Printable View
[QUOTE=MollyDaniels;1737634]And, to make it more fun, there is a nudist colony in town with a great big pool that we can do this at, once it gets a bit warmer.[/QUOTE]I should probably abstain. I mean, I pay you ladies to tolerate me, but the innocent onlookers at the colony should probably be spared from such a hideous site. Besides, my big, white, whale belly will scorch in July.
My friend is married to an ugly, fat woman. He is very happy and thinks she is beautiful. What a fortunate fellow, what a lucky guy. I should be so lucky. I should be happy with my station in life.
As Gabby Reece said recently, (April 12)
[url]http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/kate-snow[/url]
At 5:55 in the video."sex is not optional".
If only our SO had a hint of understanding of this:
DAYENU!
But alas, I am not my friend, I am not married to Gabby Reece, I am a monger. I am not even a monger who enjoys the GFE, I wish I could, but I can't.
I finally realized that many of you are happy with your mongering, while I (like Hawthorne with Puritanism) struggle with myself to find something, a slave to my own self-loathings.
All of the above became apparent to me when I went to write a follow-up review of a follow-up visit with a provider.
SECOND or THIRD VISIT WITH PROVIDER X.
Name: Same as it was last week, but will change.
GENERAL AREA OF TOWN: some neighborhood.
HOW DID I FIND HER: Chat Lines, BP, Here (usasg) , There (Indys) , and Everywhere (the oThER site) , on the street, or maybe even from a fellow monger.
Reviewed by: Kenwood Jack.
Looks: She surely looked better last time. Was my judgment so clouded that I did not notice any of the flaws that are so apparent the second time around?
Surely she was taller and thinner and younger, and cuter and nicer and had a great attitude last time. What happened? Truthfully, I realized that everything was still the same. It was only my perception that had changed.
Easy or hard to set up meeting: easy. Now that she thinks she has me hooked, she just says "ok, I'm ready"
Incall or outcall: Incall.
Cleanliness of girl: Now you ask me? I've already been there once, was my vision so myopic that I had not really noticed?
I believe she had a habit.
They all have a habit.
Hell, we all have habits.
Cleanliness of incall: No Leo, No brother in the wings, no problem?
Perfume: Providers should never wear perfume unless specifically asked to do so! And perfume does not mask other body smells.
Smoking: Providers should never smoke at location. It is sacrosanct.
Attitude: What makes me think that she had such a great attitude. It is only my second time here, and already I feel taken for granite (malapropism for effect).
Skill: Never seems to get better with subsequent encounters.
Comfortability level: A higher comfortability level seems inversely proportional to that 'thrill and chill' (fear factor).
Today's experience: I can't just put my finger on it, but today's experience never seems to measure up to the first time.
Safety of incall (and why) : Safe. See comfortability level.
Overall pros: There sure seemed to be multitudes of pros in the pasts. By today, I seem to have forgotten most.
Overall cons: Are the risks really worth the rewards? For me, the answer is absolutely!
Cost: She is saying those same things to other guys for less. How come I always seem to pay retail. It seems to get old fast.
Overall value: If I'm not a guest of Leo, and the SO is oblivious, no other criteria are more important.
If only I could be like my friend, and be truly happy with what I have, but, realistically, that ain't going to happen.
Your Humble Ranting Hobbiest,
Jack
[QUOTE=Kenwood Jack; 1740960]My friend is married to an ugly, fat woman. He is very happy and thinks she is beautiful. What a fortunate fellow, what a lucky guy. I should be so lucky. I should be happy with my station in life.
As Gabby Reece said recently, (April 12)
[url]http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/kate-snow[/url]
At 5:55 in the video."sex is not optional".
If only our SO had a hint of understanding of this:
DAYENU!
But alas, I am not my friend, I am not married to Gabby Reece, I am a monger. I am not even a monger who enjoys the GFE, I wish I could, but I can't.
I finally realized that many of you are happy with your mongering, while I (like Hawthorne with Puritanism) struggle with myself to find something, a slave to my own self-loathings.
All of the above became apparent to me when I went to write a follow-up review of a follow-up visit with a provider.
SECOND or THIRD VISIT WITH PROVIDER X.
Name: Same as it was last week, but will change.
GENERAL AREA OF TOWN: some neighborhood.
HOW DID I FIND HER: Chat Lines, BP, Here (usasg) , There (Indys) , and Everywhere (the oThER site) , on the street, or maybe even from a fellow monger.
Reviewed by: Kenwood Jack.
Looks: She surely looked better last time. Was my judgment so clouded that I did not notice any of the flaws that are so apparent the second time around?
Surely she was taller and thinner and younger, and cuter and nicer and had a great attitude last time. What happened? Truthfully, I realized that everything was still the same. It was only my perception that had changed.
Easy or hard to set up meeting: easy. Now that she thinks she has me hooked, she just says "ok, I'm ready"
Incall or outcall: Incall.
