Prostitution Leeds

Post by **chameleon** » Sat 03 Oct, 2009 9:21 pm

An article in the YEP talks about Harriet Harmans call to have the website reviewing Leeds prostitutes shut down.Written by, Mark Hookham.

Leeds-lad · Post by **Leeds-lad** » Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:33 pm

chameleon wrote: An article in the YEP talks about Harriet Harmans call to have the website reviewing Leeds prostitutes shut down.Written by, Mark Hookham. Good job it wasn't Alf Hookam

Brandy · Post by **Brandy** » Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:57 pm

Leeds-lad wrote: chameleon wrote: An article in the YEP talks about Harriet Harmans call to have the website reviewing Leeds prostitutes shut down.Written by, Mark Hookham. Good job it wasn't Alf Hookam

Post by **chameleon** » Sat 03 Oct, 2009 11:21 pm

Yup, YEP staff strike again - Hookham and

BLAKEY · Post by **BLAKEY** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 9:49 am

[quotenick="Crazy Jane"]This website thing was in the news so i figured i'd look and see what it had to say about Leeds:The moral of this sad tale is plain for all to see - ALWAYS pay by credit card and then the contract is between the Bank and the "Supplier" - your money is safe

Post by **chameleon** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 1:35 pm

We've been keeping an eye on this thread as there is obviously a lot of scope for things to get out of hand!Although there's no reason not to include it as a topic for discussion in general terms, we have to remember that not everyone will appreciate things which might appear which are unacceptable to some and not least, that we know this site is often viewed by young people - I gather it is used by some schools for research into Leeds history.The Grandmothers and children principle has to apply - if you wouldn't want them to see it - don't post it!After discussion on this, a number of moderators feel that actually naming and quoting from the website in question could be offensive to some and is not entirely in keeping with the site ethos.We're sure that there was no malice or offence intended by including these but we feel they should be removed - if anyone wants to view the site - it won't be difficult to find!

Brandy · Post by **Brandy** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 8:13 pm

chameleon wrote: We've been keeping an eye on this thread as there is obviously a lot of scope for things to get out of hand!Although there's no reason not to include it as a topic for discussion in general terms, we have to remember that not everyone will appreciate things which might appear which are unacceptable to some and not least, that we know this site is often viewed by young people - I gather it is used by some schools for research into Leeds history.The Grandmothers and children principle has to apply - if you wouldn't want them to see it - don't post it!After discussion on this, a number of moderators feel that actually naming and quoting from the website in question could be offensive to some and is not entirely in keeping with the site ethos.We're sure that there was no malice or offence intended by including these but we feel they should be removed - if anyone wants to view the site - it won't be difficult to find! SECONDED!

Post by **cnosni** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 8:57 pm

chameleon wrote: We've been keeping an eye on this thread as there is obviously a lot of scope for things to get out of hand!Although there's no reason not to include it as a topic for discussion in general terms, we have to remember that not everyone will appreciate things which might appear which are unacceptable to some and not least, that we know this site is often viewed by young people - I gather it is used by some schools for research into Leeds history.The Grandmothers and children principle has to apply - if you wouldn't want them to see it - don't post it!After discussion on this, a number of moderators feel that actually naming and quoting from the website in question could be offensive to some and is not entirely in keeping with the site ethos.We're sure that there was no malice or offence intended by including these but we feel they should be removed - if anyone wants to view the site - it won't be difficult to find! Agreed,but oh god,fancy some school pupil reading some of my posts,never thought about that!!

Post by **chameleon** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 9:02 pm

cnosni wrote: chameleon wrote: We've been keeping an eye on this thread as there is obviously a lot of scope for things to get out of hand!Although there's no reason not to include it as a topic for discussion in general terms, we have to remember that not everyone will appreciate things which might appear which are unacceptable to some and not least, that we know this site is often viewed by young people - I gather it is used by some schools for research into Leeds history.The Grandmothers and children principle has to apply - if you wouldn't want them to see it - don't post it!After discussion on this, a number of moderators feel that actually naming and quoting from the website in question could be offensive to some and is not entirely in keeping with the site ethos.We're sure that there was no malice or offence intended by including these but we feel they should be removed - if anyone wants to view the site - it won't be difficult to find! Agreed,but oh god,fancy some school pupil reading some of my posts,never thought about that!! Is that a penny I hear dropping? Don't really think you've too much to worry about cnosni

Crazy Jane · Post by **Crazy Jane** » Sun 04 Oct, 2009 9:28 pm

" your money is safe LaughLaugh"But not your marriage if the wife sees your bank statement! No problem with you guys removing the quotes/link, i forget that this website, unlike most of the internets, is family friendly