AITA in this first (and last) exchange?

[chevrox]

Just had the following initial interaction with a provider. For the record, I ALWAYS ask for the rate and a few clarifying questions if not clear in the provider's profile in my first text and I've never had any problem. In this particular case, I was hoping to book him last night when I first texted. He didn't respond until the morning (understably, since I texted late at night) but didn't answer any question. Then the conversation got weird and somehow escalated. Am I the asshole here and should I have approached him differently, either initially or in the subsequent interaction? (Provider number blurred to protect his identity; as for mine I use the same username on RM so why bother).

 

[Lazarus]

I guess you told him! I hope he learned his lesson. 

[chevrox]

2 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

I guess you told him! I hope he learned his lesson. 

Nope. Last text shown is the last text sent. If I could have said something different before it went down in flames I would appreciate knowing what that is, I can be socially awkward and inappropriate at times.

[CuriousByNature]

1 hour ago, chevrox said:

Nope. Last text shown is the last text sent. If I could have said something different before it went down in flames I would appreciate knowing what that is, I can be socially awkward and inappropriate at times.

In reading this I would say that you are not the one with the problem.  If your approach to initiating a conversation has never ended like this before,  I think it is safe to say that your approach does not require a change.  You will probably never know what triggered this individual, and I would not waste time wondering if your words contributed in any way to his response.  The same for those people who get blocked for looking at a profile or for requesting that photos be unlocked - sometimes things just don't make any logical sense.    

[nate_sf]

Sounds like the guy is bitter and has a chip on his shoulder. Your approach was just fine.

The only thing I could think to suggest is instead of asking "availability?" ask something a bit more specific such as "available tonight or tomorrow night?" But if the guy had any grace he'd have worked with your inquiry regardless.

[Jamie21]

Yes, things like ‘availability’ is a bit abrupt maybe, but not enough to warrant his response. Your questions etc are all reasonable. It looks like you had a lucky escape from hiring an arsehole. 

[Jarrod_Uncut]

Unfortunately, I differ on sides here and don’t share the other’s perspective: it sounds like both of you were hot headed, and regrettably, you came off like I just mentioned in another thread the other day. I can elaborate on each point:

#1: your 1st text comes off a bit badgering, and you’re asking 3 questions in one text (the first text at that), without volunteering any info about yourself. That’s the 1st mistake.

#2: You didn’t address the escort by name. That immediately comes off a bit disconnected. You don’t include your name either, just a profile screenname. 
 

#3: Asking if someone barebacks in a 1st message shows off the bat disrespectful, and my experience is that many clients who start that way end up being just that. There’s been clients who admit on the forum they’ll ask escorts that, not because they want bareback, but to “suss” out if they play safe.

#4: Don’t ask an escort how long they are in town. People often ask me that when I’m traveling, and I just say: when are YOU looking for? If the escort can’t make it, they’ll let you know. Don’t think ahead of the pace of the conversation. There’s been many times I’ve stayed in a city an extra day or 2 longer than planned for a confirmed client. I wasn’t in a rush to leave town, and I have flexible means of travel.

#5: By the time you say sigh, you’ve just disrespected the escort again. Setting up a visit with an escort isn’t the time to give off sarcastic vibes.

 

#6: Your last message resorted to being a bully and you stormed off like a petulant child. Block you? What’s with clients thinking escorts need permission to block them? Again, you called the escort first, not the other way around! What would have been better is to apologize, and simply offer a time and day that would work. You came to him 1st, with a need. You have to yield his procedures or how he wishes to arrange appointments. Even if you had to wait a few minutes and think about it.
 

To approach him with a bossy attitude was absolutely uncalled for. That was your 6th mistake. 

However, I will say: thanks for posting this. It shows you’re willing to learn, from your mistakes. I think if more people would discuss these things, it would make for a better escort/client relationship. 
 

