Quote:Kelly Bell - Exercise Moves, The Pad, 2009

A video of Kelly including some exercise moves - star jumps, toe touching and some other move that they do on 'Aerobics Oz Style' that I don't know the name of, but it provides some good upskirt views.

(18-06-2009 01:21 )Bluearmy71 Wrote:  One of a number of nip slips Danni had on the 16th June 2009



http://lix.in/-494a8b

Quote:Looking back on it, I didn't see many of these dayshows at the time. A lot of it is new to me. Fernanda's Pad dayshows were shockingly good, and some of Sammie Pennington's maybe even more so. But the ones by Epiphany/Lynsey are the most astounding to me now. The fact that she obviously isn't even trying to pretend to have innocent chats on the phones!

Quote:29 July 2010 "Ofcom fined Bang Media (London) Limited and Bang Channels Limited a total of £157,250 for serious and repeated breaches of the Code as regards the broadcast of programmes between June 2009 and November 2009, and for breaches of Licence Conditions"

2 November 2010 "Ofcom served a notice on the Licensees, stating that it was minded to revoke the licences on the basis that Ofcom no longer considered that the Licensees were fit and proper persons to hold a licence"

25 November 2010 Ofcom announces it intends to close some or all of the Bang Media channels/licences (see this PDF, more details elsewhere on same website).

However, the Bang people continued for a wee while, with somewhat toned-down channels like "Xplicit" and "Xcited", before going off air around January 2011(?)

boring technical stuff, but 2 nice screenshots of an un-ID'd babe, on page 8

Quote:http://www.phonepayplus.org.uk/~/media/Files/PhonepayPlus/Adjudications/0131320Tribunal20Minutes1.pdf

The Executive made reference to examples of recorded conversations in relation
to the service and submitted that these recordings demonstrated the sexual
content of the service. An extract is as follows:

7 October 2010
0907 526 6912

Operator: You like naughty little girls like me, do you?
Consumer: Aye
Operator: Ooh yeah. Do you know what my name is? My names Lynsey.
Do you like me Josh?
Consumer: I’d like you to bend over
Operator: Really, how badly do you f**king want to see me bent over? Do
you not like seeing me spread out like this? You just want to see me bent over
do you?
Consumer: I’d like to bend you over and spank that arse
Operator: You like my arse? Is that what you like?
Consumer: Aye
Operator: You like that fat arse of mine do you Joe, ooh yeah is that what
you like? You know you like those silky little panties don’t you?
Consumer: Oh aye
Operator: How old are you Joe?
Consumer: 18
Operator: Ooh only 18, are you more of a bum man than a booby man are
you?
Consumer: Aye, I like a nice pair
Operator: (inaudible) You would f**king love it, wouldn’t you, if you was with
me right now, I know you would love it you dirty little thing. Are you single?

Quote:[The Service Provider] stated that, according to the
Information Provider [Bang], the calls that had not been
terminated, or where the operator had failed to enforce the rules to the caller,
had been down to a single operator called “Lynsey”. It stated that this operator
had been reprimanded for conducting such calls in October 2010 and the rules
and regulations had been enforced. It stated that this operator had been
subsequently unable to adhere to these rules and had been moved to the nighttime
‘Adult Only’ service.

[...]

The Service Provider stated it had been informed by the Information Provider
that, of the 17 call transcripts provided, six transcripts had related to the same
operator (“Lynsey)”. Furthermore, in two of these six transcripts, the consumer
had posed a suggestive question and the conversation had taken on a mildly
adult tone. The Information Provider had stated that operators had been told to
discourage consumers who attempted to engage in a conversation of an adult
nature and to terminate the call if the consumer persisted.

The Service Provider stated that the four remaining transcripts related to the
operator known as ‘Lynsey’, there had been occasions where the operator had
steered the caller into a suggestive conversation, although the conversations
had fallen far short of sexually-explicit discussions that were outlined in the
compliance brief and, as such, to [Lynsey]’s mind, had fallen within the
guidelines. It stated that the operator in question no longer worked on daytime
services as it was felt that she had been unable to comply with repeated
compliance advice.

The Service Provider stated that two of the operators had not been native
English speakers and, as such, it had been difficult for them to pick up the
nuances of certain calls. It stated that it appeared that their calls had been
flirtatious but, again, had fallen within their understanding of the guidelines. [...]

The Tribunal’s initial assessment was that, overall, the breaches taken together were
moderate. [...]

Having taken into account the aggravating and mitigating factors,
[the parent company's "reckless" behaviour], the Tribunal concluded
that the seriousness of the case should be regarded overall as significant.