Cleanliness of girl: Now you ask me? I've already been there once, was my vision so myopic that I had not really noticed?
I believe she had a habit.
They all have a habit.
Hell, we all have habits.
Cleanliness of incall: No Leo, No brother in the wings, no problem?
Perfume: Providers should never wear perfume unless specifically asked to do so! And perfume does not mask other body smells.
Smoking: Providers should never smoke at location. It is sacrosanct.
Attitude: What makes me think that she had such a great attitude. It is only my second time here, and already I feel taken for granite (malapropism for effect).
Skill: Never seems to get better with subsequent encounters.
Comfortability level: A higher comfortability level seems inversely proportional to that 'thrill and chill' (fear factor).
Today's experience: I can't just put my finger on it, but today's experience never seems to measure up to the first time.
Safety of incall (and why) : Safe. See comfortability level.
Overall pros: There sure seemed to be multitudes of pros in the pasts. By today, I seem to have forgotten most.
Overall cons: Are the risks really worth the rewards? For me, the answer is absolutely!
Cost: She is saying those same things to other guys for less. How come I always seem to pay retail. It seems to get old fast.
Overall value: If I'm not a guest of Leo, and the SO is oblivious, no other criteria are more important.
If only I could be like my friend, and be truly happy with what I have, but, realistically, that ain't going to happen.
Your Humble Ranting Hobbiest,
Jack[/QUOTE]Kj.
Excellent introspection into the contorted workings of the male intellect (if I can use that term in the broadest (pun intneded) way)!
[QUOTE=WyldeChild99;1740366]I can't imagine any porn star hotter than her.[/QUOTE]I'm sorry sir but IMO Christy Mack is hotter than hot. And that's why I love this great country we live in, because as of right now we can all have our own opinion LOL.
PS.
I'm glad I got to know her before she started doing porn and that's all I'm going too say.
Some commentary to your words of wisdom.
Gabby Reece is a has been. In the 90's I would of paid for real estate on her body. I enjoy a distinguished woman but when they start writing books, it's over.
And I mean it's really the fuck over. That superhero waterboarder to her right? He's decorations on a table, window.
He doesn't get it yet but he was asking for permission in the way he was calling the access point between the legs. Video proves it.
Gabby has a very hardened look, she's losing her beauty and now everything is emotional dialogue infinium. Don't know about you but I like soft, ageless skin with little to no dialogue and not much forethought what tomorrow brings, let alone 10 years from now.
She's proof that she's not the crisp philly she once was, and do you think she'll exercise daily up to the point depend's undergarments fit around those thighs? No.
Already stated, divorce was filed once, someone obviously cheated. She seems like the one calling the shots for sex every 48 hours, calling it exercise and 'get it over with' mentality.
I certainly do not want that type of woman in my life with all the good times behind me (when it was fresh) and the constant mental struggle of two people that 'do' care for each other, but are not functioning well as husband and wife. Him calling her out as a temperature reading on what to expect speaks volumes to how shitty his life really is at this point.
For the record,
Many who gloat about their loving relationships, talk incessantly about them are usually the biggest ticking time bombs when they fall apart. I've dated this type where I thought she was going to buy ad space on a blimp, and we only knew each other 3 months.
But there's serious logic to loving an ugly woman. There's an implied safe zone installed, that everyone would expect you to branch out and taste the fruit others have, just because the old fruit tree is solid and living, but bears no fruit. Absolutely no reason to cut it down.
Gabby Reece looks like she has everything and nothing at the same time, buying part of the globe with ocean and sand isn't enough. She's going through life changes where she bares her soul to the world (media) and guess who the poor fuck is that has to sit in and take the shitstorm free of charge. He's truly fucked. His body was meant for literally 100's if not 1000's of women. If I had that physique the counter would be spinning.
If the dude's smart, make a boatload of money, prepare for the divorce (cause it's coming, no doubt) and enjoy life still being a part of the family from different living quarters.
If the struggles are landing in the lives of those children, cut out the dead branches to keep the family tree alive ffs. Those kids will figure out life and relationships by the enviornment they live in, hence the ever spinning record player that history proves will repeat itself.
Won't knock an ugly woman, they are all sisters when ya se'them naked doing handstands. Cannot agree with you on the perfume statements; some of the best memories I've had with a woman is the surprise of beautiful scent unknown to me what it is, never getting the chance to have them match up twice to another, forever remembering them for that. Not all abuse the design, and I know if the strength of the perfume gets stronger heading towards the promised land, nothing good will become of it.
The nape of the neck, the front of the wrist, the crease of the leg, the channel between the curves of the chest, all considered the compliments that follow attire, persona, attitude.
Serious some of you need to be rated one of you especially has been nothing but a totally dick calling me non stop and you have been asked not to call after 8pm and you do it anyway.
