Monobeauty/bobman/ erobeau.com

[ed9119]

Pinky,

Did you not understand what nightwolf75 said?

You claimed you got screwed..... TOO BAD.... the forum and him are 2 seperate entities and Clubsnap is not liable for his actions ... ...... but if you insist on doing laundry in public and bringing attention to people to be more informed of such situations , please go ahead....

This is better than watching TV.

 

[pinkyg]

I am in no way insinuating that club snap are liable in any way shape of form merely using it as a medium to talk about and resolve a photographic issue... this much money might not mean a lot to you but its the difference between eating and not eating for me

 

[Lomographer]

but this is not a court!

this is a medium for photographic discussion

and not a photographic version of "commercial court"!

please bring your discussions somewhere else

 

[vince123123]

I do agree that CS is not liable for nor responsible for the actions of its users. I don't think the TS really intended any "judicial decision" or the like to be made here as well. What I think she may have intended (and I would have if I were her), is having exhausted private remedies and communications without success, she is now airing it in the open with the hope of bringing pressure to bear on the other party to resolve it.

It is no different from Singaporeans writing to the ST Forum to air their views where certain companies or regulatory authories do not seem to be doing their job, giving them the run around or ignoring them. Hence I think we do not have to be so quick to shut her down at this point in time.

CS, having a better reach to the interested public (compared to the ST for example); because the people here are likely to have a greater intrest and relevance to this topic; has therefore become a better choice of forum for airing such views.

These are of course just my humble views.

 

[pommie]

I do agree that CS is not liable for nor responsible for the actions of its users. I don't think the TS really intended any "judicial decision" or the like to be made here as well. What I think she may have intended (and I would have if I were her), is having exhausted private remedies and communications without success, she is now airing it in the open with the hope of bringing pressure to bear on the other party to resolve it.

It is no different from Singaporeans writing to the ST Forum to air their views where certain companies or regulatory authories do not seem to be doing their job, giving them the run around or ignoring them. Hence I think we do not have to be so quick to shut her down at this point in time.

CS, having a better reach to the interested public (compared to the ST for example); because the people here are likely to have a greater intrest and relevance to this topic; has therefore become a better choice of forum for airing such views.

These are of course just my humble views.

Totally agree with the above.

 

[Simon]

This is the only Reason why we allow this Thread to be continue.

For those who have not engage with the Accuse or TS before, and are not able to provide the TS relevant assistant, try not to get involve.

I do agree that CS is not liable for nor responsible for the actions of its users. I don't think the TS really intended any "judicial decision" or the like to be made here as well. What I think she may have intended (and I would have if I were her), is having exhausted private remedies and communications without success, she is now airing it in the open with the hope of bringing pressure to bear on the other party to resolve it.

It is no different from Singaporeans writing to the ST Forum to air their views where certain companies or regulatory authories do not seem to be doing their job, giving them the run around or ignoring them. Hence I think we do not have to be so quick to shut her down at this point in time.

CS, having a better reach to the interested public (compared to the ST for example); because the people here are likely to have a greater intrest and relevance to this topic; has therefore become a better choice of forum for airing such views.

These are of course just my humble views.

 

[vince123123]

:thumbsup::thumbsup: for you

This is the only Reason why we allow this Thread to be continue.

For those who have not engage with the Accuse or TS before, and are not able to provide the TS relevant assistant, try not to get involve.

 

[ed9119]

Understood Simon :bsmilie: .... tis my last post in this thread !

Thank God I just got home and thread not locked ... yet !

Last year read about the Tiger mauling a man to death at the zoo... at least now I get to watch another mauling Live online here at CS !

 

[EroBeau]

Miss GEMMA JANSSENSWILLEN is flying on:

Flights Monday 29 June
Check in opens Mon 29 Jun 14:45
Closes Mon 29 Jun 16:05 Toulouse To Bristol
flight 6140; dep. Mon 29 Jun 16:45
arr. Mon 29 Jun 17:30

Airline booking number: NZHFLF
Passenger: GEMMAROSE Janssenswillen
London Heathrow Apt (LHR) To Paris Charles de Gaulle Apt (CDG)
Airline: AIR FRANCE (AF)
Flight Number: AF 1681
Departure Terminal: 2
Class: Economy
Departing: 18:00 Wed 1 Jul 2009
Arriving: 20:10 Wed 1 Jul 2009

Like that also can claim? Front and Back? If those dunno head or tails, please don't play GOD.

Vince has an interesting view for those who cannot solve private matters due to their mistakes can come here to air their views and hopefully can gain some sympathy and get supported.

