RadioRob

If you simply expect people to make an offer, wouldn’t you just later be mad when you spend your time with lowball offers? 

I would set my price and as soon as they say too expensive, just move on. Having them make an offer first just sets you up for the lowball offers out the gate as it’s now haggling. 

Linking to an image (meaning you paste the URL) means you're counting on the "source" to host the image.  If they remove that image or block it, that image will no longer show on our site.  
By uploading it to our site (meaning you saved it to your computer and then "choose files"), a copy of it is stored on our site itself meaning you don't have to worry it disappearing in the future.  

It's because the image source is not available.  For example:
https://www.boytoy.com/forums/uploads/monthly_2018_06/Screenshot_20180614-151010_Chrome.jpg.e94c9378788b62dfba15a8530984eb15.jpg That image file is not accessible.  I tried to load it in my browser, but it just timed out attempting to load it.  If I manually changed the URL to:
https://www.gayguides.com/forums/uploads/monthly_2018_06/Screenshot_20180614-151010_Chrome.jpg.e94c9378788b62dfba15a8530984eb15.jpg It looks like the webmaster there never setup 301 redirects to route any request from their old URL to the new one.  
There is not a set time for any image to be expired/deleted.  However things like domain changes can cause some issues like this from time to time.

Can you give me an example thread?  There are a bunch of if/else answers so I don’t want to give a wrong explanation. 

One of the biggest challenges that I've observed over the years is the number of "411" threads on a specific person.  There are times we could have anywhere from 3-12 on a single person!  This could happen for different reasons...  such as someone not knowing how to use the search function or the provider had changed their name.  
When we eventually launch the new review site, when a new item is added... a forum topic will automatically be created for that place/person.  It will have a subject of:
[ Category ] Item Name 
So for example, it might look like:
[ Escort ] John Doe
The first post inside of that topic will contain fields from the review (I can pick which fields get brought over so not all may be posted).  The goal will be that the topic will become the master topic about discussion about that item (person/place).  
Over time...  if we see information that changes about the item, people will be able to report it so that it can be updated.  So if an escort changes their name for example, someone would report that record and provide the new name.  A moderator will be able to update the item.  They'll also be able to add the old name to a special field called "Former Names".  This will let us to better track those who change their names from time to time.  
Inside the review record, it might look something like:

If other things change, that can be updated in the record itself.  
All of the detail from that record anytime it is edited would also sync to the master thread and edit the first post in it with the updated info, including the topic title if there was a a name change involved.  
Now... I'm going to put this out there now that moderators may from time to time not publish a name change in the "Former Names" field.  If we have reason to believe there is a risk to the person or there is another legitimate reason, we may update the name field only without adding the old name to the former name field.  
This will hopefully allow the first post to contain all of the latest known info about each item as it gets changed over time without needing to update 500 places.  If it works out the way I'm hoping, this will become the "source of truth" about the item and people can comment over time with their own observations, etc.  The topic itself would not be used for reviews.  (That's what the review system is for.) But general discussion about the person would happen there.
Eventually if someone does post a new thread about someone where a master topic exists, the moderators may end up merging that post into the master.
This is obviously not in place yet.  I'm just tossing the idea out there now so folks have a chance to comment on it and get used to the idea.  
 

One of the biggest challenges that I've observed over the years is the number of "411" threads on a specific person.  There are times we could have anywhere from 3-12 on a single person!  This could happen for different reasons...  such as someone not knowing how to use the search function or the provider had changed their name.  
When we eventually launch the new review site, when a new item is added... a forum topic will automatically be created for that place/person.  It will have a subject of:
[ Category ] Item Name 
So for example, it might look like:
[ Escort ] John Doe
The first post inside of that topic will contain fields from the review (I can pick which fields get brought over so not all may be posted).  The goal will be that the topic will become the master topic about discussion about that item (person/place).  
Over time...  if we see information that changes about the item, people will be able to report it so that it can be updated.  So if an escort changes their name for example, someone would report that record and provide the new name.  A moderator will be able to update the item.  They'll also be able to add the old name to a special field called "Former Names".  This will let us to better track those who change their names from time to time.  
Inside the review record, it might look something like:

If other things change, that can be updated in the record itself.  
All of the detail from that record anytime it is edited would also sync to the master thread and edit the first post in it with the updated info, including the topic title if there was a a name change involved.  
Now... I'm going to put this out there now that moderators may from time to time not publish a name change in the "Former Names" field.  If we have reason to believe there is a risk to the person or there is another legitimate reason, we may update the name field only without adding the old name to the former name field.  
This will hopefully allow the first post to contain all of the latest known info about each item as it gets changed over time without needing to update 500 places.  If it works out the way I'm hoping, this will become the "source of truth" about the item and people can comment over time with their own observations, etc.  The topic itself would not be used for reviews.  (That's what the review system is for.) But general discussion about the person would happen there.
Eventually if someone does post a new thread about someone where a master topic exists, the moderators may end up merging that post into the master.
This is obviously not in place yet.  I'm just tossing the idea out there now so folks have a chance to comment on it and get used to the idea.  
 

