On a more serious note ladies my banned

So, a day later, what do we know?

According to Joy (who claims to have posted based on Veronica's electronic records):

"Veronica wanted to help and protect a client who was being blackmailed by Sharon"
"Veronica only asked for certain info on the girls forum to protect her client legally."
"Shakira in boxed Veronica saying that Sharon and her go to the same bar and that she might be able to ask around and maybe get the relevant info."

Of course, Joy should perhaps let us know what that "certain info" requested was...

What is clear, then, is that Shakira acted to protect a client of Veronica's.

What happened at the restaurant is disputed. We have the account of Sharon, who has been banned by ESA for actions against the interests (to put it mildly) of punters, and we have the account of Shakira, who we now know was acting to help protect a punter (or maybe more than one: I see that at least one reviewer overlaps with both ladies).

Shakira was subsequently banned. When I asked ESA privately, the only reasons given were:

"Shakira has been with us for many years and in those years there has been a lot conflict,racism and arguments. We have been more than fair towards her. Its not in our interest to banned any advertiser, but when it become to much it is just not worth it. "


Of course, since her return to ESA from a previous banning, the charge of racism is demonstrably false:

www.esa.co.za/forum/thread.php

which leads one to think that Antionette's other given reasons are equally suspect.

Some other posters have speculated on what ESA's reasons might be. One of the more popular lines of reasoning is that a public scene could result in attention being focused on ESA, getting the police involved and putting users of this site at risk.

This just doesn't hold water. Google "Escorts+South Africa" and ESA is the first non-advert search return. To think that the police are not aware of the site takes a tremendous stretch of credulity! Now say Sharon had gone to the police, she would open herself up to possible criminal charges herself, and that threat was always hollow, especially if Shakira's version of events is correct. And as for reputational risk, if one Googles "Sean + Sexpo", we see a person who has carried a far higher risk of turning a media/police spotlight on ESA, through associations with the tangled web of alleged criminal associations of Lolly and Glen (forgive me SeanSexpo if this is not you; I just thought the coincidence too great for it not to be...)

Shakira's restaurant "exploits" seem unlikely to carry much risk for those of us who use this site, if any.

The other popular trope is, "well, she must have done something wrong." Which would be fair if what that was were made clear, so that both advertisers and clients know what the boundaries are. As it stands, no light has been shed.

Because Shakira was acting altruistically in the interest of clients here, I still believe she should be given a "probation" rather than a banning.

When we have had advertisers steal from a client and lie about it on the open forum (like the 'leaving the industry, anal virgin auction' Stacey www.esa.co.za/forum/thread.php ), and yet still be allowed to advertise here, I don't think my request is at all unreasonable.

Let's hope the video turns up as definitive proof...

@kickass your double bells with Paige ain't gonna happen buddy.
She doesn't do charous.

Lol

On 2017-07-26 15:03:59 Khiladi1 said:
Is Veronica Franco also banned?

she is banned from posting on the forum,but her ad is up feel free to visit her office

On 2017-07-27 01:57:20 Melina said:
On a more serious note ladies my banned

oops fell asleep while typing this post. It doesn't make any sense.

What I wanted to say was I find it strange that people who had such a serious allegation made against them was banned especially since we all know this was all bolox

@Melina You're right, it is strange. To remind everyone, here is the letter ESA support received:

"Good afternoon,
Ive been informed by Shakira that I have a hit on my life from esa and that Veronica informed everyone to look out for my whereabouts. I was shown the gun I will be shot with and that Antionette has apparently told them to go ahead.
I have requested a refund that has still not been paid and I was informed that it wont be paid back to me because a client paid me R60 000.
Please let me know as I will be going to the police to open a case of intimidation and that a hit is placed on my life.
A whole restaurant of people saw and heard this and was also captured on camera.
Shakira has been banned from the restaurant as she made a scene and showed her gun to me so management had to take action. Staff were given panic buttons due to fear of shots that could be fired.
Peoples lives were put in danger due to a death threat on my life enforced by esa, veronica, Antoinette and Shakira.
Please advise urgent"

Now her threat is to go to the police and file intimidation charges and (I suppose) conspiracy to commit murder charges. To do so, she would open herself up to some investigation of the circumstances, and that would be pretty damning, especially as she even admits in the message that she had been paid R60,000 by a client. But Shakira is not an ESA employee, so there is no connection to ESA. At worst, if she had gone through with the threat to go to the police, ESA management had only to say that Shakira doesn't work for them, and they have never considered taking any extra-legal action against Sharon, and there is absolutely no basis for the allegation against ESA or Antionette.

Simple

The next step would be to call in Veronica and Shakira and tell them that, although they sympathize with trying to protect clients, using the advertisers' forum to try and elicit information and confronting people in public places is simply asking for trouble, both for them and for ESA's reputation.

And that's even if you don't believe Shakira's version of the events at the restaurant, and choose to believe Sharon (but why would you?).

I guess I'm getting old: in an earlier age of the forum, Shakira and Veronica would have been celebrated as heroines for looking after their clients.

Dear Gary... We need more men like you to help us fight our battles... I have so much respect for you. Thank you

On 2017-07-26 22:35:55 Khiladi1 said:
On 2017-07-26 22:07:23 DIRECTORSSS said: On 2017-07-26 12:32:38 Tanya said:
Well said Sean...Veronica was not banned from advertising as she had nothing to do with the alleged restaurant incident. However she has been banned from posting on the forum and answering pm's, due to some complaints...

Complaints?? WTF??

Who complained? Ok...I don't really want to know. A HUGE high five to the "complainants" (obviously missing their hands and giving them a p..sklap teen die kop). Now the forum is BORING and it is all YOUR faults! Nice going...you fucked it up for the rest of us.

Mini



I feel the same way. Only two punters had issues with Veronica and true to form they complained, which makes me wonder why or how these two punters have so much power to get ESA admin to bow down to them.

Hey I had an issue with her but I never complained nor did I ever send pm etc. I always tackled them head on. Was told by admin to simmer down so that's what I did. Don't go starting something that's not true. Get ur facts first.

@ Gary the last time I responded to your post Arhwen was banned from posting so it's best I sit quietly in my naughty corner like the good girl that I am :)

I would just like to say that I do Empathise with Veronica.

I feel for these two ladies hey they both sexy and upfront

They both make me to just want to cum