Escort Reviews

There are some providers who do not like to give out references, that can be a sticky issue though. I can think of at least four that would claim not to remember having met you five minutes after you walk out the door. My assumption is that they want to restrict your seeing other providers and leaving all of your hard earned money with them and only with them. If you read enough posts you will get an idea of who they are.

[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]I read few girl's sites and posts on here and now they are requiring some validation from us, such as referrals and reviews. I'm a noob here and wondering what I can do to 'pass' their tests?[/QUOTE]

Most reputable providers accept Date-Check and RS2000 validations. So that is one short cut to the validation process. I prefer to use the format that I and other senior members here have outlined in these threads many times.


KG


[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]I read few girl's sites and posts on here and now they are requiring some validation from us, such as referrals and reviews. I'm a noob here and wondering what I can do to 'pass' their tests?[/QUOTE]

P411 is also a very safe validation site that the reputable ladies accept as well. For free access, you must be invited by one of the providers and vouched by two others. Most nubbies wouldn't qualify. Otherwise, one must pay to join.

[QUOTE=Nkykinkyguy]Most reputable providers accept Date-Check and RS2000 validations. So that is one short cut to the validation process. I prefer to use the format that I and other senior members here have outlined in these threads many times.


KG[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Waltmore]There are some providers who do not like to give out references, that can be a sticky issue though. I can think of at least four that would claim not to remember having met you five minutes after you walk out the door. My assumption is that they want to restrict your seeing other providers and leaving all of your hard earned money with them and only with them. If you read enough posts you will get an idea of who they are.[/QUOTE]Makes all the sense in the world to me. why would I vouch for anyone looking to spend money with someone else?

Thanks for the tips fellas.

Most of the regular providers keep track of each other when it comes to vouching for hobbyist. They know that hobbyist move around from girl to girl from time to time. If a provider doesn't vouch for a hobbyist then they will not get any info back when they need a vouch for someone that wants to see them.

Also if a provider refuses to vouch for me I would never see them again. That would be the same as me giving a bad report on a good provider just to try and keep other hobbyist from seeing her. A very stupid thing to do.

It is more about protection than it is about maintaining control of a hobbyist. The experienced providers know that safety comes first. It really has nothing to do with money to the discriminate provider. This is why date-check, RS2000 and P411 are used so often by upper scale and experienced providers.

KG


[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]Makes all the sense in the world to me. why would I vouch for anyone looking to spend money with someone else?

Thanks for the tips fellas.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Nkykinkyguy] *** Also if a provider refuses to vouch for me I would never see them again. That would be the same as me giving a bad report on a good provider just to try and keep other hobbyist from seeing her. A very stupid thing to do. *** KG[/QUOTE]
There are many way to screen. Some women use a heads-up reference from a woman who has seen the guy before. Some women use other tools. Some use all the tools in combination.

Some women are concerned the woman requesting/supplying the reference may be compromised and avoid references entirely. They don't ask for them and they don't give them out.

References in the traditional sense requires a lot of trust and confidence between the women of both sides of the reference scale . It won't work without that confidence and this has nothing to do with the guy.

You have made some very good points GC,

IMHO, any provider that refuses to participate in vouching hobbyist, whether it is by placing a phone call or using an established reference site is throwing up a red flag. They all seem very willing to take referrals from us, so why would they not participate in vouching for us.

I have even run across some providers that refuse to take vouches from C/L and BP girls as they feel they are unreliable.

The bottom line for a hobbyist is to make sure they establish themselves with a variety of established providers and or vouch sites so that if there is a provider that requires a certain level of confirmation that you are equipped to meet those requirements. If not, don't trash the provider, just move on to someone else you want to see. If you want to see her that intensely then make the arrangements to meet her business model requirements.

KG

[QUOTE=Golfcart]There are many way to screen. Some women use a heads-up reference from a woman who has seen the guy before. Some women use other tools. Some use all the tools in combination.

Some women are concerned the woman requesting/supplying the reference may be compromised and avoid references entirely. They don't ask for them and they don't give them out.

References in the traditional sense requires a lot of trust and confidence between the women of both sides of the reference scale . It won't work without that confidence and this has nothing to do with the guy.[/QUOTE]

The community in Cincinnati has suffered a loss. According to today's Enquirer, Summer4fun46, a fixture on e.com and eros for some time, passed away a couple weeks ago. I knew her to be a highly selective provider, playing on a different level than most locally. I'm sure the few who could afford her extended sessions will miss the grace and comfort at which she excelled.

GEEZ! That all sounds like TOO much work. Its like saying "your money isn't green enough until you hop through all the hoops"

It beats a bunch of attorney's fees, court costs, and notoriety. It's a bit of a pain but after a little while, you realize that it's important for you and the provider.

[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]GEEZ! That all sounds like TOO much work. Its like saying "your money isn't green enough until you hop through all the hoops"[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]GEEZ! That all sounds like TOO much work. Its like saying "your money isn't green enough until you hop through all the hoops"[/QUOTE]
"Tough titty " said the kitty but the milks still good!!!

I'm not one that can typically afford a higher end provider. That being said I may have an opportunity to put my hands on enough cash for a one-time deal. I can probably drop $.5 or $$ on a session. Since this may only happen once I wanted to get the opinions of everyone on here. Who would you recommend if you could only have one provider, once. I'm talking the total package - looks, performance, friendliness, etc... Please chime in. Thanks!

I don't think you read the entire post.

"The bottom line for a hobbyist is to make sure they establish themselves with a variety of established providers and or vouch sites so that if there is a provider that requires a certain level of confirmation that you are equipped to meet those requirements. If not, don't trash the provider, just move on to someone else you want to see."

If you don't want to hop through the hoops that is certainly your prerogative but my point was if you are not willing to hop through the hoops as you described then don't trash the provider for asking for references. Just move on to someone else that doesn't screen as thoroughly. But don't forget LEO doesn't screen at all. So maybe hopping through a hoop or two will keep you safe.

JMHO is all. Take it for what you think it is worth.


KG


[QUOTE=Lrc Metalhead]GEEZ! That all sounds like TOO much work. Its like saying "your money isn't green enough until you hop through all the hoops"[/QUOTE]

I would think it would be Saratonguetwister......

just my 02
ez

[QUOTE=Ezenuf]I would think it would be Saratonguetwister.

just my 02
ez[/QUOTE]My thoughts exactly Ez.

In my book, Sara has no equal.