In your favor, the escort didn’t really do a whole lot either to bridge the conversation gap. One word responses and curbing questions completely don’t really drive things in the right direction. However, you were the kindling to his fire, and instead of creating love…y’all created this:

Edited February 16, 2022 by Jarrod_Uncut

[maninsoma]

I'm in the middle.  I agree that your first text is a bit off-putting.  Instead of asking for a vague availability, ask for what you want (tonight or tomorrow, for example).  I also agree that asking whether an escort barebacks in the first text seems odd.  If their RM profile indicates "anything goes," you probably have your answer already anyway but you could certainly confirm what you want in a later text.  But as with asking about availability, your inquiry might come across as more genuine if you had written, for example, "I like to top without a condom.  Are you okay with that?"  Or, conversely, "I only have anal with condoms.  Is that okay with you?"  I'm basically saying your approach might make someone who's already a bit weary of prospective clients to react with skepticism because you aren't asking for what you want but rather asking, in a curt way, for the escort to divulge details about himself.

All that said, the escort should have handled your inquiry better.  Had he simply replied, "Sorry, didn't get your text until now.  I'm available today.  If you are still interested, let me know a time that works for you and let me know what you are looking for."   That would put the ball back in your court in a friendly way.

Neither of you contributed to a successful exchange of information after that.  You were put off by the escort's demeanor, and he was put off by yours.  Last night was history, so there wasn't much point in saying, "I was looking for last night" when the guy asks what day/time works for you now.  Rather than be vague, why not just ask "Are you available tonight at 8pm for an in call?"  But given that this guy is self-employed, he's certainly clueless when it comes to attracting business.  He was very quick to assume you were just wasting time and did nothing to actually advance his agenda (book an appointment).  Seems like he was more interested in playing a victim and feeling indignant than he was trying to succeed at scheduling a prospective client.  I would 100% understand that stance if your texts had been going back and forth for a lot longer, but he basically copped an attitude with you so fast that it didn't really offer an opportunity for success on either of your parts. 

[Jamie21]

17 hours ago, chevrox said:

Just had the following initial interaction with a provider. For the record, I ALWAYS ask for the rate and a few clarifying questions if not clear in the provider's profile in my first text and I've never had any problem. In this particular case, I was hoping to book him last night when I first texted. He didn't respond until the morning (understably, since I texted late at night) but didn't answer any question. Then the conversation got weird and somehow escalated. Am I the asshole here and should I have approached him differently, either initially or in the subsequent interaction? (Provider number blurred to protect his identity; as for mine I use the same username on RM so why bother).

 

Hey just to add…I wouldn’t worry about it. I get all sorts of enquiries, some short and abrupt, some long and detailed. I think clients are all different and part of my role is to understand and accommodate those differences (within reason) and make them feel welcome and comfortable.

I think people get anxious approaching a sex worker (after all, it’s not something most people do very often is it?) so I understand if they might come across a bit awkward sometimes. It’s no big deal. Once the initial awkwardness or anxiety is overcome I usually find the person to be polite and respectful. If on a rare occasion they’re not then the meeting doesn’t happen. That’s rare, most clients are delightful. 
Good luck with your hiring.

 

[italianboyph]

18 hours ago, chevrox said:

Just had the following initial interaction with a provider. For the record, I ALWAYS ask for the rate and a few clarifying questions if not clear in the provider's profile in my first text and I've never had any problem. In this particular case, I was hoping to book him last night when I first texted. He didn't respond until the morning (understably, since I texted late at night) but didn't answer any question. Then the conversation got weird and somehow escalated. Am I the asshole here and should I have approached him differently, either initially or in the subsequent interaction? (Provider number blurred to protect his identity; as for mine I use the same username on RM so why bother).