By the way, Bobman and MonoBeauty were giving permission to use by someone long time ago and if you said a photo with website stated means redirection of website, then I have nothing to say.

GHS, sorry for messing up your webby....

This will be my last post.

 

[vince123123]

Please don't distort what I said; go read again carefully if you didn't get it the first time.

Vince has an interesting view for those who cannot solve private matters due to their mistakes can come here to air their views and hopefully can gain some sympathy and get supported.

 

[ricohflex]

Tell you what a scammer fears most.

Being EXPOSED.

Not because the scammer cares about reputation or personal honour.
The real reason is because it is more difficult to scam other people again after that.

 

[Lomographer]

Tell you what a scammer fears most.

Being EXPOSED.

Not because the scammer cares about reputation or personal honour.
The real reason is because it is more difficult to scam other people again after that.

well said:thumbsup:

but this is still between them, so we don't really know who's right or wrong

but from a 3rd party point of view, this statement is very true

 

[zaren]

dear gemma and bob,

do hope you guys can reach an amicable settlement over this unfortunate incident.

bob, no one can force you to pay gemma the 200 quid that she is claiming, but if you had previously agreed to pay half of her taxi fare/transfers to and from the airport, and if you had previously agreed to pay her to cut short her stay in France, then perhaps you could consider making a counter-offer to pay her an amount that you think is reasonable. after all, i am sure you would like to have a long-term business relationship with gemma to introduce more models from the UK for your model shoots here.

gemma, short of claiming the 200 quid from bob through the small claims tribunal here in singapore, there is not much more you can do to force bob to pay you apart from scolding and shaming him in public. you have thus far remained silent about your marketing manager and whether she ok'd or checked bob's booking of your flights, as he alleged. without any conclusive evidence in that regard, it would be difficult to claim the full amount for any mistakes made in the booking. bob has since asked you to recommend models for him (the temerity of it all!), why not make it a pre-condition that he settles the outstanding amount (or a smaller sum, to be mutually agreed) first before helping him out in the future?

then we can all put this unpleasant episode behind us, clear the air, and go back to making money and enjoying our photography.

cheers.

 

[Lomographer]

dear gemma and bob,

do hope you guys can reach an amicable settlement over this unfortunate incident.

bob, no one can force you to pay gemma the 200 quid that she is claiming, but if you had previously agreed to pay half of her taxi fare/transfers to and from the airport, and if you had previously agreed to pay her to cut short her stay in France, then perhaps you could consider making a counter-offer to pay her an amount that you think is reasonable. after all, i am sure you would like to have a long-term business relationship with gemma to introduce more models from the UK for your model shoots here.

gemma, short of claiming the 200 quid from bob through the small claims tribunal here in singapore, there is not much more you can do to force bob to pay you apart from scolding and shaming him in public. you have thus far remained silent about your marketing manager and whether she ok'd or checked bob's booking of your flights, as he alleged. without any conclusive evidence in that regard, it would be difficult to claim the full amount for any mistakes made in the booking. bob has since asked you to recommend models for him (the temerity of it all!), why not make it a pre-condition that he settles the outstanding amount (or a smaller sum, to be mutually agreed) first before helping him out in the future?

then we can all put this unpleasant episode behind us, clear the air, and go back to making money and enjoying our photography.

cheers.

well, zaren has said it all

it's up to you two to resolve the matter

i think it's been dragging for long enough

well said, zaren :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[night86mare]

in any case, bobman/monobeauty/watever his previous reincarnations were banned (and re-banned after his clones appeared.. on that alone, we have reasons to ban him for having clones) because he was found to be (a)organising nude shoots on the sly (when we have banned them), and (b) re-directing traffic to his own website for shoots after we de-reg him. probably, he will, once again, be ushered out of here once sufficient time has been given to clear the air with whichever aggrieved parties.

since i have been here, i have seen at least 5 threads on such issues related to the abovementioned member and his reincarnations/clones/whatever. probably more, i am really being conservative about this number.

i agree that there is nothing to be done with regards to what members do in their free time, but if trouble is caused consistently by the same person, and it involves money, which means that it happens to be slightly more serious than the usual petty spat.. this should be taken more seriously than the norm, i.e. perhaps the ushering out of clubsnap might be done in a more permanent basis because the leopard might have been given chances to change his spots, but the spots still remain and emerge time and time again.

just my feelings, last post on this matter.

 

[grainpixel]

As Bob has repeatedly insist that he is willing to pay the transportation charges, if the model can produce the receipts. I just wonder, why is a MAN cum photographer/organiser/employer so anal about the receipts.

