to offer and when someone offers information that is more harmful than good. A few individuals here are "clueless", they have no idea as to what they are saying and as such one month will broadcast to the world this is the right way, this is the best way, this is what he recommends and a few months later the same individual will say things that are 180 degrees opposite of previous advice and information given to the point of misquoting facts and statistics that don't exist in an effort to try to prove his newly recommend methods or advice.

[BURKE89]

... in response to Burke, posted by Jack on Apr 17, 2003

Thank you, for being so cordial.

Point is:

I enjoy reading, Dan, Markintx & you - too!

The other 'Mark' is a push - which I thought you could've handled in an better fashion. Why? Because, you appeared correct in substenance - on the issue at hand; yet, you slurr....ed both of them to no end ( I'm a businessman - manufacturing - so, I shudder, at an ounce of 'harm' directed at pontential customers - we have none left).  

I didn't jump on 'Landscaper' nor, will I jump on MarknTx, because, he isn't here.  He's a married 'dewd,' and I'm happy for him!

My thoughts - with regard to you - were of a constructive nature - period!

OK - Texan?

Vaughn

So... tell me more of your connections in Barnaul?

[Dan]

... in response to Another Alexa rating update:, posted by BURKE89 on Apr 13, 2003

That this board is THE *best* board for people seeking information about FSU on the internet - bar none.

- Dan

[Bobby Orr]

... in response to Another Alexa rating update:, posted by BURKE89 on Apr 13, 2003

How do you even look up the ratings anyway??

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Another Alexa rating update:, posted by Bobby Orr on Apr 13, 2003

[This message has been edited by BURKE89]

Odd angles, however; it lists all your personal info.

I can't quite fiquire it out (why most folk spray all their info around the world), but most web-sites owners' are placed in C-block: - addy/#/ & the route to the families' home ( I only mention this, because this isn't the case here).

"... dewd, just learnin' 'bout Cuba &..."

[MarkInTx]

... in response to Another Alexa rating update:, posted by BURKE89 on Apr 13, 2003

Burke89 wrote:

" (small = good - big = bad)"

Wouldn't it be nice if life were that simple...?

Of course, this would also mean that McDonald's makes the best hamburgers, and "Joe Millionaire" was the best TV show on when its finale aired...

As for Internet hits... if small = good, then I am sure there are several porn sites that have even smaller... therefore better ... numbers... Shall we all rush over there, instead?

Sometimes numbers show you nothing more than "ease", or a better placed index in search engines... PL can be read without registering a profile... not so of RWG.

But maybe they are seeking quality rather than quantity?

Just a thought...

Also, interesting bit of trivia... over at RWG, you can post Planet Love's full URL. Here, RWG's URL has been blocked.

Hmmmm.....

[Dan]

... in response to Re: Another Alexa rating update:, posted by MarkInTx on Apr 13, 2003

At RWG - that is.

And life has been ever more pleasant here for some time - owing, perhaps, to seeing less of you.

Seems maybe it's a good 'fit' all around. Whaddya think Mark?

- Dan

[MarkInTx]

... in response to You've Seemed to Find a 'Home' Over Ther..., posted by Dan on Apr 14, 2003

I am so glad that you find this board more "pleasant" now.

Funny thing... I haven't noticed anyone on RWG complaining that their board is boring and useless, as folks on here are regularly lamenting...

Like I said before... if this is the board everyone wants, its fine by me...

[Dan]

... in response to Re: You've Seemed to Find a 'Home' Over ..., posted by MarkInTx on Apr 14, 2003

Hi There Mark,

Mark wrote: "Funny thing... I haven't noticed anyone on RWG complaining that their board is boring and useless, as folks on here are regularly lamenting..."

Another funny thing Mark - I haven't noticed anyone OTHER THAN YOU making comments that this board is "boring and useless."

In fact, it was only a few days ago that someone from another board paid us a visit because there is much more action on this board than his own.

Mark wrote: "I am so glad that you find this board more "pleasant" now."

I, among others, definitely find this board more pleasant in the past few months.

It seems (to me) coincident with your discovery of the RWG and consequent abatement of posting frequency here.

That fact is not lost on me, at least - and I suspect not lost on most who have endured some of the senseless tirades that once plagued the board.

In fairness, I am certain you were not solely responsible for those tirades - but you own the lion's share (IMO).

I hope you enjoy, and are able to make a productive contribution, on the RWG.

- Dan