 

Yikes 😬 you def escaped that one, all questions you asked are normal, he’s clearly having a bad day. His comment about flakes I get it, but that doesn’t give him the right to just be an asshole to a potential client who was simply polite and interested. You’re better off❤️

[+ sync]

20 hours ago, chevrox said:

Just had the following initial interaction with a provider. For the record, I ALWAYS ask for the rate and a few clarifying questions if not clear in the provider's profile in my first text and I've never had any problem. In this particular case, I was hoping to book him last night when I first texted. He didn't respond until the morning (understably, since I texted late at night) but didn't answer any question. Then the conversation got weird and somehow escalated. Am I the asshole here and should I have approached him differently, either initially or in the subsequent interaction? (Provider number blurred to protect his identity; as for mine I use the same username on RM so why bother).

 

The construct of the provider's texts suggests that there may have been some language barrier in the mix that further complicated the exchange.

[Hlparx]

It's not the way i would've approached this, but I think that @Jamie21 is right that the initial message is within the wide bounds of acceptabilty, particularly given app culture.  That said, I don't like app culture.

When I reach out to a new guy, I usually have something the lines of:  Hi Provider, I'm Interested.  I saw your profile and would like to arrange a meeting.  Are you available [date and time/or timeframe] for [desired amount of time]?  If it's a timeframe, I usually mention whether I can be flexible within a certain time.

Basically I try to remember that there's someone on the other end and talk to them as though they were standing in front of me.

[Guest]

I'm so used to being an EFL escort with many ESL clients, seeing the reverse is throwing me for a loop. 

My bottom line is always to give the person using their second language the benefit of the doubt. But at the same time, the provider could have tried a bit harder to make it work. Maybe he's busy enough that he doesn't care to bother. 

As others have pointed out, once the first hint of sass ("sigh") is inserted, it's all over. 

I wouldn't call you an a-hole by any means, but if your goal was strictly to make an appointment happen, perhaps things could have been done differently. Once you've decided you're not interested, best just to move on. 

[Jarrod_Uncut]

13 hours ago, Jamie21 said:

Hey just to add…I wouldn’t worry about it. I get all sorts of enquiries, some short and abrupt, some long and detailed. I think clients are all different and part of my role is to understand and accommodate those differences (within reason) and make them feel welcome and comfortable.

I think people get anxious approaching a sex worker (after all, it’s not something most people do very often is it?) so I understand if they might come across a bit awkward sometimes. It’s no big deal. Once the initial awkwardness or anxiety is overcome I usually find the person to be polite and respectful. If on a rare occasion they’re not then the meeting doesn’t happen. That’s rare, most clients are delightful. 
Good luck with your hiring.

 

 

I love your ever forgiving, relaxed approach to some things, but in this case it seems a bit more than anxiety and awkwardness. Like @maninsoma described, the interaction didn't share much, but rather had the goal of the escort doing all the leg work. This lead to frustration and aggravation on both parties, which apparently is a big deal considering how much of an epic fail it was.

Now, a distrust has been created and if the poster never came here to discuss it, you'd just have 2 people with no understanding of how to fix it and avoid it next time. Thus, the cycle repeats. And he's not the only one, because I just had a similiar client last week "give me permission" to block him as well after I told him to stop wasting my time asking about explicit activities if he can't figure out when he's available. Yet he's the one who's been contacting me since July 2021...I have a block for him, and it comes in a size 13 cowboy boot 🤠

Some clients can use a bit of feedback on how not to book an escort. And to me, that's a big deal.

 

13 hours ago, italianboyph said:

Yikes 😬 you def escaped that one, all questions you asked are normal, he’s clearly having a bad day. His comment about flakes I get it, but that doesn’t give him the right to just be an asshole to a potential client who was simply polite and interested. You’re better off❤️

 

10 hours ago, Hlparx said:

It's not the way i would've approached this, but I think that @Jamie21 is right that the initial message is within the wide bounds of acceptabilty, particularly given app culture.  That said, I don't like app culture.

When I reach out to a new guy, I usually have something the lines of:  Hi Provider, I'm Interested.  I saw your profile and would like to arrange a meeting.  Are you available [date and time/or timeframe] for [desired amount of time]?  If it's a timeframe, I usually mention whether I can be flexible within a certain time.

Basically I try to remember that there's someone on the other end and talk to them as though they were standing in front of me.