You have also asked the question if we(as an employer) will pay our staffs if they cannot produce the receipts for claims, etc?

I think it is all a matter of intergrity.

For eg, if a staff takes a cab from changi airport to my office in jurong, and lost the receipt of S$30. I will still reimburse him/her as the amount claimed is within the reasonable amount.

I have travelled in Europe a couple of times, and the amount stated by the model for 200 euros seems reasonable for the number of transfers to get home.

If you have already promised to return 1/2 of the costs, why dont you just return it whether she can produce the receipts or not, since the claims are within the reasonable amount.

I am just stating what I will do if I am in your shoes.

 

[night86mare]

on that last post i made, i just noticed this post made by darren, in that particular thread it seems as if there is also similar post made since nov 2008.

i quote darren:

Please note that any Organiser conducting such shoots in secret will be deregistered and their subscription will be forfeited.

Attempts to re-register and/or to re-subscribe to ClubSNAP as a Shoot Organiser will result in similiar deregistration and forfeiture of subscription(s) paids.

We need not remind members of the scrutiny that ClubSNAP has been subject to in the past with the connotations of such shoots (and more so that they are conducted in a clandestine manner), and we do not want our members' (and by association, ClubSNAP community) image and reputation to be tarnished.

based on that, and mod's post:

in any case, bobman/monobeauty/watever his previous reincarnations were banned (and re-banned after his clones appeared.. on that alone, we have reasons to ban him for having clones) because he was found to be (a)organising nude shoots on the sly (when we have banned them), and (b) re-directing traffic to his own website for shoots after we de-reg him. probably, he will, once again, be ushered out of here once sufficient time has been given to clear the air with whichever aggrieved parties.

why was he allowed to re-register, despite the statements made in red?

 

[pinkyg]

Bob look below that and you will see the charges..... YOU were given the receipt for the national express - you lost it! I have replaced others I lost but that one was the only copy although details could be pulled from a credit card.... We had made an agreement to work together, but obviously I can't risk sending my models out to a man who has proven unprofessional, untrustworthy and a liar.....
The receipts have been sent to Bob direct but he continues to ignor my mails and calls - THIS is the only place he feels accountable - you can see from the uploads I'm not lying so I think at this point it is clear.

 

[bakuteh]

--- you called me silly and stupid for booking the wrong flight etc etc. why don't your marketing manager or you pointed that mistake to me before i booked the ticket? she could have told me and said it was wrong but instead she asked me to go ahead to book it. you even double checked the ticket and even accepted it. it is your responsibility, you could have rejected it but you took it conveniently. our agreement is i m responsible for you flight from london to singapore and back to london......

Dear Organizer in question,

Irresponsible behavior and not admitting your mistakes? If you can blame people for not doublechecking, why didn't you doublecheck first when you booked for her? If a traveling agency gives you Singapore-KL, KL-Johor train tickets instead of Singapore-KL, KL-Singapore tickets, would you accept it if they blame you for not checking?

 

[nightwolf75]

on that last post i made, i just noticed this post made by darren, in that particular thread it seems as if there is also similar post made since nov 2008.

i quote darren:



based on that, and mod's post:



why was he allowed to re-register, despite the statements made in red?

he was found to be using his new nicks' signature function and hotlinking his images to his own forum where he was organising shoots after our Admins made the decision to ban nude shoots after the unsavoury incident with TNP and 2 CSers here. monobeauty, IIRC, was originally given permission by Admins to bobman as a separate identity to organise his shoots. we are notified by CSers actually.

IIRC too, he was requested to remove links to his own forum/website where he is redirecting traffic so that he can organise his own shoots (bypassing both the ban and the need to sign up as an organiser). most recently, using this account, his images had hotlinkings to his site, again. i believe it was cheesecake who removed them, since CC is i/c for the picture sub-forums. his original accounts were banned and rebanned (cannot remember his prior nick to erobeau.. too many liao) because of this non-compliance. he is, however, not banned because of his... past history of such kind as found in this thread since we are not, and cannot be, policeman.

whether a banned CSer is allowed back, that is the perogative of our Admins, not the mods, despite what you might like to think. if they are allowed back (as some banned CSers have), that is up to the Admins too. and yes, Admins do know when some banned CSers come back quietly.

as to his latest re-incarnation here...as Simon nicely hinted, there is a reason why it is allowed... for the time being.

anyway, the thread is not about his reincarnations. lemme repeat one more time - this is a private dispute, hence it is not for us to intervene. those that are not involved, kindly leave this thread alone.