Escort Reports

[QUOTE=B Beall; 1364378]Man, that is some pretty weak tea, especially when you tell us how much better it would taste with your special sweetener, if only you could share it.

NR isn't exactly a beehive of activity. And it only allows one review per provider. So if a guy spends his hard-earned hobby dollars on one woman he likes he's not going to chalk up many reviews. When esdotcom was the focal point of reviews I think you could say that the appearance of one-review reviewers was suspicious-of something; not enough to start flinging around charges of LE activity-but the sample audience at NR is too small. It could very well just be indicative of the fact that seasoned reviewers haven't taken a chance, because they check out the quality of reviews without being warned about it.

And, look, I don't disbelieve you. But, for one, the English language has a marvelous ability to permit saying something you "can't say". We don't need names and addresses of your inside sources, but we could use a couple lines to read between. And we need you to understand that those sorts of charges get leveled all the time, that a lot of us hear them, say, from SPs we trust with our personal information, or trust to hold our wallets, but who nonetheless have picked up someone else's bs or missed communication or outright lies.

Everyone should know to check on reviewers, as well as reviews. And should be left to make his own decision. If you've got more to add, please say it a little clearer.[/QUOTE]Actually NR doesn't limit reviews to one per provider. Many advertisers have multiple reviews.

When I posted my report, I struggled with the fact that I was offering no verification of what I was reporting. I get that. I'm by nature, a curious person as well. However, worst case scenario is this: Someone REALLY wanted to see one of those two providers, but would be sufficiently scared off to the point that they would have to overcome that urge and select one of the dozens of other providers that offer their wares to the central Indiana area. I agree with you that checking the reviewer as well as the reviewee is a good idea. (In fact, that's what confirmed for me that something was fishy with these two.) I wouldn't expect everyone (anyone) to take my word for it, but that's your choice of course. I could be wrong, but my info and gut both say no.

The info that I had was specifically based on Alexis Nicole, not Vivian. I surmised that Vivian might very well be working with Alexis Ann, again based on reviews. If you can see the reviews and reviewees on NR, check it out, and tell me whether or not it raises a red flag.

Info received, fishy reviews and reviewers, and a "reverse sting" that I personally conducted yesterday, have lead me to believe that these two should be avoided. (If you want details of my sting operation, send a PM. I can't out myself on this board.) Short of being placed in cuffs and charged by IMPD, I cannot promise that I'm 100 percent correct in my thoughts. However, I'm pretty sure about it, and I thought it would be nice for me to give a head's up. The information is worth whatever one wants it to be. If you set an appointment with one of these providers and have a 5-star experience, I would of course be happy to say I was wrong.

[QUOTE=Ilapp;1358955]I was going to buy you a new calendar for Christmas, but all the new ones were gone, I hope you like that old out of date one I sent you, all the numbers look the same at least on the months.[/QUOTE]I never look at the dates, just the naked pictures. Got to get me a calander with cars and trucks or somthing unapealing.

I used my secret room while in vegas again this trip. Wife playing slots while I'm watching an asian play my flute.

In my post-two reports lower-I originally mentioned Alexis Nicole. Later, I said Alexis Ann. This was a mistake. (I have OTHER issues with Alexis Ann). Too many Alexis (es). One thief, one cop, and one dirty massage therapist.

[QUOTE=EarlyCuyler;1364874]Actually NR doesn't limit reviews to one per provider. Many advertisers have multiple reviews.[/QUOTE]For the record, what I meant was that reviewers there are limited to one review per provider. Both of the women you mentioned have two reviews.

The point I'm trying to make is that while "someone" might be served by that sort of information, provided it turned out to be true, and reached them just in the nick of time, the board as a whole is not. In case you're not aware of it, that sort of thing has disrupted this forum on a regular basis, always from someone with "inside information" that so-and-so "is working with LE". No one has ever quite explained the devious legal stratagem which swaps a Class A misdemeanor (or C felony) arrest for the opportunity to make some more Class A misdemeanor arrests at no small expense. And, to my knowledge, no one has ever demonstrated that actually happening.

