r__d

Gee, sounds grim. Barb's used to be fairly busy on many Thursday and Friday afternoons. Difficult to get a sense of any overall trend at 340. Reports seem to swing between quiet and active, although the active times seem more likely to be in the evening. Poor Dennis.

But not that old, I'm sure.

Was never crazy about the 'grand staircase' layout at the 'Fax. Much prefer the easier access at Barb's or the 'Mate.

Remember this as well. There came a point when I began to avoid going to Barb's on Friday/Saturday nights because on many of those busy nights one simply could not leave one's seat for any reason without losing your table.

I'm wondering if some of us (and I'm definitely including myself here) just have a kind of nostalgia for 340 having attended so very many times over the years (indeed decades!) and as a result may have become less than completely objective in our preferences. Certainly H&K has a number of valid reasons (to him - and that's what matters) for his continued patronage of Barb's and careful readers of this forum will be aware that this gent also attends and opines regarding some of the other clubs discussed here. While I don't mean to be a defender of Barb's without reservation, I think it's fair to say that many, if not all, of the posters to this thread have not been altogether immune to the venue's charms as recently as late last year. Those who are concerned about some of the issues ("smile...you're on candid camera") raised more recently in other threads of course are entitled to their own preferences and choices. A number of us have noticed the slow deterioration of certain aspects of the 'decor' at 340 and I've certainly wondered if this is related to (to return to the initial topic of this thread) the eventual closing of the club. It's always difficult to watch an old friend go downhill. Suppose I really should have attended more recently before making this post, but I'm not sure my view would be much different. To be fair, my own outlook may well have been rose-tinted regarding this club as a result of my interest in an ATF dancer there. The anticipation of seeing a long-time fave may have compensated for a multitude of sins in the eyes of a bedazzled beholder. But now I'm succumbing to that nostagia again.

Indeed. Reminds me of the famous Gold Club case in, I think, Atlanta.

Can any regular (or less than regular) visitors to Barb's report on Brandy's attendance (or otherwise) at 340? I've read reports of her being seen at the 'Mate recently, so I'm a bit unsure where it would be best to look for her. Perhaps she frequents both venues.

Agree strongly that Adora "did look good". The black outfit (short dress) really complimented her jet black (with one light streak) very long hair and she was stunning in and out of it. I might be wrong, but I think the ebony dancer with the very blonde look was known as Sarah at Barb's, where I saw her before she changed hair colour, but I think she went blonde before leaving Barb's. Or these are two different ladies - it's been a while since I saw her at 340. Incidentally, another ebony dancer told me she was formerly at Barb's.

Dropped by the 'Mate Thursday (5/11) afternoon (from about 1:00 - 2:30 or so) and found the typical atmosphere for this venue. Not really very busy, but not completely dead either. As always, noticed Candy and another regular who often wears a very short, pink dress (daytime Ashley, I think). These two ladies are almost always present on afternoons at the Playmate. Julianna and two ebony dancers were also on the floor. Also noticed another ebony lady, a former Barb's dancer I think (Sarah?), but now with a startling blonde 'do. Adora graced the stage and then provided her usual friendly CR experience. For all the Adora fans, she'll be gone for a bit starting next Thursday, I think. Adora was not very busy today, so any of her fans would have had plenty of opportunity to engage with this busty lady. (While she was onstage, Adora's facial expressions kept reminding me of a similar dark-haired vixen, but one with much shorter hair and it's been bugging me a bit all afternoon that I can't figure out this resemblance.)

Regarding the cameras in the CR, my own guess is that their use as security aids or to settle disagreements has likely been quite limited, although there may have been some occasions when they were helpful. Only a guess, though. Another possibility is that management sees them as a useful way of ensuring that the behaviour of dancers (and clubgoers) remains within the bounds of acceptability according to management's prescriptions, or at least that the threat of possible reprisal for transgressions may act to temper CR activity.

