former lurker

Time also makes memories less reliable and turns uncertain memories into had fact in the mind.

You do not get thanked or praised enough for keeping working links in front of us.

Exactly. Thanks. It's so common for guys to look at a post without looking at the posts around it for context.

Reggie (character name) on Riverdale.

Nor mine.

That might be counterproductive. PO's generally disallow being w/in a set distance from a certain place or places, as the protected person's home. If the restrained person doesn't know where that home is, in order to issue the order, the court must reveal it.

There may be more to the story. For instance, the client may have misrepresented himself beforehand or been more than merely overweight. At what point is it kindest to ask "are you "morbidly obese”? Not answering the door may have been a small kindness. In any event, this suggests client's be upfront about the stuff we've heard have been disqualifiers. (Age, medical condition, skin condition, obesity, etc).

You mean discount for multi-hour sessions? Or for a promise to re-hire? If the latter, do you pay the full amount for session one then get discounts on future sessions?

We must be looking at different versions/formats of RM. The page I see for him doesn't reference his "style” using the word "style”.

I read his ad otherwise. He describes himself as a muscle guy. He lists "twinks” among his "into” list, as he does "daddies”.

Because you didn't meet, you generally can't leave a review.

If he's in Europe, texting might mean fees and rates for int'l d/p on his plan. Might try RM messaging.

If he kept the same account but changed his name the reviews remain.

Why "avoid”?

It was.

Perhaps they're a name passed down from time to time like the dread pirate Roberts.

Not sure if this is still the case, but thebestflex site had a way to search for guys open to meeting.

Changing names and changing accounts are distinct acts. Changing one's handle doesn't delete one's reviews. If you had an RM chat and the provider changed names the old chat will link to the new ad. My take on how reliable any review is has a lot to do with the reviewer's other reviews and whether they seem credible and unbiased. The more specific the review, the more I can assess the criteria applied by the reviewer. Some clients have decision rules (no face pix, kissing not guaranteed, etc., no hire). Other's balance all the info they can acquire and make a case by case assessment. Ultimately, you have to see what works best for you -- recognizing that there is always a degree of uncertainty and thus risk, and some of us are more risk averse than others.

Some other possibilities include tone/tenor of the contact, reading this forum and screening out those who seem negative or to not respect providers or who complain about prices they want, or negative feedback from other providers.

Exactly right. Cheapest by far.

In my 20's, I took a group of college debaters on a tour in England and Scotland. We flew on Icelandic Air, and switched planes in Keflavik. The layover was sheduled to be 12 hours. The flight over landed in Iceland on May 1 around 8:00 AM. As it was "May Day” in Iceland, most of the country was on strike and we were not allowed to leave the international floor of the airport (one of the debaters had family friends in Rekyavik who had planned to take us around. Restricted to the Int'l floor, we hit the bar for drinks. After 1 drink, they announced last call at 9 AM. It seems there were Int'l flights only twice a day, 12 hours apart. We were the only passengers there. The airport, including bathrooms, had lots of teac.. LIke the airport was built by Dansk.

Nixon's resignation in August 1974.

Two times fellow passengers had items confiscated. First, pre-9/11, 5 of us were returning from a college trip to Japan. One of the other students attempted to bring an ornate sword in her carry on luggage. She reasoned that it was a "gift” for her brother. I whispered in her ear to ask that the crew store it. I explained to her that buying a weapon as a gift didn't transform into a non-weapon. Had she visited Israel, she wouldn't be allowed to carry an uzi onto the plane. Ultimately the pilot offered to hold the sword for the flight. Unfortunately, we flew from Tokyo/Nariata to Chicago/O'Hare where we to connect for the last leg of the flight. The delay boarding our party because of the sword snafu left our names off the passengers list. United Airlines cancelled all of its flights due to a strike. We were booked on Northwest, but all of the airlines were taking bumped United passengers. We ended up waiting for about 12 hours to get rebooked. Second, post-9/11, the guy in front of me was stopped, and the security line delayed when he tried to bring a set of electric tools onto the plane. Also an international flight, so the delay made some of us nervous about getting through customs screening on time. We did, but it was close

You lack sufficient reading comprehension and are too defensive to have a reasonable dialog. I'll just not that a "rant" may be written. You've opted for a narrow definition. The word rant accurately describes the tenor or your post. And I was referring to your bringing up the "friend's" rates. You find those rates so offensive you have to include them in your list of gripes about the provider who's the subject of the thread. But I'll let other readers draw their conclusions. No distortion on my part. You also choose to get needlessly nasty. Not only is English my "first" language, it's the one I'm published in and employed as a college teacher and attorney drafting opinions for a federal, as well as the language I utilized as an editorial manager of one of the nation's leading law review. Try reading more carefully, both what you write and what other's write in response. It'll reduce the noise and the confusion. BTW, when you stoop to unsupported insults (questioning my facility with English, accusing me of fabricating and distorting because you didn't recognize I was saying you shouldn't criticize the provider asked about in the thread based on your dislike of his friend's pricing. Oh, and what "confirmable" facts did you point out? That the provider may be 6' or 6'1" (or, perhaps 6' . 5"). You were merely alerting the forum to facts. You were (mis) characterizing those facts.