Printable View
Spent an hour with Victoria Saturday. The best way to describe it is, WOW. This lady will knock your socks off and more. She is a big girl but then that is my cup of tea. Very clean, friendly, well groomed and easy to talk with. Members wanting details can PM me. There is a wicked (walk on the wild side) of her that is awesome. This was not my first visit with her and for sure it will not be my last. The lady is A+.
Went to see Dawn earlier this week. She is a truly amazing girl to be around. For those of you who have spent time with her, all I can say is I can't believe I have waited this long to see her. For those of you who have not; you have so much to look forward to.
She was a true joy to spend time with and I cannot wait until we can do it again!
A
Let me give a thumbs up to Hotsquirt over on the escorts advertiser page. Very clean, very safe and smokin hot for those of us who like them real!
Take care of her. She's a good one.
[QUOTE=Avunus; 1092313]Went to see Dawn earlier this week. She is a truly amazing girl to be around. For those of you who have spent time with her, all I can say is I can't believe I have waited this long to see her. For those of you who have not; you have so much to look forward to.
She was a true joy to spend time with and I cannot wait until we can do it again!
A[/QUOTE]Dawn IS a pretty common name.
Yes. This is the Dawn I was talking about.
Dawn = sweetsassyrefreshing.
[QUOTE=Stockinghunter;1092950]Dawn IS a pretty common name.[/QUOTE]
The raid of "E" on 10-27-10 caused them to remove information from their review form. They removed the boxes in the upper right hand corner that were checked off to show FS or not, CBJ or BBBJ, DATY or not, etc. Today (11-16-10) all text has been removed from the body of the review. So what is left are the boxes on the left side about the girl's appearance, whether her photo and profile are accurate, the presence of tattoos, etc. The redacted form of review now on 'E' is basically worthless. It looks like all the old reviews have been similarly redacted.
[QUOTE=Avunus; 1093006]Yes. This is the Dawn I was talking about.
Dawn = sweetsassyrefreshing. [/QUOTE]SWEET! At least now I know who we are talking about.
[QUOTE=Golfcart;1093049]The raid of "E" on 10-27-10 caused them to remove information from their review form. They removed the boxes in the upper right hand corner that were checked off to show FS or not, CBJ or BBBJ, DATY or not, etc. Today (11-16-10) all text has been removed from the body of the review. So what is left are the boxes on the left side about the girl's appearance, whether her photo and profile are accurate, the presence of tattoos, etc. The redacted form of review now on 'E' is basically worthless. It looks like all the old reviews have been similarly redacted.[/QUOTE]I just checked my reviews on e com and you are right, there is nothing of importance. No details, no actual text in the reviews, so what's the point of being a paid member? I wonder if this will be a permanent change, its bad for both clients and providers. I had about 70 reviews which are now basically worhless in my opinion.
Hopefully, you can read between the lines a little, I know I have sent messages to some reviewers to see if they were being 100% honest in review, more often than not they oversold in their review!
At least if a girl has a few on the site you have a better than even chance of good things happening. I might have to be a little "cute" in review in the future to give an idea what to expect. I still like the site though, had some very pleasant memories so far!
Ez
I had a terrific lunchtime rendezvous with Dawn today. Guys, she is truly a special lady. While I will keep the details to myself and Dawn I will say that she will always be one of my all time favorites. She has the whole package and aims to please.
Wingman Todd: definitely no breaks or bruises from skating. She was looking just fine.
JR: I have to give her an A++++ today in all respects. She was definitely on her 'A' game. As for the paddle or the whip I preferred a spanking myself although I'm sure the paddle and whip were on the menu.
Anexec
Anexec,
She is a delight to be with, isn't she? A funny! Well you are moving right down my recommended personal list! Sorry to say "A" from Dayton is out of the business. But I have a back-up or two!
And while "Dawn" may be a common name, this Dawn is VERY well reviewed and thought of on this board!
WM
[QUOTE=Anexec; 1093450]I had a terrific lunchtime rendezvous with Dawn today. Guys, she is truly a special lady. While I will keep the details to myself and Dawn I will say that she will always be one of my all time favorites. She has the whole package and aims to please.
Wingman Todd: definitely no breaks or bruises from skating. She was looking just fine.
JR: I have to give her an A++++ today in all respects. She was definitely on her 'A' game. As for the paddle or the whip I preferred a spanking myself although I'm sure the paddle and whip were on the menu.
Anexec[/QUOTE]
There has been the last two days, much discussion over on indys about e-com. I direct you to the "recent topic" forum (Is E. Com irrelevant? Anyone willing to pay for what that!). Waltmore has several great posts there. General feeling is that there will be a mass exit from the ladies on e-com and going to other sites. My advice is to jot down numbers and info of your favorites before they leave.