DAY 1...  Alphabetical order.  
But with that said, we're tracking location.  To make it easier to match up locations, they'll use Google's auto-suggest for cities.  

So we won't have to worry about issues like "Ft Lauderdale, FL" vs "Fort Lauderdale, FL" vs "Ft. Lauderdale, FL" (with the period in Fort). 
Very shortly after the initial release, there will be a map view to see items based on location.  Below is a screenshot "stock map" that has not been integrated yet.

The idea is that you could pick a state and see all of the items that are associated with that location.  In addition, where the squares are would be pins link to reviews for cities that have more than XX reviews.  We would not be able to have THOUSANDS of pins, but the idea is that our top 10-20 cities might get pins.
I'm also working to create a location filter where someone would just be able to search for a city and get those results as well.  That would look/feel somewhat like Rent.men's location system.  My goal is to leverage that same Google location suggestion to power it where you start typing a city or a state...  when you submit it, you get results for just that area.

You're essentially on target.  
Reviews are essentially what Daddy's site was before.  Reviews of encounters that actually happened.  The person that saw the escort (or other item) has a chance to tell their story.  If the provider wants a chance to respond, they do as well and will have the final word.  
The master thread is general ongoing discussion that involve that item (person).  
The differences between Daddy's site and what I'm trying to do...
The new review system allows for more than escorts to be reviewed.  We can essentially review ANYTHING.  Each category of things to be reviewed can have it's own fields and it's own review questions. The review system is highly integrated into the forum itself.  This includes having the ability to have new things being reviewed automatically have a forum discussion created.  That discussion will exist in both the item record itself and in the appropriate forum.  (They're basically automatically "synced".) Daddy never separated the escort from the review.  Meaning every time you submitted a review, you submitted everything about an escort.  By having a database of escorts that just describe the escort, it's possible to then have reviews be linked to things that already exist.  I don't need you to tell me their height and weight, etc if the person already exists!  I already know it!  Instead you are simply telling me about the encounter itself.   Daddy's site also allowed viewing by location and by date.  This will be added in a subsequent update.  Day one, I'm just trying to get functionality down.  The different "views" of the data will come soon.  

One of the biggest challenges that I've observed over the years is the number of "411" threads on a specific person.  There are times we could have anywhere from 3-12 on a single person!  This could happen for different reasons...  such as someone not knowing how to use the search function or the provider had changed their name.  
When we eventually launch the new review site, when a new item is added... a forum topic will automatically be created for that place/person.  It will have a subject of:
[ Category ] Item Name 
So for example, it might look like:
[ Escort ] John Doe
The first post inside of that topic will contain fields from the review (I can pick which fields get brought over so not all may be posted).  The goal will be that the topic will become the master topic about discussion about that item (person/place).  
Over time...  if we see information that changes about the item, people will be able to report it so that it can be updated.  So if an escort changes their name for example, someone would report that record and provide the new name.  A moderator will be able to update the item.  They'll also be able to add the old name to a special field called "Former Names".  This will let us to better track those who change their names from time to time.  
Inside the review record, it might look something like:

If other things change, that can be updated in the record itself.  
All of the detail from that record anytime it is edited would also sync to the master thread and edit the first post in it with the updated info, including the topic title if there was a a name change involved.  
Now... I'm going to put this out there now that moderators may from time to time not publish a name change in the "Former Names" field.  If we have reason to believe there is a risk to the person or there is another legitimate reason, we may update the name field only without adding the old name to the former name field.  
This will hopefully allow the first post to contain all of the latest known info about each item as it gets changed over time without needing to update 500 places.  If it works out the way I'm hoping, this will become the "source of truth" about the item and people can comment over time with their own observations, etc.  The topic itself would not be used for reviews.  (That's what the review system is for.) But general discussion about the person would happen there.
Eventually if someone does post a new thread about someone where a master topic exists, the moderators may end up merging that post into the master.
This is obviously not in place yet.  I'm just tossing the idea out there now so folks have a chance to comment on it and get used to the idea.  
 

Normally have seen his ad in London.  He's visiting the US...  finishing in DC and then headed to Philly tomorrow, then to NYC and Boston.  
LuccaTwink on Rent.Men
RENT.MEN View my profile on Rent.Men Had a great time with him.  Pictures are accurate and he was a sweetheart.  If you're in Philly, NYC, or Boston...  I would definitely recommend.  

Also to give you an idea about what this might look like when we're done...  this is a mockup I've made of how I think this is going to turn out when finished.  
All of the item info would be on the left hand side... such as Contact Info, Personal Info, etc.  The reviews themselves would be on the right side.  

I did not make my appointment until he was in my city.  It might not hurt to wait till he's actually in your neighborhood if his travel schedule is not firm.  

