will the Boilerhouse get closed down?

john_reilly74

Pretty shocking stuff. In the comments section of www.squirt.org staff threw a young man naked out into the lane at 6am and then threw his clothes out after him. If this makes the papers they could be in trouble.

Killer Pigeon

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Pretty shocking stuff. In the comments section of www.squirt.org staff threw a young man naked out into the lane at 6am and then threw his clothes out after him. If this makes the papers they could be in trouble.

I hope so. Such places don't paint the nicest image of the gay community, in my opinion. But then again, who am I to judge.

Neither do websites like the one you mention above as they promote sex in public places, which I understand to be illegal in most jurisdictions for very good reasons.

These places, in my honest opinion, encourage all the negative stigma which hinders the normalisation process of homosexuality. After homosexuality is normalised, gay men will feel more comfortable to come out and meet other gay men in a safe, clean and more sociable environment.

floggg

I really think you need something more reliable than the comments section of a cruising website (which was probably posted anonymously) to close down a business. Journalists are (in theory) at least meant to verify facts before running anything.

foggy_lad

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Pretty shocking stuff. In the comments section of www.squirt.org staff threw a young man naked out into the lane at 6am and then threw his clothes out after him. If this makes the papers they could be in trouble.

The "young man" was probably safer thrown naked onto the street at 6am than being left in that seedy place:)

brokenice

foggy_lad wrote: »

The "young man" was probably safer thrown naked onto the street at 6am than being left in that seedy place:)

Brilliant!:pac:

Norderburse

It seems fairly clear from the comments on that site, which you have posted in another thread here, that there is a user with a vendetta against the BH and little else to do but try and stir-up trouble. If you like the BH, go. If you don't like it, don't. Simples.

floggg

Perhaps said user with a vendetta is also here too...

john_reilly74

floggg wrote:

Perhaps said user with a vendetta is also here too...

if the suggestion being that i'm someone with a vendetta then it's a categoric "no". Thread got created in the public's interest

foggy_lad

john_reilly74 wrote: »

if the suggestion being that i'm someone with a vendetta then it's a categoric "no". Thread got created in the public's interest

I've no vendetta but have not been in there in years, last time it was a seedy place where lockers were rifled through and rent boys got in free due to having friends working there. Not a well run establishment and I doubt much has changed.

oisindoyle

foggy_lad wrote: »

I've no vendetta but have not been in there in years, last time it was a seedy place where lockers were rifled through and rent boys got in free due to having friends working there. Not a well run establishment and I doubt much has changed.

Cant see how lockers were "rifled through" ,you have the key to your locker,Was your locker "rifled through" did you report it if it was?
how do u know they were rent boys ? most establishments be they bars/clubs/parties ect the owners or workers of the place will let their friends in free.

floggg

john_reilly74 wrote: »

if the suggestion being that i'm someone with a vendetta then it's a categoric "no". Thread got created in the public's interest

A public interest piece would point to the more obvious risks like stds and hygiene, not repeatedly post about annonymous comments from another website about an unwitnesses (by anybody here) incident.

If you weren't there to see the incident (and both sides of it at that) then its not really appropriate to repeat an unsubstantiated story across public forums. I'm sure the place has its many faults but it still has a right not to have its name unjustifiably through the mud.

I'm assuming you weren't there BTW as you site the comments section on squirt as your source.

foggy_lad

oisindoyle wrote: »

Cant see how lockers were "rifled through" ,you have the key to your locker,Was your locker "rifled through" did you report it if it was?
how do u know they were rent boys ? most establishments be they bars/clubs/parties ect the owners or workers of the place will let their friends in free.

Several lockers that had been locked were found to be opened and the clothes inside we're stuffed in the locker as if they had been searched, those who I am calling rent boys were known to be straight and engaging in sex for payment not just in there but they were also known in the George and barred for bringing people down to the toilets for sex then robbing them.

As I said I have only been in the place a couple of times after being dragged in by someone else, I understand that places like this provide a much needed place for many people to meet for sex etc who because they are straight married/in a relationship or just not out can't do things in the normal way.

john_reilly74

floggg wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

if the suggestion being that i'm someone with a vendetta then it's a categoric "no". Thread got created in the public's interest

A public interest piece would point to the more obvious risks like stds and hygiene, not repeatedly post about annonymous comments from another website about an unwitnesses (by anybody here) incident.

If you weren't there to see the incident (and both sides of it at that) then its not really appropriate to repeat an unsubstantiated story across public forums. I'm sure the place has its many faults but it still has a right not to have its name unjustifiably through the mud.

I'm assuming you weren't there BTW as you site the comments section on squirt as your source.

The premise of any thread on this forum lies in it being a newsworthy item. Had I repeated the story without providing evidence, most people would deem it merely hearsay, however i provided a source and furthermore directed it to a GLTB audience some of whom may use this establishment. They have a right to know (I'm annoyed that too few things get leaked) while you have no right to censor anyone.

floggg

Sorry, but a copy and paste of anonymous comments is not evidence, and you'll find what you have posted veryuch fells within the ambit if hearsay.

Can you honestly say that you know whether the comments referred to are accurate, a d can rule out thr possibility of them having been maliciously posted?

Nobody has anyway of knowing whether it actually happened or not. It could be a fake account set up by a prankster or a disgruntled ex-employee.

So it's not censorship to say you shouldn't be posting unsubstantiated allegations on public forums.

baby and crumble

Guys, I take everyone's perspective into account, but I think I'm going to close this thread for the reasons outlined above. Right now, these are nothing but rumours, and it's not fair to have such discussions in a public forum, with 'proof' that only comes from another forum. I don't at all think that if what is being said is true that it should be kept quiet at all, but the fact of the matter is right now nobody who saw this happen has come along to say so, nor have I heard about the incident in any media outlet to date. If that happens I will open this thread up again.

Any problems, feel free to PM me or one of the other mods.