And Brooke, according to one of the providers there, go to: ecortreviews dot com. Apparently, you log into this the same way as on e-com and you can access all your reviews. How long that will be there is unknown.
Update here: I just accessed my reviews on this site, and it is very generic! No reviews of timesor details spent shown. Oh well, just trying to help! It is a dying site!
WM.
[QUOTE=Brooke Taylor;1093079]I just checked my reviews on e com and you are right, there is nothing of importance. No details, no actual text in the reviews, so what's the point of being a paid member? I wonder if this will be a permanent change, its bad for both clients and providers. I had about 70 reviews which are now basically worhless in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately e dot com has been rendered completely irrelevant.
How do, why'all?
Lookee here. Knowing how Jackson frowns upon posts with cryptic messages, I hope this will not be perceived as cryptic. Tonight's events have me knowing how it feels to be Bill Fanta, when I wish they had me feeling like Golfcart. I will explain. I knock on the incall door of a provider who arrived in Cincinnati today, and while I recognize her from her photos, they were obviously not photos taken today, yesterday, last week or last month. She confirmed that they were taken a year ago, and I knew a minimum of nine months had passed since she was in front of the lens of any of the pix I saw. How many times has Golfcart advised us, when we feel misled, to say "I am not the guy that was on the phone"? Enough that I should have known better than to enter the room. Even with this uneasiness, I hand over donation, all the while sensing that this is not feeling right. As I am half undressed, I finally get it together enough to halt the proceedings, my mind kind of panicking about my bonehead move of up-front donation in her pocket.
What to do, what to do? I tell her it isn't working for me, she tries to change my mind, and I say nope. She WAS friendly so far, so I take a shot at the only thing I can think of at the time and apologize for wasting her time and ask if a note from Jackson (Andrew) is fair enough for her time and trouble, and we exchange my Jackson note for two Franklin notes. Whew, relief!
Here's my dilemma. I am really not willing to call out this lady, since it could have turned out worse. On the other hand, if any of you uncover inaccuracies in ads, I am hopeful that you share it with us here. So, what I have decided is to drop some clues that will probably advise to those who already made a note of her presence in town and / or were considering a visit. Again, I don't want to have a name on the record, in consideration of her cooperation. I am guessing that the photos being used will at some point become accurate, again. Ad (s) on BP, check. Profile on that much discussed escort site, check. Age somewhere between 22 and 24, according to BP, check. If we have corresponded before, and you have a burning desire to confirm your guess, pm me. If the length of the post offends you, put me on your ignore list. Thanks for reading, thanks for sharing.
Lookee
[QUOTE=Lookee; 1093706]How do, why'all?
Lookee here. Knowing how Jackson frowns upon posts with cryptic messages, I hope this will not be perceived as cryptic. Tonight's events have me knowing how it feels to be Bill Fanta, when I wish they had me feeling like Golfcart. I will explain. I knock on the incall door of a provider who arrived in Cincinnati today, and while I recognize her from her photos, they were obviously not photos taken today, yesterday, last week or last month. She confirmed that they were taken a year ago, and I knew a minimum of nine months had passed since she was in front of the lens of any of the pix I saw. How many times has Golfcart advised us, when we feel misled, to say "I am not the guy that was on the phone"? Enough that I should have known better than to enter the room. Even with this uneasiness, I hand over donation, all the while sensing that this is not feeling right. As I am half undressed, I finally get it together enough to halt the proceedings, my mind kind of panicking about my bonehead move of up-front donation in her pocket.
What to do, what to do? I tell her it isn't working for me, she tries to change my mind, and I say nope. She WAS friendly so far, so I take a shot at the only thing I can think of at the time and apologize for wasting her time and ask if a note from Jackson (Andrew) is fair enough for her time and trouble, and we exchange my Jackson note for two Franklin notes. Whew, relief!
Here's my dilemma. I am really not willing to call out this lady, since it could have turned out worse. On the other hand, if any of you uncover inaccuracies in ads, I am hopeful that you share it with us here. So, what I have decided is to drop some clues that will probably advise to those who already made a note of her presence in town and / or were considering a visit. Again, I don't want to have a name on the record, in consideration of her cooperation. I am guessing that the photos being used will at some point become accurate, again. Ad (s) on BP, check. Profile on that much discussed escort site, check. Age somewhere between 22 and 24, according to BP, check. If we have corresponded before, and you have a burning desire to confirm your guess, pm me. If the length of the post offends you, put me on your ignore list. Thanks for reading, thanks for sharing.
Lookee[/QUOTE]I don't see this as a call-out of the provider. We all know that only half or less of the ads out there use current pictures and many 'hide' their less-than complementary features. We are fortunate in this area (albeit a small number) to have some very honest providers. I believe that appearance is a YMMV thing and this provider passed the test with regard to being fair to you. Actually you have posted a good review and although she should post more accurate pictures, she did do the right thing. Thanks for the post. JM