Normally have seen his ad in London.  He's visiting the US...  finishing in DC and then headed to Philly tomorrow, then to NYC and Boston.  
LuccaTwink on Rent.Men
RENT.MEN View my profile on Rent.Men Had a great time with him.  Pictures are accurate and he was a sweetheart.  If you're in Philly, NYC, or Boston...  I would definitely recommend.  

It's unusual but not necessarily unheard of.  At the end of the day, if you don't feel comfortable with sharing it, don't.  
I've seen a couple people ask, but not require it.  (And I've seen more providers than I care to admit!)  Remember...  at the end of the day, the person on the other side doesn't know what to expect either.  Most seasoned/professional providers won't bother asking and just go with the flow.  Some newer and/or younger providers are of the Grinder era where swapping photos is a common thing.  Some might even be trying to turn their sex life into a revenue stream.

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

Stickies are good for communicating short term announcements, but I'm trying to avoid them for long term messaging.  They end up eventually cluttering the display and making you scroll through a whole bunch of stuff to find what you really came for.  
My long term vision is to instead of simply having forums to also have articles and/or blogs.  These sort of things are much better for that sort of information.
I can imagine a series of articles around things like hiring best practices, communications, etc.  I can also see a set of resources/articles for providers...  how to respond to criticism, how to promote yourself, etc.  These would be things that could be more easily found in dedicated areas instead of being mixed in with literally millions of other posts.  

One of the biggest challenges that I've observed over the years is the number of "411" threads on a specific person.  There are times we could have anywhere from 3-12 on a single person!  This could happen for different reasons...  such as someone not knowing how to use the search function or the provider had changed their name.  
When we eventually launch the new review site, when a new item is added... a forum topic will automatically be created for that place/person.  It will have a subject of:
[ Category ] Item Name 
So for example, it might look like:
[ Escort ] John Doe
The first post inside of that topic will contain fields from the review (I can pick which fields get brought over so not all may be posted).  The goal will be that the topic will become the master topic about discussion about that item (person/place).  
Over time...  if we see information that changes about the item, people will be able to report it so that it can be updated.  So if an escort changes their name for example, someone would report that record and provide the new name.  A moderator will be able to update the item.  They'll also be able to add the old name to a special field called "Former Names".  This will let us to better track those who change their names from time to time.  
Inside the review record, it might look something like:

If other things change, that can be updated in the record itself.  
All of the detail from that record anytime it is edited would also sync to the master thread and edit the first post in it with the updated info, including the topic title if there was a a name change involved.  
Now... I'm going to put this out there now that moderators may from time to time not publish a name change in the "Former Names" field.  If we have reason to believe there is a risk to the person or there is another legitimate reason, we may update the name field only without adding the old name to the former name field.  
This will hopefully allow the first post to contain all of the latest known info about each item as it gets changed over time without needing to update 500 places.  If it works out the way I'm hoping, this will become the "source of truth" about the item and people can comment over time with their own observations, etc.  The topic itself would not be used for reviews.  (That's what the review system is for.) But general discussion about the person would happen there.
Eventually if someone does post a new thread about someone where a master topic exists, the moderators may end up merging that post into the master.
This is obviously not in place yet.  I'm just tossing the idea out there now so folks have a chance to comment on it and get used to the idea.  
 

The rate financial institutions pay for deposit insurance varies from institution to institution. I won't try to summarize this article from the FDIC's website, but suffice to say it is based on the institution's size and capitalization. 
Do I think banks would raise fees if the deposit insurance limit was increased? I think it depends on the institution. Some institutions are more fee-centered than others. What I find interesting is that small, community banks often have higher fees than regional, super-regional, and large banks and require higher balances to waive monthly fees.
Individuals (i.e. consumers) can increase their deposit insurance coverage at a single institution to above $250K by titling their accounts so that they have multiple ownership structures. It can be as simple as creating informal revocable trusts (a/k/a "Totten" trusts in some places) by opening multiple accounts each having different pay-on-death (POD) beneficiaries. This article from the FDIC website explains how deposit insurance works. The FDIC also has an insurance estimator. Lastly, Bankrate has a decent article on deposit insurance. I like it because it calls out establishing beneficiaries as a way to increase deposit insurance coverage.  Other articles reference revocable trusts (which is accurate) but do not mention POD beneficiaries as being a type of revocable trust.
It is unfortunate that FRB found itself in this situation. They served a niche and served it well. It bothers me that they are referred to as a "regional bank," when in fact they were a boutique or niche bank. I look at Fifth/Third, Old National (out of Evansville), and First Bank (out of Colorado) as being "regional" banks because they serve a broad customer base across a geographical portion of the country. I think calling FRB a "regional" bank diminishes what made it special. 

That would be the “Did They Match Description (Rate of 5 stars)”  
Please keep the suggestions and feedback coming!  This is new for the spa… I want this to actually be useful!

Well, my bank did fail and is now operated by Chase. On day one, my direct deposit pension check went right through. My balance is correct, so it seems the switch went off well.