Comments on: EFN Lounge closes abruptly

By: Daddy

Daddy — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 18:28:56 +0000

It’s karma! Bill came in to the business with the idea he didn’t have to pay his vendors. The universe made him pay dearly!

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:37:36 +0000

What’s wrong with buying one highly over priced water bottle and refilling in it the bathroom?

By: Jaxon

Jaxon — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:32:52 +0000

I think it’s funny how when it was Be:Bar, all was good and business was great. Then, they went after a different theme, which was already being done, well I might add, by the Green Lantern. Bill should of known not to attack a ‘stronger bar’ and they should of stuck to what they knew: a Hip, martini-esq, dance-derived, twink inspired, all people welcome gay bar.

By: J.

J. — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 17:14:49 +0000

This makes no sense? So all of DC is a ghetto and should remain that way? Can you explain yourself better…

By: Baltimore Dougie

Baltimore Dougie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:26:22 +0000

Yeah, I guess they would have been better off catering twinks who refill their water bottles in the bathroom sink LOL

By: samuel nelson

samuel nelson — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 03:07:54 +0000

BARF

By: Ajae

Ajae — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 23:00:04 +0000

Steve, I had that same thought, as I read through this story.

By: jeff

jeff — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 22:33:48 +0000

It is kinda ridiculous to mention that everyone is gay. We can be post-gay here I think, hello, it’s a gay publication! We can maybe notate when people are not gay if/when its relevant to the story.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:04:52 +0000

I don’t see any real reason to have identified who is gay and not gay in this article. Its really distracting, and a tinge shameful. Are we to be concerned that gay people cannot run a profitable business or something? I hope this writing doesn’t follow any standard for reporting in our community.

By: Tony

Tony — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:20:54 +0000

I think the author should have made it easy on himself and only identified those who are NOT gay in the article….which would have been exactly no one. So why did he feel the need to identify each and every person in it as gay? Who cares?