 

I agree. "Normal" on app culture and normal when contacting a sex worker isn't quite the same thing. One thing that nobody has mentioned:

"what's your rate, do you bareback"

technically that's considered the "P" word, and even though a properly screened client doesn't pose a risk, for a client to text a provider this puts the client at risk for a charge (suppose this escort was a cop), and the escort at risk for a charge (if the client was a cop).

Edited February 17, 2022 by Jarrod_Uncut

[Jamie21]

13 minutes ago, Jarrod_Uncut said:

technically that's considered the "P" word, and even though a properly screened client doesn't pose a risk, for a client to text a provider this puts the client at risk for a charge (suppose this escort was a cop), and the escort at risk for a charge (if the client was a cop)

I didn’t think of that but as prostitution is legal here in UK I’m not accustomed to being discreet about it in exchanges with clients. 

[Jamie21]

16 minutes ago, Jarrod_Uncut said:

love your ever forgiving, relaxed approach to some things, but in this case it seems a bit more than anxiety

I’m probably too laid back sometimes ha ha. I like to please, it can get me into trouble. 

[Jarrod_Uncut]

4 minutes ago, Jamie21 said:

I’m probably too laid back sometimes ha ha. I like to please, it can get me into trouble. 

Ya, I wish there were more like you out there. But, there's just some shitty guys out here in the gay sex world. Lately, it's been so bad that I don't even have a desire to meet with any dudes who aren't paying me. Not because I'm greedy or all about money, but because they don't appreciate it. It is just bad. Guys out here come to the table only to get something for nothing. The quality of guys were actually better during the pandemic. Now, it's just tragic. 

So when I see text exchanges like above, it just reiterates. The bossy, bitchy, and moody attitudes are pervasive. At some point, somebody has to say; "let me treat you the way YOU want to be treated". 

[Shawn Monroe]

21 hours ago, Hlparx said:

 

Basically I try to remember that there's someone on the other end and talk to them as though they were standing in front of me.

I really like this line, especially in regards to people just asking one-word questions like “availability?”

[chevrox]

Thank you everyone for your feedback. This is helpful. I would like to add a few things from my perspective and what I think could be improved based on what I've read. This is in no way a defense of my part in the interaction, because regardless of my intention what matters is how my words are perceived. 

1. "Availability" is certainly a bit short, but my usual "what's your availability like," while more polite, doesn't meaningful expand on the information requested. I'll cop to not being fully committal in the first text, but I think everyone would agree that both parties should assess whether it's a mutual fit before working toward a booking, and this includes asking questions. Unless the client is certain that a provider is what he's looking for based on available info prior to initiating contact, it is perhaps too early to specify a time and date in the very first text when a commitment is still contingent on information yet to be disclosed. At least, I personally find it disingenuous to ask for a specific slot before I know for sure I want to work with the person. That said, I agree that "availability" isn't a helpful, tactful, or productive question, and if I'm not yet ready to book, I think I should leave it out altogether and revisit when we can establish a fit.

2. Of course, this is a two way street, there's a give and take and I wasn't giving much. Based on the feedback, I agree it's better to offer more information about myself in initiating the contact other than just my screen name (although to be fair, my client profile has a lot of information about me, but I could have made it more accessible). There are also competing priorities here. The client wants more information before he commits, and the provider would presumably prefer more certainty in whether the prospect converts into a booking. In exchange for more provider information, I could have signaled in the initial and subsequent text more earnestly a readiness to seal the deal.

3. In hindsight, "what's your rate," I now feel, is just as superfluous and unnecessary a question in the first text, since rate tends to run mostly within a $100 spread, i.e., it's something that the prospective client already has a good idea about, and leading with it can come across as impersonal, hesitant, and appear to be an effort at bargaining before establishing any rapport. It can also wait until a fit is established, if at all; the provider usually volunteer that information, and I've also had success by offering a budget and ask for the amount of time it's worth instead.

4. In my experience, there have been providers that booked based off zero information about me, and there are providers that declined to book due to lack of fit based on information that I provided. This is completely okay; nobody should feel pressured to do anything they don't feel up to with anyone, and as a client I would not enjoy the encounter if I knew that the provider is going to hate it or feel uncomfortable.  There are different approaches and tolerances, and some providers are more selective than others; in any case, I now think it's always the better policy for the client to offer some information to establish fit within reasonable scope and discretion, which I failed to do effectively in this interaction.

5. I do contest the notion that I needed to address the provider by their name in the first text, since I don't know their real name at that point and in a text message there's nobody else I could possibly be addressing. Similarly, I feel that offering my screen name is appropriate initially before a rapport is sufficiently established to exchange real names, and a screen name is much more informative anyway. With few exception, I've always exchanged real names with providers either after sealing the deal or when we met in person. That said, there's no cost or downside to addressing the provider by their screen name and I should do that in the future.

6. I also disagree that it disrespects the provider by asking whether he barebacks, even in the initial text, especially when the profile specifically says "ask me." For me it is a requirement (unless I'm just looking to hang out or cuddle), and there would be no need to carry on a conversation if the answer is no. I understand that there is a concern about client "sussying out" the provider (and I know providers that similarly suss out clients when it comes to drug use), but when it comes to safety, the best policy is always honest conversation, full disclosure, risk awareness, and informed consent. This is a matter of principle. I also acknowledge that there is a concern of harassment and/or entrapment by law enforcement in the US since it is a direct reference to sex; "masseurs" and "escorts" exist in such a gray area that it can be very difficult to navigate (it is of course not illegal to ask or answer the question per se, but context of the conversation and the context this question contributes to make it murky). It is very unfortunate that providers have to assume this risk. Whatever tolerance level they have toward legal jeopardy and however they approach it are valid, including declining to answer, but it is not wrong or disrespectful to ask.

7. Ok, all that only to cover my first text lol. I'll pick up the pace. I admit it's a mistake when the provider needed a bit prodding I took a step back ("how long are you in town for") instead of forward, although by that morning I did not have any immediately open slot on my schedule so I at this point I would not be able to commit to anything within the day or next. I should have instead asked if he's available for my next available slot, even if a couple days later.

8. I was taken aback by the "Why don't you... take it from there" reply, but I should not have gotten defensive in clarifying and pleading my intentions ("I was hoping to..."). I can definitely see how that can be read as relitigating the past, accusation even. At this point I was starting to lose interest but still hopeful, and, although feeling less committal due to the provider's reply, I should have simply said "sounds good" and try later if interest remained instead of defending myself against a perceived slight.

9. I cop to a compulsion to win every argument, something very valuable in my profession (which is all about persuasive argument and I'm almost always right) but quite alienating in my personal life. So when the provider got argumentative and screen capped me, I instinctively felt the need to respond in kind, even though at that point I've completely lost interest. This is dumb, because it was completely unnecessary given I've already lost interest. The nastiness thereafter is just history.

 10. I don't know this provider in person, what he's like usually, or whether he was having a bad day, and I cannot say anything on his behalf. His profile gave me the impression of sincerity, affability, maybe even goofiness. It was a short interaction but I do see how it could have gone down very differently. Even if the conversation went wrong at the beginning, I could have ended it amicably early and salvaged a chance for a meet, and there were multiple points of failure on my part that contributed to the terrible mutual first impression that made it nearly impossible to enjoy an encounter, if one is even possible, even if the provider could be the nicest guy in person. This is a bridge burnt before it was even built and it definitely didn't need to be that way. Lesson learned.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, chevrox said:

(....)

This is in no way a defense of my part in the interaction

(....) 

5. I do contest the notion... 

6. I also disagree.... 

(....) 

9. I cop to a compulsion to win every argument

 

Yeah checks out. 

[Hlparx]

4 hours ago, chevrox said:

Thank you everyone for your feedback. This is helpful. I would like to add a few things from my perspective and what I think could be improved based on what I've read. This is in no way a defense of my part in the interaction, because regardless of my intention what matters is how my words are perceived. 

