former lurker

I seem to recall that Christian tweeted a while back that he had been diagnosed with ulcerative cholitis and that the condition was serious/chronic. That sort of condition, depending on the severity and course of treatment/dietary regimen can result in weight loss and loss of muscle mass.

No doubt, it's a benefit to the members of the board when you flag an escort and the related review postings. So, thanks for that. I simply pointed out there's more to garner from the RM review history of the prolific reviewer and the other reviewers.

I've enjoyed reading your posts. I hope the step-back doesn't keep you from continuing to grace us with your forum presence. Best wishes for whatever course you take.

It's worth noting that the reviewer with excessive number of reviews has also reviewed a number of other escorts, several of whom he reviewed multiple times as well. A quick run through the RM reviews shows the other reviewers for "hotstudlat" also have reviewed other escorts, and the sole negative reviewer has just the review of hotstudlat and not other escorts. So, it could be there's a client with a propensity for lots of repeats with his providers who is prolific with reviews and 1 dissatisfied customer with no track record to rely on.

I get his logic. A lot of clients also don't want to book longer sessions the first time they see an escort. Hiring for one hour provides the opportunity to see if a longer session might work out, while limiting the cost in money or time. For the escort, not knowing the client yet, it's a big gamble to set aside the time for a multihour session when the client might flake, cut the session short, or not work out otherwise.

Nice catch. Should have said "couldn't" rather than "could".

I could care less about your preferences. I have my own, and I enjoy them. What am I supposed to do with the links you've posted? Do you think porn clips like this pertain to real life? You express fairly rigid views, and you express them emphatically with no subtlety or nuance, then fall back to saying "just my preference". As I said, when you say provocative things, expect to hear criticism. Rather than telling me what problems I have, consider your own views and statements and why you've gotten the responses you have. Oh, and I should add: I have no problem with your preferences. You're the one who is expressing distaste for what are some other people's preferences. After all, there's only one person posting on this thread about the sort of people they don't want to be with, and that person is . . .

And one doesn't need to say everything, either. When you do express narrow stereotypes, expect criticism. If you don't want to get that criticism, don't say provocative things. The problem with what you've said isn't that it's your "preference", it's that you present your preference as if it is universal fact. It's not. It's yours, not everyone else's.

First off, getting tested would involve also getting medical advice as to what is and isn't "safe" if you have developed antibodies. That alone is reason enough to get tested. Second, the HIPPA laws require medical personnel to maintain the confidentiality of your medical records, so there's no reason for your employer to discover anything about your medical condition unless you talk about it with them, co-workers, others who are not medical care providers. Third, there is some thinking that you can catch the virus more than once. You may be an example of someone having done so. We don't know whether repeat cases are more, less or equally severe to initial cases. You may be more susceptible to catch it, and that's yet another important reason to get tested if it's available.

Why did you inquire if you had no intention of hiring due to covid?

This belongs in the Politics Forum -- all of the discussion of Cuomo, not just your post. If it were there, I'd ask you whether you think Cuomo is more of a fraud than President Trump, and if so, why. But let's leave that discussion for the Politics Forum.

Especially if you like clams on your pie.

New Haven, despite the presence of Yale, is not exactly upscale either. But Bridgeport is definitely more working class and lower middle class than most of Connecticut.

You make perfect sense. As I read the posts attacking him, and those by him, my impression is that there is room for criticism on both sides of the debate. However, he is the provider and the focus, so it doesn't serve him well to get into spats with other posters regardless of whether those posters are excessive in their criticisms. If he felt the need to clarify, he should leave it at that and not engage the personality of an opposing poster. I agree about the limits of RM as a venue for clear expression. More broadly, communicating online, even through posts on forums such as this one, have their limits. Tone, personality, openness or rigidity, etc, are all less clear in print than live/in person/on the phone. That said, to avoid painting oneself in an unfavorable light, the limits of the media have to be taken into account. More measured language that is less susceptible to negative interpretations is warranted.

Some free advice: sometimes silence IS golden. When you lash out like you have in this thread, you are communicating on multiple levels. There is the content of your language, or what you say on the subject. Then there is the fact of your having said it and how you say it, both of which say as much about you as they do about the subject you're addressing. Sometimes trying to prove your point, you lose by virtue of how you present yourself.

You are far from the only one who offers comments about your personal tastes, or points out stuff literally in the ads. It's a common practice. At its best, this forum provides first hand information about providers. But it's also a place where people offer unsolicited opinions, point out the obvious, etc, purely as a means of expressing themselves. I wouldn't worry too much about it, but it's not unfair for others to point out whether you're really contributing anything useful to the OP who is generally seeking first hand info based on actual experience.

Lots of armchair commentary, often simply pointing out things from the ad linked in the OP. I treat it as inbox clutter because I can interpret/read the ad myself. If one were to point out each post that is either pointing out something from the ad or expressing a personal preference, it would only add more clutter. But the emoji idea . . . hmmm.

The last post, which didn't say anything about the escort in question, was 14 years ago. The link in the OP is not functional. If you want info, try to find a current ad, post it, and ask -- preferably in a new thread.

I can read quite well. I've also studied and taught logic. The assertion that it's OVERLY cautious doesn't follow from not knowing the duration of immunity. The latter makes the former statement a leap of logic. As to whether I'd hire you, that wasn't my point but with each passing flurry of your posts, I suspect you chase more people away, and not merely because of corona concerns. If I'm being "annoying", you're ahead of the curve on that one.

You acknowledge not having the answer to duration of immunity, then in the same sentence conclude that it's why the WHO is being "overly cautious". It's not overly cautious in advance of that information. It's prudent caution. It's statement like that that give people pause about your claims and your judgment.

Reading through your responses, I get the sense that you may be missing a point or two. We are in the early stages as far as assessing rates of infection, reinfection, duration of antibody immunity, etc. While it makes sense to internalize hopeful signs, it doesn't make sense to act on them in advance of further data. Also, it seems that your ad conveyed the sense that you were claiming you couldn't pass the virus on. If you're not saying that, please clarify. If you are saying that, don't be surprised that people will question your judgment.

The current concern is the absence of reliable data. What should we do before it is available? For now, it seems to me, the risks of underestimating the risks of relapse and/or reinfection are more harmful than the risks of overestimating them. As we gain reliable data, we will need to adjust our approach. There is a lot of armchair science going on. Whether and to what extent we can rely on experience with other diseases to analogize the role of antibodies is one important area where we lack sufficient data.

I'm guessing that NYC man hears Bridgeport and thinks of an upscale area. If so, that's incorrect. It's part of an upscale area, Fairfield county, that has a number of ritzy cities and towns, including Westport. Bridgeport itself is an old manufacturing city, more lower middle and working class. It's also a majority minority city.

When I saw the name, my first thought was of the Taconic Parkway in NY.

Ouch! I'm easily burnt, but have never been diagnosed as allergic to the sun. But I'm allergic to anything it makes grow. I guess good sun block is a staple of your daily routine.