[QUOTE=NikkiFromCincy;1743310]Serious some of you need to be rated one of you especially has been nothing but a totally dick calling me non stop and you have been asked not to call after 8pm and you do it anyway.[/QUOTE]Google voice works as well for providers as it does for us mongers. Just sayin'. (:
[noparse]/[/noparse]z
Its not even the SW thats become a problem its these pushy over rated and overhyped provider that thinks everyone actually cares where when and what they are doing at all time of the day. If a hobbyist really wants to see you then they will take the time and effort to make contact not the other way around also if they werent charging an arm leg and organ people would make the effort thats just my opinion though its a buyers market and people arent going to pay for great quality at big city prices when they can save in the big city and have their world rockedi won't apologize for offending anyone because their will always be someone unhappy just my two cents
[QUOTE=RedBred;1738049]I saw a review by someone with only five posts. It was two lines and basically said so-and-so is legit and really great. I did a google search on the image in the linked ad and came up with a TON of duplicate ads with different phone numbers and different names in different places. Should I just let that go or share the info? If I share the info, how much detail is appropriate?[/QUOTE]If we're just talking about you finding a bogus picture, I would submit that all the details are appropriate. The main thing would be not to phrase it like you're trolling the original review. I would just quote it and say something like "well, there's an issue with the picture in that ad." etc etc. Don't call him out, don't accuse him of being a liar, don't be dramatic. Just quote the review, link to the ad, insert your research, and upload. That way, we all know that (A) that ad should be approached with extreme caution despite a positive review, and (B) be very wary of anything else posted by that handle. At least, that's how I would handle it.
To me, that's not reviewing a review so much as adding hard physical evidence that the review might be questionable, and as such is not only fair game, but [B]should[/B] Be posted.
You're correct, the section is only intended for reviews, but I was just commenting on what was already posted. I don't think that I said anything offensive about you in the post. My issue is that these guys jumped in to defend you, while questioning whether or not the guy saw you. Just because his experience was different than their own. Your reviews speak for themselves. They have all been positive.
If he saw you or not is between the two of you. I don't know what his motivation would be to slander you or what can be gained by doing so, but if it isn't true it shouldn't be an issue. Again, your positive reviews speak for themselves.
[QUOTE=Sinful Dreams;1743841]It would be all well good IF he had seen me, but he hasn't. And I thought this section was for "reviews".[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Willow1535;1744122]If he saw you or not is between the two of you.[/QUOTE]I wasn't going to wade into the one but WTF.
Will. Everything you said about letting positive reviews speak for themselves is right on target. Where I disagree with you is this "if he saw you or not" comment. I think that's at the heart of virtually everything we share so when a new poster shows up with a "review" of someone he didn't see. It makes me wonder about that poster. If we, as a group, aren't going to hold each other accountable for actually seeing the provider partners that we're reviewing, the whole thing falls apart. So for me, the fact that he posted a review and didn't see her is not between the two of them.
I got no issue with two members having wildly different opinions about the same provider. I got no issue with both of them forcefully making their arguments. BFD. In the end, that's why it's called taste. If you like spinners and I like curvy girls. What's it hurt. If you like curvy girls and I like spinners. So what. Vote with your $$$.
But, and here's where I have an issue, if you post a review about a provider and you didn't ever see her? Com'on, that's not an issue of liking chocolate versus vanilla, that's lying to the board. Calling it out doesn't have f*'all to do with the specific provider and it has nothing to do with white-knighting any particular provider. If we're ok with members posting reviews (good or bad) about providers they haven't even seen, we should turn in our passwords and call it a day because we're not sharing information here anymore, we're just sharing bullsh*t.
And while I'm on a roll. WTF with the comment on some new provider poster that she's got bad teeth because of a drug issue. Seems like the poster's rebuttal got deleted (probably should have been posted in here). I have to ask. Are you a f*ing dentist. And we wonder why we're not seeing a lot of new top quality provider partners rushing to advertise around here.
[QUOTE=Dweezil; 1744163]I wasn't going to wade into the one but WTF.[/quote]Will. Everything you said about letting positive reviews speak for themselves is right on target. Where I disagree with you is this "if he saw you or not" comment.
Not trying to speak for Willow, but I kind of took the comment not as its ok to post a review without seeing a provider so much as a he said he saw you, you say he didn't, I'm not going to get into the middle of or address that he said / she said argument. And I am not wading into that either, before either party accuses me of calling them a liar, etc.
[QUOTE=NikkiFromCincy;1743310]Serious some of you need to be rated one of you especially has been nothing but a totally dick calling me non stop and you have been asked not to call after 8pm and you do it anyway.[/QUOTE]Wouldn't that be a hoot! It seems as though there are some very thin-skinned individuals in our community. Could cause a full-blown riot.
I try diligently to respect the wishes of a provider, and apply proper phone etiquette. (Although I am prob guilty of the occasional over-texting prior to a first meeting; I'm a little skeptical by nature.)
On a similar note, a Dayton provider recently told me about a BP Blacklist site where providers can report on poor behaviors of clients. (Have not checked it out though)
Who knows, maybe Admin2 wants to open a secondary octagon for mongering reviews only.