This is certainly a possibilty in terms of the dancer's perception of "group dynamics", although I've often wondered if dancers are reluctant to approach a group of clubgoers at a table on the basis that (unless she knows the group or someone in it) lone clubgoers are more likely to be attending with the avowed intention of participating in CR visits versus the sense that a group may be just out to drink, watch the game and enjoy the atmosphere - i.e. the stage show and the lovely ladies on the floor. It may be that dancers see singletons as a better prospect for CR time. Perhaps "group tables" should try to express interest in a particular dancer to give her a sense of being invited.

However your views may differ from those of the OP or the "majority" of those responding to the poll, I'm not sure that any of the posts in the thread expressed demands for rules requiring anything, leave alone the suggestion that patrons "own" dancers, even as one understands that the verb "own" is used here in a rhetorical sense. Use of the term "undertone" (in the context of discerning a whiff of "male entitlement") suggests that this is less than explicit in the posts and may not fairly characterize the attitudes of all (or even most) posters. However, it may be true that certain expectations have been built up over time and many clubgoers will be far from immune to such expectations, thus leading to a certain disappointment or uncertainty when things appear to be changing and the expected experience differs from that of the past. In general, I would think that "demands" and "policy"-making would be the prerogative of management (within the bounds of reason - which could provide controversy for some i.e. what is reasonable?), although management (at any business) would be well advised to consider the effects of any hard-and-fast policy on the attitudes of clientele.

My vote goes to Barbarella's, but I'd rank BareFax as a close second. Certainly understand that many are less than thrilled with certain aspects of the CR at Barb's, but as has been discussed in the 'Barb's' thread, this is less of an issue at times when things are not especially busy in the club/CR. Everyone will have his (or her) own reasons for preferring one over another, but I have always liked the overall layout of Barb's with the club seeming not too small for comfort, but not overwhelmingly large, either. Have never been entirely comfortable with the 'grand staircase', 'stairway to heaven' feel ascending (and descending) from the CR area at the 'Fax - and can remember a time when there was a limited amount of CR space on the main floor but that was some time ago. Perhaps I should note that it's been a number of years since I've been in either of these clubs at night, so my ranking is based on day visits. The 'Mate deserves mention for its very casual (during the afternoon, anyway) atmosphere, but will strike many clubgoers as just too slow in general. To me, the 'Mate is best for either hoping for a particular encounter (i.e. with a fave dancer) or just 'hanging out' without particularly high expectations for.....well, for anything - certain kinds of dancers, frequency of stage rotation, large numbers of dancers etc. Most typical expectations should be discarded prior to entering the 'Mate and one should just hope for the best. I've had a very stimulating time there but, just as often, have left after a short while as things just seemed lethargic. Barbarella's (with some exceptions on certain Saturday afternoons) has seemed the most consistent of the venues I've frequented, but consistency may not be a characteristic valued by all. I hope some will post to give reasons for their own preferences, especially regarding the places with which some of us are less familiar such as Pigale and Taboo.

I've seen her many times in the afternoon, including Saturdays. Not sure if she is in during the evening hours.

At the risk of seeming overly pedantic, you are indeed a "sophomore" in year two, but in the tradition of naming the four years of college attendance (more common in the U.S. than here in Canada) you would have been a "freshman" in your first year, the term "junior year" being reserved for the third year of a four-year college program and the final (fourth) year termed "senior year".

Noticed this over the years, but especially in the last few. Seems that there were occasionally a small number of regular Asian ladies at Barb's in the past, but less and less in the past 5-7 years or so. One could sometimes spot an Asian dancer at the 'Mate or 'Fax, but in my memory it was more common to see some at Barb's - but a relatively small number overall.