Stinging unwary hobbyists, yes. Alexis Whatever might be a cop, as might any of us, but it's the combination of New Listing and No Reviews from Established Hobbyists which should give any sensible hobbyist pause. If you have inside information to add to that-inside information defined as "I saw her and the deal was hinky in the usual, get-undressed-and-fan-out-your-money, honey" cop fashion, or your private pipeline to the Vice Squad-try to figure out some way to say it without "outing" yourself. Or swallow it. It's inflammatory, and the rumor mill is less than worthless nine times out of ten. Everybody and his brother can say it about anyone who refused to see him.

I'm all for this sort of thing being exposed. Just report rumors as rumors and facts as facts.

[QUOTE=B Beall; 1365497]For the record, what I meant was that reviewers there are limited to one review per provider. Both of the women you mentioned have two reviews.

The point I'm trying to make is that while "someone" might be served by that sort of information, provided it turned out to be true, and reached them just in the nick of time, the board as a whole is not. In case you're not aware of it, that sort of thing has disrupted this forum on a regular basis, always from someone with "inside information" that so-and-so "is working with LE". No one has ever quite explained the devious legal stratagem which swaps a Class A misdemeanor (or C felony) arrest for the opportunity to make some more Class A misdemeanor arrests at no small expense. And, to my knowledge, no one has ever demonstrated that actually happening.

Stinging unwary hobbyists, yes. Alexis Whatever might be a cop, as might any of us, but it's the combination of New Listing and No Reviews from Established Hobbyists which should give any sensible hobbyist pause. If you have inside information to add to that-inside information defined as "I saw her and the deal was hinky in the usual, get-undressed-and-fan-out-your-money, honey" cop fashion, or your private pipeline to the Vice Squad-try to figure out some way to say it without "outing" yourself. Or swallow it. It's inflammatory, and the rumor mill is less than worthless nine times out of ten. Everybody and his brother can say it about anyone who refused to see him.

I'm all for this sort of thing being exposed. Just report rumors as rumors and facts as facts.[/QUOTE]It's a rumor. There's no truth to it. I made it all up, based on the fact that one or both of the ladies in question refused to see me.

Look, I know I'm new around here. In my time here however, I've asked a couple of questions, added a few reports, given a couple of the USASG advertisers some business, and generally played by the rules. I'm not trying to come in here with guns blazing, and I have indeed seen some of the disruptions caused by previous exchanges Those exchanges largely involved providers who had some level of verification on this board. Unlike those reports, I searched and found nothing on either of the providers. Therefore, a comparison to those exchanges I believe, is not a valid comparison. I'm stymied by the fact that you are upset by my raising a red flag. I'll repeat this one more time. If I were to give details in public about my information, it would not create a good situation for me-even if I used my extensive knowledge of the English language, liberally seasoned with innuendo, double entendre, and satire. Whether you grasp that reality or agree with it doesn't alter it. In 1/10th of the time it took you to write your response, you could have sent me a PM. Do you really want to know what I know? It would seem to me that by your choice of berating me as opposed to writing me, that question is answered.

As regards to reporting rumor as rumor, I'm not sure how I could more clearly state it than,"I cannot promise that I'm 100 percent correct in my thoughts" and "I would of course be happy to say I was wrong". I would think even you would appreciate that particular wording. (This is another example of how a comparison to other exchanges on the board doesn't really fit my report.)

I'm not looking for a fight. I like this board for many reasons, and am appreciative of the information I've been able to glean from it. I trust that at least someone benefits from what I've had to say in regards to Vivian and Alexis Nicole.

"I'm Urlee Kiler and I approvify this here messige."

[QUOTE=B Beall; 1365497]For the record, what I meant was that reviewers there are limited to one review per provider. Both of the women you mentioned have two reviews.

The point I'm trying to make is that while "someone" might be served by that sort of information, provided it turned out to be true, and reached them just in the nick of time, the board as a whole is not. In case you're not aware of it, that sort of thing has disrupted this forum on a regular basis, always from someone with "inside information" that so-and-so "is working with LE". [b]No one has ever quite explained the devious legal stratagem which swaps a Class A misdemeanor (or C felony) arrest for the opportunity to make some more Class A misdemeanor arrests at no small expense. [/b] And, to my knowledge, no one has ever demonstrated that actually happening.[/QUOTE]Just me playing devil's advocate here. If this happens, perhaps it's a ploy to run a preventative operation and / or one with a big PR media payoff and the corresponding political benefits. Besides, it's potentially easier to keep a first-time offender from becoming a felon than it is to keep a felon from repeating. Once they have the felony, they're branded and their "give-a-damn" is busted too.

