Comment regarding my Marchelo Review

[Guest QualityAlways]

Hooboy - feel free to lock this thread, or move it; I understand the policy of not wanting to start "cat fights" on this meessage board.

 

I understand escorts being given a chance to post a response to negative reviews, but it is untrue that I ever hired Marchelo more than once (read the review - you'll know why).

 

I have no desire to hurt him or damage his reputation. My review was simply that - my review. My own experience with him. Your mileage may vary, and everyone has their own tastes.

 

It seems a little silly that some escorts need to defend themselves by claiming "fatal attraction" and "obsession" as the reason for every potential negative review they might receive. I've noticed that on these sites more than once.

 

Good luck to Marchelo - that was simply my opinion of you.

[guyinsf]

I understand a reviewer's desire to correct obviously erroneous information put forth by an escort in his response to a negative review. That being said, when the response seems to bear little relationship to the criticisms in the original review I think that many of us here question the veracity of the escort's statements. I thought that Marchelo's response didn't make much sense in the context of what had been written about him. I think that a repeat customer who had a "fatal attraction" thing going on wouldn't write a review claiming that the escort's body build was lacking when compared to his photos as it's just too easy to refute that claim (ie, if Marchelo still has a ripped body it will be relatively easy for him to prove that via new photos and reviews by other, non-first-time reviewers). There are other, more subjective, complaints that a client-turned-stalker could make that would be more difficult to disprove.

 

And I'm still wondering why Marchelo's web-link brings up hetero porn.

[Guest QualityAlways]

>I understand a reviewer's desire to correct obviously

>erroneous information put forth by an escort in his response

>to a negative review. That being said, when the response

>seems to bear little relationship to the criticisms in the

>original review I think that many of us here question the

>veracity of the escort's statements. I thought that

>Marchelo's response didn't make much sense in the context of

>what had been written about him. I think that a repeat

>customer who had a "fatal attraction" thing going on wouldn't

>write a review claiming that the escort's body build was

>lacking when compared to his photos as it's just too easy to

>refute that claim (ie, if Marchelo still has a ripped body it

>will be relatively easy for him to prove that via new photos

>and reviews by other, non-first-time reviewers). There are

>other, more subjective, complaints that a

>client-turned-stalker could make that would be more difficult

>to disprove.

>

>And I'm still wondering why Marchelo's web-link brings up

>hetero porn.

 

Well, you'll note his site is back up, and those are the pictures I looked at, none of which in my opinion represented him.

 

Note that one of them, as is discussed in another thread here, is actually a copy of a gay greeting card piture.

 

I don't mean to belabor this point, but -- well, my point was my point. I am no stalker and certainly his response had nothing to do with my review of him.

[+ glutes]

I tried to resurrect a post that was in 'Escort Travels' about Marchelo when he visited SF, but cannot find it.

Even several months ago there was controversy re. Marchelo, principally by me asking potential clients to look at ALL his reviews, something smelled.

Actually it still does, beware.

[+ glutes]

bump for our St. Louis Hoovillites

[Steven_Draker]

>I tried to resurrect a post that was in 'Escort Travels'

>about Marchelo when he visited SF, but cannot find it.

 

Glutes, as you may recall the travel posts in the "Escort Travels" section are deleted as they expire with no possibility to resurrect them.