Would you Write a Negative Review?

[axebahia]

>The point is that there seems to be a reluctance by many

>people to Write negative reviews. Why?

 

I don't write or read positive reviews. I don't write them because I don't want to share. I don't read them because I don't believe them. As for negative reviews, I am inclined to write them for no-shows or hustlers, not guys about whom I was indifferent, who were having an off day or where there was just a mutual lack of chemistry. (I might be inclined to write more reviews if Hoo had not pulled my first negative review of an escort who actually became abusive and threatening after I cancelled him after a 1 hour delay.) I read negative reviews because I think they reveal patterns, and though I did not credit Mr. KY's story, I think he was right to be negative and I would not patronize the escort in question.

[Guest jstlooknthx]

HE WAS NOT RAPED! One more time for all the drama queens. HE WAS NOT RAPED! HE even admits that. However, if you find the Lifetime Channel in your cable guide, there is most likely a film there to quench your cravings for outrage. Meredith Baxter Burney, Valerie Bertinelli, or Melissa Gilbert can teach you what a real rape is all about. Now grow up!

[+ Lucky]

"When I see someone trying to rationalize the behavior of an escort who forcibly barebacks an unwilling client, I find it hard to come"

 

Me too.

[axebahia]

>HE WAS NOT RAPED! One more time for all the drama queens. HE

>WAS NOT RAPED! HE even admits that. However, if you find the

>Lifetime Channel in your cable guide, there is most likely a

>film there to quench your cravings for outrage.

 

I could not have said it better myself!

[duke37]

The point is barebacking

 

>Yeah, I do say that. When I see someone trying to rationalize

>the behavior of an escort who forcibly barebacks an unwilling

>client, I find it hard to come to any other conclusion.

 

 

I noticed a lot of people seem to want to gloss over this part. Rape is a subject I'm glad to admit I don't know much about. I did, and still do, have some concerns for KY finding out for himself what happened and why BEFORE hiring again.

 

What isn't subject to question, the escort never denied it, is the fact the guy BAREBACKED him. If a client had done this to an escort he would be pilloried here and rightly so. I'm disappointed we couldn't get behind the idea of condemning that behaviour.

 

A pretty often expressed thought here in the Message Center is that we should always assume the worst about STD's and act accordingly. Good advice. But when we KNOW someone isn't playing by the rules we ought to come down hard on him. Starting with Hooboy and hopefully people who post here. Heck I'm surprised escorts in his area haven't taken this guy aside and tried to get him to see the light.

 

So in answer to KY's original question, Yes I'm somewhat reluctant to write negative reviews. We are encouraged to write reviews under the same handle to build "credibility". If thats the case we have an interest in seeing our views are portrayed fairly and aren't undercut by the management. Otherwise why bother to use the same handle twice. The content here becomes more valuable because people are willing to trade some of their anonymity to shed some light in a process that is pretty opaque otherwise. People who post here on the MC under the same handle leave themselves even more exposed to hostility if they have to write something negative. Perhaps Flower is right and we should use different names. However I put more credence into the reviews of Tampa Yankee and Traveller and others because they post here. The information they present becomes more valuable because they have traded away part of their anonymity. We should value that contribution.

 

I have been lucky and had only one escort I felt I needed to write a negative review. I would have written it off to bad chemistry if the escort hadn't been so odd in followup emails. Amazingly enough he wanted the review. And I did have concerns that I would have to defend myself here because of the review. Fortunately for me it worked out. I was willing to take the chance because I found people here whose experience gave me the confidence to give it a shot. So I felt like I had the responsiblity to repay the favor and share what I know.

 

Now I will probably get ripped for this post. Well no good deed goes unpunished.

 

Jeff

[Chuck50]

RE: The point is barebacking

 

I too look for the name of a consistent reviewer and post, actually its the first thing I look at even though I now have to go to the Bottom. HUGS Chuck:P

[woodlawn]

RE: The point is barebacking

 

>>When I see someone trying to

>rationalize the behavior of an escort who forcibly barebacks an

>unwilling client, I find it hard to come to any other conclusion.

 

>I noticed a lot of people seem to want to gloss over this

>part. . . . .

 

How true.

 

>What isn't subject to question, the escort never denied it, is

>the fact the guy BAREBACKED him. If a client had done this to

>an escort he would be pilloried here and rightly so. I'm

>disappointed we couldn't get behind the idea of condemning

>that behaviour.

 

In fairness, the original thread on this incident, which was deleted by the management for reasons known only to them, did contain a number of posts condemning the escort's behavior in strong terms.

 

What a pity it is no longer available for reading by people who are considering hiring this escort and might want to search this section for additional information on him.

 

>A pretty often expressed thought here in the Message Center is

>that we should always assume the worst about STD's and act

>accordingly. Good advice. But when we KNOW someone isn't

>playing by the rules we ought to come down hard on him.

>Starting with Hooboy and hopefully people who post here.

 

I agree. That's why it doesn't make sense to me that management has tried to hush this incident up.

 

[woodlawn]

>>HE WAS NOT RAPED! One more time for all the drama queens.

>HE

>>WAS NOT RAPED! HE even admits that. However, if you find the

>>Lifetime Channel in your cable guide, there is most likely a

>>film there to quench your cravings for outrage.

 

>I could not have said it better myself!

 

I guess you men must have read a completely different account of this incident from the one I read. In the one I read, the client told the escort "No" before the escort penetrated him and again told him "No" when he realized the escort was going ahead anyway. Why don't you explain to us what is required for a rape besides that? Well?

[VaHawk]

Hey KYT,

 

I would only write a negative review, if it was something that was a true misrepresentation (i.e. bogus photos, absolute refusal to at least try what was agreed upon, etc.) If I had to use HB's definition of what constitutes a negative review situation, I would count my blessings that I even woke up to write such a negative review. Been there and done that!

 

I would not write a negative review for a local no-show, but would for a no-show when I bought a ticket for the guy to come here or paid air and hotel to go see him.

 

I think clients have a right to know if the escort is a total misrepresentation of what he looks like and/or agrees to do. These types are not escorts, they're hustlers and in the situation HB proposes they are outright criminals!

 

I've had some so-so, disappointing sessions with escorts, but didn't feel that warranted a negative review. I've also had some so-so, okay sessions but didn't feel that warranted a positive review.

[VaHawk]

Great post! I agree with everything you state. I really don't comprehend why people can't understand that NO MEANS NO! and to disregard that regardless of the situation, could easily constitute assault. Doesn't matter if you are under the influence, crazy with lust or whatever, at whatever point you say no, and the other party continues, imo, that constitutes assault! If a client says stop for whatever reason, since he is the one who is paying, then the escort should stop, period, no explanations need to be provided by the client. :-(

[VaHawk]

Thanks jackhammer. I miss you from the mc, and I'd like to meet you also.

[axebahia]

>I guess you men must have read a completely different account

>of this incident from the one I read.

 

It's unfortunate that the thread was deleted because both sides were well mooted there. It became pretty clear from the escort's response, subsequent KY "clarifications" and Hoo's post here that Mr. KY sent mixed messages beforehand and allowed the escort to re-enter after he supposedly initially objected. It sounds like an unfortunate mutual mistake, but it is no more rape than the Mike Tyson show trial "rape" in Indiana in the 1990s.

[LAShowbiz]

Do rape victims ask their rapists for a second date?

 

KY-Top... didn't you check the OC escort's availability a few weeks AFTER this incident?

 

I already know the answer...

[Guest Utopia]

>

>Now get over it. Your disingenuous is tiring.

>

>Sorry man, maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the floor...

 

 

Nothing wrong with the floor you slept on HooBoy. Your remarks are perfectly on target!

[Flower]

RE: The point is barebacking

 

>Now I will probably get ripped for this post. Well no good

>deed goes unpunished.

[font color="green"

]

Hey Jeff--actually no reason for you to get ripped--it was a well thought out post. HOWEVER, so what if someone does take issue with it? you seem pretty intelligent and your posts are usually pretty good--so let them disagree or take their shots--you should always feel free to express your opinion--here or in reviews:+

 

So, let me respond with my thoughts on what you said.

In some ways, by using the same SN on the MC and the reviews, you are correct--the people familiar with the MC might be better able to evaluate the reviewer if they were one in the same.

 

On the other hand, there are advantages of complete anonymity--even separate from your MC name. For one thing you avoid the flack if it is really that much of a problem. (Some would say I thrive on it:)

 

In my case, I was only doing reviews and not participating in the MC for a long time--couple of years actually, then I became interested. But there are people here that do in fact know who I am at this point, so I leave the SN separate--I like the privacy and prefer not to have my friends trail my travesl --- so that's my main reason for keeping my reviewing SN separate from my MC SN--but I have about a dozen reviews all with the same SN so there is consistency if others are looking for that. I have several more with different SN before I realized the value in consistency here.

 

What I look for in a review is the consistency of the reviewer--first has he reviewed several escorts? Then I look to his past reviews to see if they are all negative or all overly complementary--I trust someone that has a little of each, but who has many more positive than negative reviews to his credit. When I find a reviewer that has many credible reviews then I certainly find that as valuable as from anyone here.

 

And incidentally, a few of my reviews have either been negative or bordered on it--and I have yet to have one rejected by HOOBOY or even criticized as a result. Even in my negative reviews, I try for honesty and objectiveness, without emotion, so that may make a difference--hoo knows? :+

 

Anyway, if changing your SN for reviews would allow you or any one else here to make more reviews, by all means do so--just keep the same SN each time you review.

 

Regarding the allegations of Ky (hopefully for the last time), I agree with you, if they were true as originally reported. I, based on his first post several weeks ago, was outraged like many of the others here, but as he leaked out more information, he lost credibility at least in my eyes and apparently in many others'. I don't think anyone here condones forceable penetration or unauthorized BB, but since KY seemed to be changing his story, we don't know what to believe

[Guest Utopia]

>I think you would find from them that I DO NOT DISRESPECT

>THEM, very much the opposite. That comment has absolutely no

>basis.

>

>>Now get over it. Your disingenuous is tiring.

>

>Been over IT since our conversation. Re-read my post PAST the

>MY thing.

>

 

Apparently not you can't seem to let go of the issue. As evidenced by your current comments.

===

"You realize that life goes fast

It's hard to make the good things last"

[Flower]

>I guess you men must have read a completely different account

>of this incident from the one I read. In the one I read, the

>client told the escort "No" before the escort penetrated him

>and again told him "No" when he realized the escort was going

>ahead anyway. Why don't you explain to us what is required

>for a rape besides that? Well?

>

[font color ="green"

] First, you need to go back and read ALL of his posts in that thread, including the ones where his story changed each time and he talked about asking the escort ahead of time to top him etc. If you then don't see what "you men" are talking about, ........... then, you're just an idiot! (actually you are regardless:+

[Huey]

>So, Would you write a Negative review?

 

No

 

Then why or why not?

 

I rarely will write any type of review. Only if I felt the escort might be a danger to others would I write a negative review. And due to the time lapse between reviews I probably would simply post the information in the MC first, or send HB an email so he could post it to give others a heads up

 

Didn't you already go through this once already?

[Flower]

[font color = "green"

] Actually, Woodbrain, I'll give you a serious answer for a stupid and childish post on your part. Since you asked so nicely, I can tell you that I served 3 years as a Serious Crimes DDA in one of the largest if not the largest county in the USA in Southern Calif. I did nothing but felony trials of rape and sex crimes, assault w/gbi, murder and attempted murder cases, etc I certainly did my share of DUI's for 6 months before going to the felony unit. When I moved to Northern California, I did nothing but violent crimes for 18 months before going into private practice. That's more information than you deserve, and more than you dare to share yourself. :+

 

You really don't have a clue, either here or in your other posts, (especially the ones spreading misinformation) but in evaluating sex crimes, the credibility of the "victim" was and still IS paramount. I learned long ago, that there are many reasons other than fact and truth that causes people to allege they have been raped. Two such reasons appear relevant to Ky's posts -- attention of friends and loved ones and getting even with someone, both of which are high on the list. Both of these factors presented themselves as very real possibilities in KY's case. If you in fact read ALL the posts and still didn't see the problems, then you are a bigger idiot than I thought you were earlier.

 

However, it never was a question of condoning the acts he first complained of--if true, those would have been wrong. The question was and still is one of credibility. It's that simple.

 

Now in re-reading my post, before i push the button :7, my only question is do I take out the references to you as an "idiot" and "clueless" and change your name to it's correct spelling or do I sink to your level and leave them in? Do I give in to the temptation of calling an asshole an asshole? Hmmm--tough one }(

[Flower]

[font color="green"

] Gee Axe, 2 outta 400+ ain't so bad--I knew we had to have common ground somewhere

[KY_TOP]

>Of course it has been answered. Many are reluctant to write

>negative reviews because they don't wish to be insulted by the

>management and by other members and by the escort, the way you

>have been. Is that so hard to understand?

>

 

Unfortunately you are probably correct, Thanks for answering my entire point of this thread that I poorly started by mentioning myself, my mistake.

 

Your other advice has been taken.

[taylorky]

a @#@%#@ PROSECUTOR .......and i thought you were one of the good guys! oh well i guess some-body has to do it }( taylorthewaterscold@08:30-05/13/03

[woodlawn]

> Actually, Woodbrain, I'll give you a serious answer for a

>stupid and childish post on your part.

 

A rancid hatemonger like you deserves nothing but contempt. You should be grateful that I or anyone else even bothers to read the crap you smear on this board.

 

 

>That's more

>information than you deserve, and more than you dare to share

>yourself.

 

I estimate it's about 85% fiction, but thanks anyway.

 

>in

>evaluating sex crimes, the credibility of the "victim" was and

>still IS paramount.

 

It took you how many years as a prosecutor to figure that out? Or did you learn it from watching "Law and Order"?

 

> I learned long ago, that there are many

>reasons other than fact and truth that causes people to

>allege they have been raped. Two such reasons appear relevant

>to Ky's posts -- attention of friends and loved ones and

>getting even with someone, both of which are high on the list.

 

 

That statement might make sense if it were possible for him to get the attention of friends and loved ones by posting on an anonymous message board, which seems highly unlikely. Or if he had taken Hooboy's offer to amend his review of the escort in question, which he did not. As it is, your statement is just more of the idiotic pontification which seems to be your sole reason for posting here.

 

 

>Now in re-reading my post, before i push the button :7, my

>only question is do I take out the references to you as an

>"idiot" and "clueless"

 

Why do anything that would call into question your well-earned reputation as a foul-mouthed jerk? It would be a shame to throw it all away now.

[woodlawn]

>First, you need to go back and read ALL of his posts in

>that thread, including the ones where his story changed each

>time and he talked about asking the escort ahead of time to

>top him etc. If you then don't see what "you men" are talking

>about, ........... then, you're just an idiot! (actually you

>are regardless

 

Flower, it's clear you're lying about having prosecuted sex crimes. If you had done that for even a few weeks, let alone years as you falsely claim, you would know that rape occurs whenever the victim refuses consent and the perpetrator forces the act on him regardless. That the victim may have expressed interest in sex with the perp at some earlier time is irrelevant. That the victim blames himself for the situation later and even seeks out the perp at some later time is irrelevant. What is relevant is what happens at THE time. "No" means "No." Most schoolchildren can understand that. You obviously have a long way to go before you understand it. You are simply repeating the stupid prejudices that have made life hell for rape victims in generation after generation. If you ever were a prosecutor, I'm glad for the sake of such victims that you no longer are.

[Flower]

[font color="green"

] Whatever, dude