Good to hear about a fun and quite busy Saturday afternoon at 340. Even when one is not able to get in very regularly (or recently), it's always great to read reports about the ongoing situation at Barb's. As a clubgoer who was almost always stopping by Barb's in hopes of an ATF encounter, I've been thinking about this aspect of the SC experience in light of the "loss" of the ATF in question. It strikes me that not only does one miss an ATF for all the obvious reasons (i.e. those qualities leading to someone becoming a fave in the first place, if that isn't too circular), but also for the sense of familiarity that is built up after a number of years. Certainly, it's understandable that many clubgoers prefer variety and the sense of adventure and novelty that comes with meeting and trying CR encounters with new and/or different dancers. On the other hand, there's something nice (at least to my mind) in knowing what to expect (and what not to expect) with an ATF. Maybe I'm not adventurous enough, but I can't help but feel a certain very slight tension when going to the CR with someone unfamiliar. Even when one is by no means looking for 'high mileage', the uncertainty regarding how the experience will unfold tends to promote a certain nostalgia for the trusted ATF encounters. Guess it's important to remember that everyone is at least somewhat different and experiences of this nature are unlikely to be precisely replicated. Barb's continues to be the venue in which I'm most comfortable and with which I'm most familiar, so it may be that it's the place to begin to seek a more diversified experience - or find a new ATF.

Perhaps I shouldn't have raised this whole thing and, as I noted in my post, I have no way of knowing who is behind the post on the (unmoderated) "other board" in question. But the tone of the post seems to suggest that it is someone associated with the club. It just seemed silly, in any case.

That's from "The Information". By Little Keith, M.A.

Apparently someone on another board has claimed that customers are "boycotting" Barb's and this would appear to be true in a few cases as indicated by some of the posts in this thread. Then there is a very strange reply (on the relevant thread at the "other board") suggesting that our friend KiltBoy had been seen to be causing a "problem" by selling his "wares" in the club and not giving Barb's a piece of the action. Now I haven't been in to 340 recently, but whenever I saw KiltBoy at Barb's he never appeared to have a flea market table set up to do business, nor did he ever try to sell me anything. I mostly noticed him going to or coming out of the CR, which one would presume would meet with the approval of management. Some of his posts would indicate that a dancer or two might have purchased a few of his "wares", but it's difficut to imagine this being especially disruptive. Is management annoyed at his opinions regarding the main subject of this thread (i.e. cameras) ? Of course I'm not sure who is behind the post. It's a bit difficult to know what to make of this but the reaction (against KiltBoy) seems to be a bit extreme, all things considered. Especially if KiltBoy is no longer frequenting the establishment.

Yes, this occurred some time ago. Her final day at Barb's was December 30 of last year. No need to depend on the "rumour mill" as there was some discussion of this in the very thread to which you are posting, around pages 236 and 237.

Point taken. Although I wonder if a court would see it this way, at least for the purpose of judging the application of such privacy legislation. Overall, I really would have concerns that the installation at 340 is not meeting the standard set out in these guidelines and thus I'm wondering if the use of surveillance in this case is actually in some aspect(s) in contravention with the letter of the law.

This is really very enlightening. If all of these "guidelines" were explicitly and rigourously adhered to, there would be scant cause for concern. If. I note particularly the admonition that "[t]he recorded images must be stored in a secure location...". Wondering if a smartphone qualifies. Also notable is the statement that the guidelines do not "apply to the surveillance of employees." This seems to be the purpose of the surveillance in this case.

"...in the Cloud..." Now that is a truly very disturbing possibilty. I've been working on the assumption that this would be a kind of internal CCTV (as the British say) kind of thing, but the notion that cloud storage is being used is somewhat concerning. But, come to think of it, if material is being shown via smartphone it is clearly already vulnerable and, to some degree, 'out there'. Not to mention lower tech distribution methods.

I'm guessing (and it's only a guess) that the configuration of the CR booths at the 'Fax is not particularly good for this type of surveillance. As far as the 'Mate is concerned, I can only conclude that many dancers (and patrons) are, to say the least, less than concerned about the possibilty of installed surveillance. Of course, this is not to say that the 'Mate CR is camera-free.