1. "Availability" is certainly a bit short, but my usual "what's your availability like," while more polite, doesn't meaningful expand on the information requested. I'll cop to not being fully committal in the first text, but I think everyone would agree that both parties should assess whether it's a mutual fit before working toward a booking, and this includes asking questions. Unless the client is certain that a provider is what he's looking for based on available info prior to initiating contact, it is perhaps too early to specify a time and date in the very first text when a commitment is still contingent on information yet to be disclosed. At least, I personally find it disingenuous to ask for a specific slot before I know for sure I want to work with the person. That said, I agree that "availability" isn't a helpful, tactful, or productive question, and if I'm not yet ready to book, I think I should leave it out altogether and revisit when we can establish a fit.

2. Of course, this is a two way street, there's a give and take and I wasn't giving much. Based on the feedback, I agree it's better to offer more information about myself in initiating the contact other than just my screen name (although to be fair, my client profile has a lot of information about me, but I could have made it more accessible). There are also competing priorities here. The client wants more information before he commits, and the provider would presumably prefer more certainty in whether the prospect converts into a booking. In exchange for more provider information, I could have signaled in the initial and subsequent text more earnestly a readiness to seal the deal.

3. In hindsight, "what's your rate," I now feel, is just as superfluous and unnecessary a question in the first text, since rate tends to run mostly within a $100 spread, i.e., it's something that the prospective client already has a good idea about, and leading with it can come across as impersonal, hesitant, and appear to be an effort at bargaining before establishing any rapport. It can also wait until a fit is established, if at all; the provider usually volunteer that information, and I've also had success by offering a budget and ask for the amount of time it's worth instead.

4. In my experience, there have been providers that booked based off zero information about me, and there are providers that declined to book due to lack of fit based on information that I provided. This is completely okay; nobody should feel pressured to do anything they don't feel up to with anyone, and as a client I would not enjoy the encounter if I knew that the provider is going to hate it or feel uncomfortable.  There are different approaches and tolerances, and some providers are more selective than others; in any case, I now think it's always the better policy for the client to offer some information to establish fit within reasonable scope and discretion, which I failed to do effectively in this interaction.

5. I do contest the notion that I needed to address the provider by their name in the first text, since I don't know their real name at that point and in a text message there's nobody else I could possibly be addressing. Similarly, I feel that offering my screen name is appropriate initially before a rapport is sufficiently established to exchange real names, and a screen name is much more informative anyway. With few exception, I've always exchanged real names with providers either after sealing the deal or when we met in person. That said, there's no cost or downside to addressing the provider by their screen name and I should do that in the future.

6. I also disagree that it disrespects the provider by asking whether he barebacks, even in the initial text, especially when the profile specifically says "ask me." For me it is a requirement (unless I'm just looking to hang out or cuddle), and there would be no need to carry on a conversation if the answer is no. I understand that there is a concern about client "sussying out" the provider (and I know providers that similarly suss out clients when it comes to drug use), but when it comes to safety, the best policy is always honest conversation, full disclosure, risk awareness, and informed consent. This is a matter of principle. I also acknowledge that there is a concern of harassment and/or entrapment by law enforcement in the US since it is a direct reference to sex; "masseurs" and "escorts" exist in such a gray area that it can be very difficult to navigate (it is of course not illegal to ask or answer the question per se, but context of the conversation and the context this question contributes to make it murky). It is very unfortunate that providers have to assume this risk. Whatever tolerance level they have toward legal jeopardy and however they approach it are valid, including declining to answer, but it is not wrong or disrespectful to ask.

7. Ok, all that only to cover my first text lol. I'll pick up the pace. I admit it's a mistake when the provider needed a bit prodding I took a step back ("how long are you in town for") instead of forward, although by that morning I did not have any immediately open slot on my schedule so I at this point I would not be able to commit to anything within the day or next. I should have instead asked if he's available for my next available slot, even if a couple days later.

