Comments:[Add New]
November 26th, 2007 at 12:11:24  From: shieldvulf at playful
Raw is quoting the GENERIC explanation
I've looked over the report at the L.A. area BBB website. Raw is quoting their catch-all explanation of an "F" rating. The specifics in the Suicide Girls profile list only two complaints out of 10 total were not responded to. And that only means the BBB didn't get a response to those two. Maybe the complainants did? I'm not here to defend Suicide Girls (as if they needed my defense!), but only to remark that, given the lack of meet, Raw ought to tell us why they think this is a story. I suspect this is a thin and premature posting on a usually substantive site.
November 26th, 2007 at 15:25:40  From: deckard68
A more substantive article could be written about their unjust lawsuit against their most acclaimed photographer, Phillip Warner -- http://www.lithiumpicnic.com Sean Suhl, the man who owns Suicide Girls, has said "nothing cleanses the soul more than disproportionate retribution" and seems intent to bankrupt Warner before the case makes it to trial, by adding dubious charges and not attending mediation. The crux of the upcoming hearing is that Warner's contact allowed him to shoot for single girl sites, such as that of his own wife (the model Apnea). Then they sued him for doing so. Suicide Girls is a vicious corporation.
Add Comment:
Name:
Location:
Subject:
Message:
Verification Code
Verification Code: