APPLE1

I lean toward guys who have more of a IDGAF attitude and seem low maintenance. While I am sure we all draw the IDGAF line in a different spot for appearance, painted nails definitely crosses that line for me.

No.

My favorite ad was: I like dead presidents. Ben Franklin is my fav SMH, ohhh how the American education system has failed us.

I give a general description, and no pic, right up front. I'm not hung like a horse, and I don't have 6 pack abs. I have been offered a discount up front (usually after I decline a meeting). BUT, I am much more likely to be offered a discounted, or free meeting, on a repeat session. I have always attributed it to 3 possible factors: 1) The provider had a slow week, and even a discounted session is better than $0. 2) I am doing something right during our past session. 3) "Opposites attract" can be universal. I am attracted to, and usually hire, guys very different from me.

The US discontinued routine smallpox vaccinations in 1971/1972. It used to be a great way to catch age "fibbers"who were trying to shave 10 years, but would tell you the scar on their arm was from smallpox vaccination.

https://rentmen.eu/ZaneWoods

@pubic_assistance Please check your sources. "If you don't have anything nice to say don't talk," was in quotes because it wasn't MY statement. It was me quoting Daniel1984

I can say I have only experienced one flaky provider in Denver. I've been there and hired a lot, although at this point, I have established a pool of "regulars" I hire in Denver.

When I am traveling, or see a traveling provider, it's often about how pretty or special they are. I will reach out, and inquire about what they are providing. I may rearrange my schedule, pay a little more, or send a pic and lengthy description if they are pretty enough or offering something special. If not, I decline to rearrange my schedule, pay more, or jump thru any hoops I don't find necessary. I don't expect the provider to be upset with me for not accommodating him, and I am certainly not upset with the provider not accommodating me. It's really no different than any other goods or services I purchase. If I go to a newly opened McDonald's, I am not paying $30 for a burger, waiting in line for 20 min, or making a reservation-it's not that special! I can go down the street to another McDonald's, a Burger King, or a steakhouse to satisfy my hunger. I may go back to that same McDonald's tomorrow to see if there's no wait.

Wow! What a great recipe for spontaneity! I think I am going to try my next experience with a provider I've never seen before like that.

I don't think the client being in Gaithersburg now, or later, was the stumbling block. The client talked about Gaithersburg, and when the provider asked about Charlotte, the client was unsettled. Possibly thinking things like 'I said Gaithersburg, but he brings up Charlotte. Is he not paying attention to what I tell him? Is he too high to focus? And now he wants to know exactly where I am in Gaithersburg, before we have even gotten to any other details. I am feeling uneasy.' I am not saying the client communicated well, or should have been weirded out. I am saying, like many client/provider texts we hear about, both of them them could have 1) communicated more clearly, and 2) taken a minute to explore what the other meant besides the very first thought that came into their head.

I don't get "anger" from the client. I more envision frustration. The impression I get, having the bennifit of the back story from you, is that the provider's first 2 lines were 1 thought, but because messages can sometimes get interrupted if the other party keys faster or a senders connection is slow, the client's message came in between the provider's complete thought, and becauseof this the client felt like the provider may not have been paying attention to what he was saying. Overall, I think the client could have explored more options for what/how the provider was trying to communicate. But, I also have to say, I think it would have served the provider better to give the client the explanation he gave you right from the start instead of just asking for the where and when details. Sometimes one word, or a few words, work just fine in messaging, and sometimes, to make sure you're not misinterpreted, it helps to write a paragraph before you click send.

All other things equal, if I am choosing a between profiles that are exclusively smiling pics and no smiling pics, I am picking the no smile provider. Too many smiles just makes me think the guy will be chatty. If he's chatty, he's is not the one for me!

I fail to understand why anyone would explain WHY they aren't available. Unless we have matching wedding rings, all I need to say is "I can't meet then." Giving details is an open invitation to question my life choices and priorities.

I am not sure embarrassment is the case for most who object to other people being present. I rarely talk about my masturbation practices with other people. I'm not embarrassed, and I assume others assume I masturbate. It's one of MANY parts of my life I keep private. And if I do share it with someone, I certainly don't expect them to bring it up 2 weeks from now at happy hour with other people.

Just by virtue of it being a gay app makes it a hook up app right??? LOL! Excluding the apps marketed for selling services, you can make any app what you want it to be. I think guys looking for more than a hook up are in the minority on the apps, but you can do it. I've done it. I've known others that have done it. As I have traveled, I have noticed regional differences in app usage too. How popular they are in an area, and how many guys in an area seem use a particular app for hook ups or dating.

I estimate that a little over 50% of the providers I have met with came. It often gives me some questions. Is it sense of obligation to a client, or desire? Sometimes one? Sometimes the other? Sex should be fun. I don't want anyone involved to be miserable, so I am always willing to continue when any party expresses "almost there" or "could you do X." But, when we have the conversation about how our session will go, is it rude, or direct, to just lay out there that "I can be an active participant if you want to cum, and if you don't want to, that's fine too." Would providers feel less pressure and more relaxed having that knowledge from the start?

I am not trying to belittle your experience, but unfortunately, YOU let them take your Ziploc baggie of meds, and YOU entertained their bullshit by answering questions. Experience has taught me that I am the primary advocate for MY health. Generally that means, when I take my bag of pills along for a hospital stay, I only have to ASK 3 questions: 1) The chart lists current meds and supplements, right? 2) I haven't been declared not competent to make my own medical decisions, right? 3) My primary indicated I would be managing my own regular meds while I am here, right? Once, a hospitalist tried to question my primary's orders on letting me manage my meds. It didn't go over well. My primary got loud and ugly. The hospitalist lost, quickly. I can't even imagine if it was a pharmacist and a nurse manager questioning the orders he wrote.

What @rvwnsdsaid about checking on significant unseen damage is certainly important. You can typically buy the car from the insurance company when it's totalled though. They will total it out for say $5000, agree to sell it to you for say $500, and simply cut you a check for $4500. Even if it's financed, you can often agree to buy it from the insurance company. At that point you can fix, or not fix, any damage you want to. I hit a deer right after I graduated college. It was completely cosmetic, but insurance totalled the car. I didn't feel like dumping money into a car at that time, so I replaced some lights, put liability on the car, and drove it with dents until I decided to get a different car.

Even in the example you put forth, the devil is in the details! Maybe I wasn't as being clear as I thought I was being earlier. I think clients are free to feel, and write, however they want about experiences with providers, but GIVE DETAILS to support claims/feelings. If their aren't enough details, readers can't even begin to try to identify who the devil is. Had the client written: the provider left after 35 mins, I didn't finish, he said he had to get to another appointment he bookended onto mine, and he rudely ran out the door without even a goodbye or a thanks. I think that's very different than the client writing: the provider left after 50 mins. We had finished, but I paid for 60 mins, and he shorted me time because he should have cuddled with me for 10 more mins. I felt like he cut my time because he had to get to another appointment he had bookended onto mine, and after he said goodbye and thanked me, he rudely left without even a hug and kiss at the doorway. I mean if we're not going to take each other's, or 7 other members, testament on who is hot, or not, because we want to see links/pics and make the determination ourselves, why would think anyone else should believe testament on subjectives like "left early," "rude," or "shady" without supporting detail. My perspective may be tainted because I am looking to hire, and therefore likely read more reviews of providers than clients, but I don't see as many providers on this forum making unsupported statements about clients. I usually see, or recall seeing, providers saying "late" and then defining it as "X mins", or saying things like "rude" and supporting it with "because the client did/said "X, Y, and Z".

Lemonade out of lemons 👍. A hot shower together is never a bad way to start a session!

I read the reviews on JAELLPZ. None of the words agressive, demanding, or menacing are FACTS. They are CONCLUSIONS. It's a very important and useful distinction. When people write their recollection of anothers words or actions, readers can draw their own conclusions. Let me illustrate: prvoder X says at the end, "I need you to hurry up, I have 9pm client coming." Client A may write "the provider rudely pushed me out the door as soon as we were done." Client B may write "the provider was straightforward with me and put a premium on protecting my anonymity." Neither client is wrong in how they feel, but I can't really assign my "grade" unless both reviewers tell me their recollections of what the provide said and did.

I can understand that it's always a question of relative risk. I go to the dog park. Part of the "risk assessment" is weighing the other options. If I didn't go to the dog park, I'd walk the dog down the sidewalk. I typically encounter 15 other dog walkers on a walk. I let my dog sniff and play/interact with the dogs we meet for a bit. It doesn't seem significantly less risky than having more extended interaction with the 20 dogs that will be at the dog park. @Funguy is there a map to this mythical magical dog park you speak of full of the "snooty" people? I've never experienced it. LOL! I understand there are crazies on both ends of the dog park spectrum, but I think I would welcome the occasional canine tussle if it meant the DOGS socialized, and the owners got to keep one eye on the dog and MY other eye on my phone crusing for escorts, or socializing on company of men, and not being proselytized to about the mistakes I am making with my dog. And don't get me wrong, I don't care who hosts, or partakes in, a pot luck at the dog park. Likewise though, OWNERS shouldn't be badgered into participation because we are 2 strangers who simply encounter one another regularly at the dog park. I've known plenty middle aged housewives. WE never bonded just because we both liked dick, and just because someone else owns a dog, that's not enough to make a bond for me either. @Stormy and @EZEtoGRU, I will am certainly willing to share a list of highlights that nut job dog park visitors have attempted to admonish me for: not feeding the right treats, not using the right bags to pick up his shit, not putting a coat on him in the cold (he is a cold weather breed), not shaving him in the summer so he stays cool, allowing him to interact with other dogs freely before asking the owner's permission (not that he's been ageessive to other dogs), not taking him up to and giving him an introduction to people (not that he's been aggressive to people), using a leash and collar instead of a harness (and he does walk completely calm and controlled with a collar), using the wrong leash for his breed, using hand signals and not talking to him enough, allowing him to play in deep water, mud, and/or cold water, allowing him to entice other dogs into playing in deep water, mud, and/or cold water, and finally my favorite, not teaching him that when he and another dog play with his tug toy, he has a social responsibility to let the smaller dogs win sometimes. While I wish MY experiences at the dog park were better with people, I do still take the dog. HIS positive experiences are my ultimate motivator.

Also not sure what the "obvious" would be. But, back to the question of not publishing Prep status, I feel like writing "not on Prep" would generate a lot of personal questions a provider may not want to answer. I have to assume there are folks out there not taking Prep specifically due to existing health conditions and pharmaceutical interactions.

https://cvm.missouri.edu/cvm-experts-caution-against-overreaction-to-canine-infectious-respiratory-disease-cases/