BigRic

Thanks, Boom, for your consideration and--speaking of marketing--helping put eyeballs on me right beside NT/GC . . . something that might not be as possible in the gym.

I'm thinking of a toe-tappin', ass-shakin' Chaka Khan song, covered by Whitney Houston. @BabyBoomer, I'm crushed that you're just now noticing this change. It's part of my attempt to get on a DJT Watch List without having to be dragged (screaming like a little bi*ch) off a United flight. But I'd hoped that you were paying even closer attention to my ad at all times and would've noticed this many, many months ago. Seriously, this is marketing, mate. It's current status is in honor of the Arab Spring. It will change again soon. One never knows if an interested prospective client might make a inherently restrictive search choice in that (problematic) category and thereby never see all my Big Handsomeness. I'll even change it to White again soon, perhaps setting myself up to be named a defendant in a lawsuit by Paul Ryan. I kinda hope so: I'd like to get into some "litigation" with that man boy, preferably with him in his underwear. Another (more) interesting question revolves around your penchant for addressing publicly something that might be better handled via PM? Signed, "Liberian Girl"

"And the crowd [will go] wild." For whatever my 185-lb., mixed black, ripped "little" dude opinion may be worth, there's some significant variance there. A couple of near-300-pounders "versus" closer to 240. A guy with a rep for being super nice who is friends with one of the others, while the third not so much. And yeah, with the caveat that Vin Marco advised me at one point to take my ad down every now and again so as to not over-market, only one of these dudes has a solid, stable ad presence plus accurate pics plus no anecdotal word of being a . . . what's the name of track 10 on Michael Jackson's Bad album . . .?

LOL. @azdr0710

See Harvey Dent.

So interesting, the variety of responses. Glad @NJmusclelover has had repeat good experiences. I wonder what (besides big tips and/or above rate initial offers?) makes the difference between that positive experience versus another wherein a client I know was ripped off by GC.

How do "we" feel about "I ask that we both abstain from drugs, alcohol, and poppers"? Asking first-time clients to not be incoherently effed up scans for me. But asking even repeat clients to not even use poppers? Is this dude that handsome? LOL.

There appear to be three vids as of this writing. The first two are most impressive.

I'll PM you, @big-n-tall. The point you're making in your first paragraph here about RS and "supposed controversies" you've made elsewhere and my point in bringing him up wasn't to re-broach any of that. It was simply a point about "Newbie" status. Regarding your second para and me "encourag[ing] him to participate": Respectfully, that's a little absurd. I would not purport to tell an escort so much more successful and experienced than me how to handle his business. I'd feel a bit like Urkel telling Chris Hemsworth how to make it in Hollywood.

I'd expected this thread to be more . . . comely.

Visiting Miami for one more day, gentlemen.

Thanks, Tru. Where did you find this info/is it posted?

More than fair enough, @Tonyko. For me, the number of times that it's been clear that "a grain of salt" is in order have been outnumbered by the times it's less clear what's going on. I've seen scenarios here wherein perhaps "a disgruntled client or competing scort" seems to be "mak[ing] up wild accusations" yet they have a decent post count/aren't a newbie. (For instance, that popular guy I mentioned in my last post seems to be on the receiving end of that often here.) But I also acknowledge that I'm "new-ish" here/you've been on these boards longer than I have. To quote Mr. Ismay, "I leave it to your good offices . . ."

I'd sure like to think that something of your bolded variety would be exactly the kind of serious matter that leads to the creation of an already-existing dedicated thread? Also, forgive me if it's discussed in a site FAQ somewhere but what determines the moniker a member gets, which shows up just below the screen name to the left of our posts and that changes over time ("Baron," "Knight," "Master," etc.)? Is it length of membership, number of posts or something else? Where I may be going with this is that, if it's a function of how active someone is on the site, the "Newbie" designation might not necessarily be a "giveaway" of anything/an indication that that member should be taken less seriously. (Heck, this whole conversation we're having right now is in response to an OP by a "Novice.") One of the things I mention (read: prattle on at length about) in a 411 thread about me is that I have numerous clients, especially from Adonis Lounge, who don't know about this site or its reviews component. Just because they have no tenure here doesn't mean they could accurately be described as "newbies" as far as experience in hiring goes. Similarly, "everyone" knows I dig Ryan Steel. Controversies which he says keep him off these discussion pages aside, it's also become clear (to me at least) that another reason he doesn't come on here is because he's so busy putting smiles on clients' faces and earning 5-star review after 5-star review. He's classified as a "Newbie." This particular "Master" looks forward to kneeling before that "Newbie" again soon.

Of course. I do. And on the flip flip flip, I recommend escorts to clients when I'm asked about friends/recommendations/duos. That's part of what I'm up to when I talk up another escort on these pages and/or on MSS, especially if it's someone who doesn't advertise (like a Justin Philly or James Denver). The idea being that paying it forward also reflects positively on me, perhaps generates duo business, enhances my status/raises my profile and helps puts smiles on more client faces (and, yes, more dollars in escort wallets). It's part of good client/business development.

That's the way we (well, some of us) roll. Gotsta open dat "nest" to git dat honey (read: money)!

(At the very least, is it too much to ask that the thread title be corrected?)

Welcome to the forum, @Milo Farnsworth. Echoing and perhaps amplifying what @saminseattle said, I think this has too much potential to devolve into a gossip fest. I think, at least in theory, we should leave gossip to PMs. For instance, just because one or even a few clients didn't vibe with an escort doesn't mean that merits a general airing. Although well-intentioned, it seems to me this is indeed asking for a "bitch fest"with too much potential to be unfair. In the interest of being constructive, here's my alternate suggestion: Both more fair in theory and more productive given the number of escorts available would be for you to start from a more specific place. Identify, say, 10 escorts you're interested in and do your own independent homework. See if there are existing "411" threads about them. If they're dormant, revive them with a question. Then, you could post links in this thread to the ads of escorts you're interested in who don't already have such threads seeking more specific info. Regardless, good Milo hunting.

Apropos of nothing other than the Hart Bochner talk, I want to mention Twilight Time Blu-ray commentary contributor Julie Kirgo. She's effusive in her man praise (wonderful--and refreshing in the current climate--to hear her enthusiastic praise of Sidney Poitier's beauty on the To Sir, With Love track). I found her comments about Bochner on the Breaking Away commentary interesting.

The name of the church is singular . . . but the name of the film is plural. Surprised to not see this one mentioned more often. Gotta love that over the top excommunication scene. LOL. (And surprised Steve [now Max] Sandvoss didn't become a bigger star.) Also, Another Country. (@JayCeeKy: You perhaps don't need me to tell you this but Colin Firth is in this one, too.) http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah92/MuscleRic1/ANOTHER%20COUNTRY_zpsu5hsjyy8.jpg

Ha. To heck with the looks: Except for being from East L.A., the narrative in the speech bubble is close to accurate. I like #11: We're apparently free to place Wimbledon boy's blonde balls wherever we chose. Good racket!

Maybe Mav doesn't care so much what Goose thinks he is and is not looking for. Maybe it's gonna find him anyway. "I want some butts!"

The first one (clothed, left hand somewhat under lifted tank top): Right on.

Hot stuff. I prefer bigger, but I volunteer to work out with/train him. Who wants to watch?

Of course, nowadays it's a completely different calculus. But back in The Outsiders day the "problem" with TC was that he didn't need anybody's $500 when was getting 20x that from Geffen. Ironically, my understanding is now he's the one paying. (Allegedly. I don't want my bank accounts to disappear in some Scientology puff of smoke. LOL.)