[QUOTE=Mikehammerindy;1365724]Just me playing devil's advocate here. If this happens, perhaps it's a ploy to run a preventative operation and / or one with a big PR media payoff and the corresponding political benefits. Besides, it's potentially easier to keep a first-time offender from becoming a felon than it is to keep a felon from repeating. Once they have the felony, they're branded and their "give-a-damn" is busted too.[/QUOTE]There's also the possibility that a) they're hoping some big fish flops into the net, or be) they've got a quota. I've now had three people tell me privately that the events did, in fact, occur as described.

This still doesn't really explain what they were up to. It was, apparently, the young woman's first brush with the law, and she got scammed.

Which is all the more reason for us here to do what we can to make sure that the paranoia and the misinformation are kept in check. This woman was not aware of the legal ramifications of what she was doing. She was unaware that she faced a misdemeanor charge, automatic entry into a diversion program, and a clean record in six months time. She got convinced she needed to do something to help the cops, rather than something to help herself, namely, clam up and demand an attorney. As a result who knows what others' lives may have been ruined.

One thing further: this is why we are all in this together, providers and clients. Anything which increases disinformation and paranoia, discomfort and distrust hurts us all.

[QUOTE=B Beall;1365816]I've now had three people tell me privately that the events did, in fact, occur as described.[/QUOTE]You're welcome.

[QUOTE=EarlyCuyler;1365834]You're welcome.[/QUOTE]Let's not have any misunderstandings with you, me, or the board. I said what I said because I think there ought to be a clear distinction between reporting rumor, opinion, and guesswork from reporting fact. I allowed as how you might be right in general sense.

Had I been an interested hobbyist in this case-which I wasn't-your report wouldn't have convinced me either way, because of the way you stated it. One I received later did convince me, because it contained verifiable facts. And I think I relayed it without revealing any sources.

That's all. I think we can all agree that there's a distinction between saying someone "might be a cop" and noting that a newbie provider fell for Uncle Leo's high-pressure sales technique, and at least one hobbyist got busted. Maybe the latter causes the next newbie in line to do her homework. Maybe it'll encourage some of our brethren, who sample BP girls like grandma's candy dish, to pass along some solid information. Like the three most important things if you're faced with arrest are 1) Try to stay calm; 2) Know your rights; and 3) Realize that the cops don't want you to stay calm or know your rights.

And, finally, let's try to find a small amount of compassion for a scared young woman who got taken. The real culprits are the guys who lurk in dingy motels trying to enforce a comic-book version of Bronze Age morality.

Has anyone seen Tori recently? She's a hot blonde that alternated between Indy and Detroit.

How has no one commented on this one yet?

[url]http://www.**************.com/escorts/jade-lea-indianapolis-white-female[/url]

[url]http://indianapolis.backpage.com/FemaleEscorts/classy-sexy-pleasurable-beautiful-and-real-31/5585224[/url]

She looks fierce!

[QUOTE=Dave30; 1366795]How has no one commented on this one yet?

[url]http://www.**************.com/escorts/jade-lea-indianapolis-white-female[/url]

[url]http://indianapolis.backpage.com/FemaleEscorts/classy-sexy-pleasurable-beautiful-and-real-31/5585224[/url]

She looks fierce![/QUOTE]Googled her phone number and found one "not worth it" review on another board. She does have a couple of good reviews since arriving in Indy, so it would appear as always YMMV.

Is coming to town, and is a really sweet girl!

Kim Marie is simply "Marie" on nr. She's head-to-toe hot and worth every red cent (and then some).

BFDeal.

[QUOTE=JohnBuddy;1366974]Is coming to town, and is a really sweet girl![/QUOTE]

I've seen Marie and she's the best in Indy when she's here, but I've heard Jade is top-notch, although I haven't seen her. And I'm texting Marie as I'm typing this.

BFDeal.

[QUOTE=Dave30; 1366795]How has no one commented on this one yet?

[url]http://www.**************.com/escorts/jade-lea-indianapolis-white-female[/url]

[url]http://indianapolis.backpage.com/FemaleEscorts/classy-sexy-pleasurable-beautiful-and-real-31/5585224[/url]

She looks fierce![/QUOTE]