8. I was taken aback by the "Why don't you... take it from there" reply, but I should not have gotten defensive in clarifying and pleading my intentions ("I was hoping to..."). I can definitely see how that can be read as relitigating the past, accusation even. At this point I was starting to lose interest but still hopeful, and, although feeling less committal due to the provider's reply, I should have simply said "sounds good" and try later if interest remained instead of defending myself against a perceived slight.

9. I cop to a compulsion to win every argument, something very valuable in my profession (which is all about persuasive argument and I'm almost always right) but quite alienating in my personal life. So when the provider got argumentative and screen capped me, I instinctively felt the need to respond in kind, even though at that point I've completely lost interest. This is dumb, because it was completely unnecessary given I've already lost interest. The nastiness thereafter is just history.

 10. I don't know this provider in person, what he's like usually, or whether he was having a bad day, and I cannot say anything on his behalf. His profile gave me the impression of sincerity, affability, maybe even goofiness. It was a short interaction but I do see how it could have gone down very differently. Even if the conversation went wrong at the beginning, I could have ended it amicably early and salvaged a chance for a meet, and there were multiple points of failure on my part that contributed to the terrible mutual first impression that made it nearly impossible to enjoy an encounter, if one is even possible, even if the provider could be the nicest guy in person. This is a bridge burnt before it was even built and it definitely didn't need to be that way. Lesson learned.

I see--and agree with--some of your points, but nothing in here is a persuasive response to the advice to put together a 3 or 4 sentence introductory message.

Yes, you can be noncommital in the first message, but be upfront about it.  For example:

Hi, I'm Interested.  I saw your profile and would like to ask a few questions.  [Insert description of self OR likes OR questions here.]  [Do you think that we'd be a good fit?]

If the escort isn't willing to answer a couple of questions that are aimed at deciding whether you want to move forward, then it probably means that any experience with him is going to be unsatisfying.

You're right that you don't have to use your name, real or fake.  But, for what it's worth, I'm not sure revealing your assumption that revealing your RM screenname in a text message is as enlightening as you think.  Escorts may know better than me.  I've searched for my screenname on the site and my profile doesn't appear.  If you were using the RM messenger to communicate, I'd agree that just mentioning your screenname is an acceptable, if impersonal response.  Regardless of whether you're using RM messenger to communicate, it's also kind of unreasonable to expect the escort to go research you to find out more.

As for the bareback question, this can be:  "What safety precautions do you take?"  Or you can reveal your preferences on that front when you're describing yourself.

[chevrox]

2 hours ago, DanteV said:

Yeah checks out. 

Being open and lowering my defense doesn't mean I must concede to every single point raised or, given there are different opinions, that I only concede to the critical ones. This is a defense, though 😉

[Jamie21]

4 minutes ago, chevrox said:

Being open and lowering my defense doesn't mean I must concede to every single point raised or, given there are different opinions, that I only concede to the critical ones. This is a defense, though 😉

I guess you’re a lawyer. In that respect we both charge by the hour and in both instances the client gets screwed. 🙂

Please don’t sue me. I have no money (it’s all off shore…you won’t find any of it). 

[chevrox]

20 minutes ago, Hlparx said:

... but nothing in here is a persuasive response to the advice to put together a 3 or 4 sentence introductory message.

These are sound advice. My reply was not meant to be persuasive, and the purpose wasn't to convince, but rather some thoughts on what I have synthesized from everyone's response and my own reflection and to provide my perspective. I'd like to note that we should also allow some degree of idiosyncracies in our interactions and play by ear (which I didn't do well in this instance), instead of relying on the perfect form response.

[chevrox]

33 minutes ago, Jamie21 said:

I guess you’re a lawyer. In that respect we both charge by the hour and in both instances the client gets screwed. 🙂

Not a lawyer, but my clients are primarily lawyers and I do charge them by the hour (and yes, they are also getting screwed if the expert of... let's just say contract theory... that they hire couldn't even seal this deal 😂💅)