maninsoma

I don't get this guy's appeal at all, but if I had to guess he's simply figured out another way to make money. Not everyone will pay to watch his soft core porn but maybe some of those people will watch him ramble on YouTube. Enough views and he can make some more coin off his "celebrity."

Not only undue entitlement, but bad business sense. Wouldn't it make more sense for the provider to decline the booking, then, rather than show up and not give his best because he's resentful that the client wouldn't pay an advance deposit? Talk about starting out on the wrong foot -- first the client has a bad impression that the provider wants money before they have even met, and then when the provider agrees to meet with the deposit he has a negative view of the client and therefore provides a substandard experience? I think a reasonable provider could set aside his negativity once he and the client were together and it was clear he wasn't being scammed; otherwise he's just compounding the ways in which he can establish a negative reputation.

If anyone has any doubt that true bisexuals exist, look at self-made porn of someone like Donte Colle. He clearly gets off having sex with both men and women.

As a client, I've never no-showed for an appointment. I have shown up and walked away when the person answering the door wasn't the same person shown in the ad. I have had multiple experiences with providers who failed to show up at my place or weren't reachable when I arrived at their hotels. I'm not losing money when this occurs, but it's still a waste of my time, a waste of preparation as a bottom, and a disappointment since most guys aren't just sitting by the phone available at the drop of a hat if someone else flakes out. I don't expect a provider who is new to me to do anything for me to prove he's reliable and I don't think I need to pay a deposit to prove I'm legitimate, either. As far as I am concerned, the trust needs to be a two-way street. But, again, a provider can obviously choose to run his business any way he sees fit and I, as a customer, can choose to hire him or not.

I guess he's one for name changes. I see that he now has a RentMasseur profile under the name Heyhellohi, and apparently he previously had a Rentmen ad under CrazyAsianMassage or something like that according to a thread about him here that I found searching for Heyhellohi.

I understand a guy being concerned about having no-shows or maybe even guys who try to get something for nothing by not paying at the end of a session, but it's extremely rare in the professional world to have to pay for work before it's performed. I pay at the counter at my doctor's office when I arrive for my appointment, so that would be the equivalent of paying an escort on arrival. If I need work beyond a normal cleaning/exam at my dentist's office, I pay my portion after he performs the work. I know that people pay a deposit when hiring a contractor, but that makes sense because that person typically has to procure materials for the job before actually starting work. The notion that I would just send money via Venmo or whatever to someone I had never met simply because he promised to be available for me at a certain future time is laughable. But, like FrankR wrote, the guy has a right to run his business the way he wants and we as clients have the right to simply look for someone without such a requirement.

I only made it through about 2 1/2 minutes, which was long enough for him to finally give 3 opinions about what drink orders mean in a gay bar: Beer - you are a top Manhattan - you are an older gay man who just wants to sit by yourself and make catty comments to those around you Cosmo - you are an older gay man who wants to remain current with pop culture and have fun with younger guys Beyond just generally finding this guy annoying, these above observations are just so silly.

Not that I haven't watched a lot of "free porn" in my day, but keep in mind that a lot of "free porn" that's available online is only free because someone has posted it without consent of the person who created the content. If some guy really floats my boat, I'd rather pay for a month or three of his OnlyFans page so I can see all of his content without it being edited, without it having reduced picture quality, and without having to scour "free porn" websites for it. That being said, I'm not one to subscribe to someone who is only posting jerk off/show off videos. I want to see men having sex with other men, and not the same couple of guys over and over (another reason why my subscription to someone's page might not get renewed). The best OnlyFans content providers are the ones who are sexy sluts who find a lot of other sexy sluts who want to have sex while recording it so it can be shared online.

To have a good Only Fans page -- one that's worth subscribing to because new, worthwhile content is regularly added -- requires work. I guess from the outside it might look like "easy money" to some since part of the work involves having sex, but recording and editing that sex so it's interesting to watch requires effort. Even without subscribing you can tell a lot of guys' pages are not worth subscribing to due to the infrequency of content being added. Some guys add content regularly but it's more of the same -- here's another photo of me, here's a quick video of me jerking off, etc. I doubt that many subscribers stick around for more than their initial subscription period if that's all they are getting; I know I don't. I'd love to subscribe to a masseur's Only Fans page who posts full videos of erotic massages, but I assume that many masseurs wouldn't want to post their sessions even if they could get their clients' consent and probably even fewer clients would consent to their sessions being posted online, even if they got a cut of the action.

More than a bit, I'd say. The age listed in the ad is definitely a decade off. It's fairly easy to find his information online since he uses the same phone number in his RentMasseur ad that is associated with other aspects of his life.

Given that "transitioned" can mean different things, it's not possible to give a single answer to the question. I would potentially hire a gender fluid or non-binary or gender non-confirming escort who had a penis. I would not hire a person who had surgery that removed their penis since having a penis is a very important part of what makes someone sexually attractive to me.

Maybe the ad has already been removed. The link just leads me to a page of listings. I'm a little perplexed by the story, but as others have written never pay up front unless you know the provider or have good reason to believe he's trustworthy. Even for someone with a known, solid reputation I'd probably just look for someone else if he wanted to be paid up front and I'd never met him before.

