I wish some would not say: “your prices went up” Well should it never?

[Archangel]

Tangential remark –

A lot of the “21-year-old guys” are actually much closer to 30 than they admit in their ads because youth sells. I know this for a fact. Two regulars of mine shave several years off their ages for their RM ads because they can pass for younger. Is that akin to saying you’re 9” when when you’re actually 7”? Maybe. I’m sure some here will disagree or justify such “fudging,” but the fact remains it happens. In more ways than one. The “product” is misrepresented in order to make the sale.

[+ José Soplanucas]

2 hours ago, Archangel said:

Tangential remark –

A lot of the “21-year-old guys” are actually much closer to 30 than they admit in their ads because youth sells. I know this for a fact. Two regulars of mine shave several years off their ages for their RM ads because they can pass for younger. Is that akin to saying you’re 9” when when you’re actually 7”? Maybe. I’m sure some here will disagree or justify such “fudging,” but the fact remains it happens. In more ways than one. The “product” is misrepresented in order to make the sale.

This is not breaking news. 

[Archangel]

14 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

This is not breaking news. 

I didn’t intend it to be. I guess I forgot the conversational “Let’s not forget” at the beginning! 

[NJF]

6 hours ago, Archangel said:

Tangential remark –

A lot of the “21-year-old guys” are actually much closer to 30 than they admit in their ads because youth sells. I know this for a fact. Two regulars of mine shave several years off their ages for their RM ads because they can pass for younger. Is that akin to saying you’re 9” when when you’re actually 7”? Maybe. I’m sure some here will disagree or justify such “fudging,” but the fact remains it happens. In more ways than one. The “product” is misrepresented in order to make the sale.

Aren’t we all taking the 9’ as a real 7 and a 11’ as a real 8? I am not sure that I pay much attention to the listed age on RM either 😂 

[Archangel]

7 minutes ago, NJF said:

Aren’t we all taking the 9’ as a real 7 and a 11’ as a real 8? I am not sure that I pay much attention to the listed age on RM either 😂 

Pointless info then

[+ DrownedBoy]

1 hour ago, NJF said:

Aren’t we all taking the 9’ as a real 7 and a 11’ as a real 8? I am not sure that I pay much attention to the listed age on RM either 😂 

Real Length = (Listed Length) * .8 - 1/2 inches

[DWnyc]

On 9/10/2023 at 1:59 PM, Archangel said:

Pointless info then

Well no … when you’re competing against embellishers… if you don’t embellish, you’re screwed as people will discount your honest answer by the industry standard. And assume the “worst” if there’s no answer.

[Simon Suraci]

On 9/8/2023 at 3:03 PM, DWnyc said:

Guys you do realize he gets off on this provocative behavior and the response that follows, and he knows full well it’s all  nonsense.

Ignore, don’t engage. Stay on topic as much as possible.

I try to ignore those members and scroll on. I lost count of the number of threads the mods had to close because of a few choice members continuously picking fights with others arguing over absolutely nothing. They like provoking and getting a rise. The pattern is: take offense to something in the discussion, veer way off topic and take offense to something else down that whole other rabbit hole topic, defend one’s self to the point of total communication breakdown until only personal attacks ensue. You can see the pattern consistently play out. It sucks we miss out on some productive discussions because they hijack the thread. Note those members in the moderator locked closed threads, and then don’t engage their crazy anymore. Don’t poke the bears and don’t feed them either.

And no, I’m not naming names. The various threads speak loudly and clearly for themselves.

[Archangel]

13 hours ago, DWnyc said:

Well no … when you’re competing against embellishers… if you don’t embellish, you’re screwed as people will discount your honest answer by the industry standard. And assume the “worst” if there’s no answer.

Pointless insofar as even having a site include in an ad. I can understand why some otherwise honest escorts would “embellish” (creative reframing of “lying,” there), but if dishonesty is a known factor and the info is simply overlooked because it’s assumed to be dishonest, then it’s really a moot point from the moment when the gun goes off. It’s as useful as the “ask me” response.

Maybe RM ought to start including a field for blood type. 

[DWnyc]

22 minutes ago, Archangel said:

Pointless insofar as even having a site include in an ad. I can understand why some otherwise honest escorts would “embellish” (creative reframing of “lying,” there), but if dishonesty is a known factor and the info is simply overlooked because it’s assumed to be dishonest, then it’s really a moot point from the moment when the gun goes off. It’s as useful as the “ask me” response.

Maybe RM ought to start including a field for blood type. 

Or integrity