Noldus Posted January 18 Author Posted January 18 16 minutes ago, StnCld316 said: That means of a good probability they will not be back. That probably only applies to the clean-shaven guy. But the reason they removed the replay is probably something else, since we can still see the guy there 1 1
Maxbell Posted January 18 Posted January 18 1 hour ago, StnCld316 said: That means of a good probability they will not be back. The one guy had been there before, getting busy with Gelia, but stopped before his clothes were off. It was suspected that maybe the cameras made him shy. I’m not sure if he knew they were there or not. 🤷♂️
StnCld316 Posted January 18 Posted January 18 4 minutes ago, Maxbell said: The one guy had been there before, getting busy with Gelia, but stopped before his clothes were off. It was suspected that maybe the cameras made him shy. I’m not sure if he knew they were there or not. 🤷♂️ Tenants should let their guests know about the camera before they even step onto the property. It becomes a liability for RLC when tenants don’t follow the proper procedures due to legal repercussions. 2
NoOneSpecial Posted January 18 Posted January 18 33 minutes ago, StnCld316 said: Tenants should let their guests know about the camera before they even step onto the property. It becomes a liability for RLC when tenants don’t follow the proper procedures due to legal repercussions. You'd think some sort of acknowledgement or release would have to be on file. 1
ddhm Posted January 18 Posted January 18 8 hours ago, Maxbell said: So, if they were about to have sex, and the cameras went black, someone would have commented. ‘if they had sex, and cameras were on, there would have been lots of comments, even though they replay was deleted later. ‘We might be saying the same thing. I can’t really tell as I didn’t watch . For sure , if sex had happened , it would have been mentioned ( or kisses or foreplay , whatever minor ) . But again , I am surprised that nearly 7 hours of recording was deleted only to be able in the end and see the guy( s) faces - in case one of them or maybe both asked that they are deleted - . 1
Pete1960 Posted January 18 Posted January 18 On 1/18/2026 at 4:19 AM, Maxbell said: Technically speaking we don’t know they did. If you look back about 4 pages, ddhm gave his thoughts on it that are fairly plausible. If something did happen they obviously didn’t ban her from their properties. lol. ‘From the Vewers point of view she brought more to the table than many of the girls and I kinda of like her eccentricities We are on page 2
Maxbell Posted January 18 Posted January 18 42 minutes ago, Pete1960 said: We are on page 2 lol, it was page 1 when I said that. 😁
Brit Guy Posted January 18 Posted January 18 Just now, Maxbell said: lol, it was page 1 when I said that. 😁 It's called nitpicking.
Pete1960 Posted January 19 Posted January 19 4 hours ago, Brit Guy said: It's called nitpicking. Yes you are 1
Brit Guy Posted January 19 Posted January 19 8 hours ago, Pete1960 said: Yes you are You actually said something without being unkind 😆
Maxbell Posted January 19 Posted January 19 Is Annette moving in? She looks like she is taking over part of the closet 1
Recommended Posts