I assume the San Quentin quip was meant as a joke, but if one puts up an ad where he is lauding the character Voldemort then it makes sense that someone might equate him with murder or attempted murder -- you know, the type of behavior that could land someone in San Quentin. The photos show a hot young man, but the text is either just not well thought out because it creates the wrong impression (just because you like reading murder mysteries or watching films with heroes and villains doesn't make you a killer or wannabe killer) or the entire ad is a joke. I am voting for the latter.

I think he means chivalry, and if I hired the guy and liked him I would try to politely inform him that he needs to correct his ad.

I'm not even sure the ad is legit. The amount of information provided is scant, yet the advertiser spent a lot of time philosophizing about the wonders of villains. Even if the guy shows up and looks like the man in the photos, do you really want to be with someone whose leading line is how much he admires villains? Do you want to be his victim?

Thanks for the laugh.

Maybe the ad has already been removed? You link just took me to a general listing for New York City.

He is absolutely, stunningly gorgeous (at least to my eyes), so he has that going for him. $1,000/hour is way too rich for my blood, but if he makes enough on Only Fans and wants to limit his clients to those who are either very wealthy or who spend more than they can really afford then there's nothing really to complain about except that us mere mortals won't ever get the chance to be with him.

I'm not sure that the show's ending has anything to do with the claims of how horrible of a person Ellen is when the cameras are off. I'm guessing it's all because the show has lost so many viewers, and for whatever reason the show's producers haven't figured out how to have an entertaining show since the pandemic began. Her series of shows shot from her home were pretty awful. I ended up fast forwarding through most of them. I think people were willing to give her some slack, though, since no one was going to have a talk show with in person guests and a live audience when the pandemic began. But there's really no excuse for how they have produced the show this season. Some guests show up in person, but a lot are still only there via computer. The number of guests has been reduced, with entire episodes being devoted to people without much to say so it ends up feeling like the audience is just eavesdropping on a mundane conversation between Ellen and someone she knows. Way too much time is spent playing clips from pre-pandemic shows. Sitcoms maybe do this once per season, if that, but for a daily talk show to expect its viewers to want to watch repeats almost daily is puzzling. The icing on the cake was Ellen deciding she didn't want to film five episodes per week, with rotating guest hosts appearing on Friday -- many of whom had no experience carrying a show (and it showed). All in all, this season has been a drag to watch which is why I fast forward lots of segments and simply delete without watching other episodes. I basically only watch still for the monologue and if there is a guest I like. Somehow Graham Norton figured out how to return to work and still make an entertaining show. Even when he was doing everything via Zoom, his interviews still had the same wit. Now that he's back in the studio with four socially distanced guests, the dynamic is pretty much the same as pre-pandemic if you ignore the lack of an in person audience.

Not only does cash protect escorts against chargebacks, as a client I prefer it because I don't really want an electronic record of my payment to providers.

"Nip it in the butt" has me intrigued. Tell me more.

If I assume the app developer has integrity, they probably are just fetching stuff in the background constantly so that when a user wants to find a match for an image that can be done more efficiently. They probably aren't really harvesting website logons and passwords. If they were, that would be discovered fairly quickly and everyone would stop using them. Still, it doesn't sit well with me that someone wants more information than they need and I generally try to share only the information I need to. And even if that app developer isn't using all of the information they are collecting, if they are collecting and storing more information than they need to provide the intended service they could end up getting hacked and then someone else misuses the harvested information. This is why I chose to never use Facebook or Facebook Messenger on my phone and I never gave Facebook my phone number. I don't need to browse Facebook when I'm not at home and anyone who really knows me can send me a text, not a message through Facebook. I don't want Facebook mining any more of my information than I've given them. I've been looking into refinancing my mortgage recently and have checked rates at various banks. The websites that require me to start giving them personally identifying information before they will disclose rates just get closed out. And if an app requests overly broad permissions then I either choose not to install the app or, if it's an option, I disable some permissions even if it means some features don't work as intended. I know that they only way to truly regain most of one's privacy is to stop using the internet and credit cards, to "live off the grid" as much as possible. I'm not willing to do that and I realize that modern life has a trade off of lack of privacy in exchange for making some things more convenient. But I definitely set limits when some entity tries to get me to consent to something that isn't reasonable.

One would have to be incredibly stupid and/or naive to fall for such an obvious scam.

I searched Firefox add ons as you suggested and the top two (including one named Search By Image) required giving permissions I was not comfortable with. Why would an image search tool need "access to every website you visit?" Upon reading the definition of this, I was advised that that included user names and passwords. There's no way I'm going to install an add on whose purpose is to allow me to search that's going to potentially track my banking usernames and passwords.

You asked about him in the summer of 2019 but didn't get a response from anyone who hired him. Then you started two separate threads on him last month (maybe you titled the second one "delete" after realizing you had recently started another thread asking him him). One person had experience with him but didn't recall much about it. Then you posted a comment in a thread another person had started about something else, asking about the guy. So you've obviously been interested in this guy for quite a while and there doesn't seem to be feedback available from forum members. Maybe you should just finally "bite the bullet" and then report back to the rest of us how it went.