(21-07-2015 00:46 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe the producers just wanted easy sex and quick cash, and didn't intend to stay on for longer? 
Your claims couldn't be further from the truth. There was a strict 'no fraternisation' rule in place at Sin TV and any breach of the rule carried a punishment of instant dismissal.
As for not staying on for longer, the owners expected to lose money in the short term, just not as much as they did. Their long term plan was to eventually acquire more channels.
(23-07-2015 23:31 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ]<snips mindless drivel>
Your every utterance on this forum just underlines your complete disconnect from the real world. It's like you live in a bubble. Have you ever actually interacted with a fellow human being? You clearly have no idea about business, how TV studios run, how males and females relate. No matter what people tell you, and no matter what facts are presented, you just dismiss them. It's bizarre.
As for your suggestion that people went to all the trouble of setting up Sin TV in order to have some easy sex with those models/prostitutes (in your eyes) and earn some quick cash is so ludicrous it's not even funny, it's pathetic.
Get some help.
(23-07-2015 23:31 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ]^Haha. See, now that's a nice constructive response from you!
Hard to say what regular is...
mrmann, I have a hypothetical question.
If someone else were to have seen all the examples of these activities that you say has given you this view of what goes on at the channels... for how many of these examples
might this second person come to a different interpretation of what was happening in each case do you think?
I think you have to strike a balance here.
There have been some well documented cases (in one case just a couple of months ago) where things have happened on camera in plain sight. What we don't know is how prevelant that becomes off camera; I'm pretty sure that every break the girls don't get fucked - if they did you have to be slightly intimidated
The production crew are by and large young blokes starting their media careers so I assume may be moderately attractive to the ladies
. Lots of relationships happen at work (met my wife at work) but for most of us the working day doesn't include naked ladies talking filth (sadly).
So I suspect things do happen off camera but perhaps not as often as some would assume.
A number of girls escort; some openly, others less so. I've met both types. As a percentage, don't know what that equates to. What I would say is that being an escort doesn't mean they will fuck the production team. On the contrary most escorts are keenly aware of their "value" and wouldn't just sleep with anyone; oddly a number of ladies that escort are almost puritanical in their view towards one night stands and mentally seperate Escorting from their personal sexual activities.
So that's me sat firmly on the fence between Mrmann and the rest of you
^The obvious case I can think of is Ruby summers.
Use to be registered on this forum and use to watch the channels, regarding sintv can someone just give the story on what went down with this channel and why they were taken off air??
^ Why don't you just read the thread?
It appears that Sin TV have a studio in place for the relaunch - at least that's the information filtering through to the girls.
(25-07-2015 12:25 )bigglesworth Wrote: [ -> ]It appears that Sin TV have a studio in place for the relaunch - at least that's the information filtering through to the girls.
Indeed. There was a tweet to that effect published in these pages a week ago.
Maybe they think that all those girls they have screwed (financially that is) will come flooding back. Or maybe they also believe that fairies live in the bottom of the garden.
But they have got little to no chance to recruit or restart if their outstanding liabilities are not met, and in full, before that launch. Who would be daft enough to work there if they are still owed money with the faint promise of getting it sometime in the future ?
