Escortboi in Phoenix: plagiarized review?

[TrumpCoupTommy]

"Escortboi" in Phoenix (aka Ryan) has a new, rather lengthy and detailed review posted on MER. It is his first review there, and is dated 9/23/07. Only problem is, it is almost a word-for-word copy of his one available review on Daddy's site. That review has a date of over two years ago. Only a few changed words and a new sentence or two distinguish the two reviews.

 

Even the descriptions of the two reviewers are suspiciously similar.

 

One possibility is the two reviewers are one in the same and the individual in question "was just too lazy" to put any real effort into writing a new, original review this time. I'm afraid that possibility is inconsisent with a couple of things he said in the two reviews. Specifically, he indicates in both reviews that he met Ryan in Phoenix for the first time a few months before the date of each respective review. That doesn't compute, as over two years separate the two reviews. Additionally the reviewer makes contradictory statements about both his age and the length of time he has been hiring escorts.

 

This casts doubt on the feasibility that the two reviewers are one in the same. Moreover one would think that if a client was going to write a second, glowing review of an escort that he had just had a great time with, he would at least be motivated enough to write an original review, and wouldn't have any apprehension about indicating that it was the second time he had hired the escort in question.

 

Another possibility is that this is Ryan's work.

 

Yet a third possibilty is that the two reviewers are different, and that the newer of the two basically copied the other guy's work. That still doesn't explain the contradictory statements I've pointed out.

 

We may never know the truth- unless Ryan comes forward and explains this anomaly.

 

I felt I should disclose this to the other readers here, as I dislike being duped.

[doctordoctor]

isn't it possible that the reviewer has discovered MER only recently and just decided to cut-and-paste his own old write-up into MER?....

 

I have not looked at either review yet to see what's up, but this was my first idea to explain this....the separate facts about seeing Ryan only a few months previous and other details like that seem unimportant compared to the actual review of the meeting, don't you think?....

 

I may be wrong, but I wanted to diffuse a possible non-issue....

 

thanks....

[MiamiLooker]

>isn't it possible that the reviewer has discovered MER only

>recently and just decided to cut-and-paste his own old

>write-up into MER?....

>

>I have not looked at either review yet to see what's up, but

>this was my first idea to explain this....the separate facts

>about seeing Ryan only a few months previous and other details

>like that seem unimportant compared to the actual review of

>the meeting, don't you think?....

>

>I may be wrong, but I wanted to diffuse a possible

>non-issue....

>

>thanks....

 

 

The date of the encounter in Daddy's reviews is posted as 5/2005. The engagement date posted on MER is 8/2007. The client describes himself as athletic and in-shape. All that cycling and running must have taken it's toll. He went from being mid 40's to being mid 50's in just two years.

[TrumpCoupTommy]

>isn't it possible that the reviewer has discovered MER only

>recently and just decided to cut-and-paste his own old

>write-up into MER?....

 

Upon reading and comparing the two reviews carefully as I have (and obviously as MiamiLooker has) the several inconsistencies would seem to belie the possibility you suggest.

 

I'm all for giving one the benefit of the doubt initially, but there clearly isn't something right with these two reviews/reviewers. It would be nice if the escort in question would come forward and clarify this for all of us. If he is innocent of any wrongdoing then I would think he would welcome the chance to set the record straight.

[whipped guy]

RE: Moreover one would think that if a client was going to write a second, glowing review of an escort that he had just had a great time with, he would at least be motivated enough to write an original review, and wouldn't have any apprehension about indicating that it was the second time he had hired the escort in question.[/font color=blue]

 

Several years ago I did indeed write three different reviews for an escort who is now retired. The reviews spanned a period of almost three years and I was certainly motivated to write an original review on each occasion. In fact, each review took not only a different twist, but was written in a completely different style.

 

Now, the second review was indeed influenced by reviews that had been written in the interim since my first review had been submitted. While ninety percent of that review was original, toward the conclusion I quoted earlier reviews to bolster my judgments and opinions. Moreover, I actually took pains to use quotation marks to differentiate my own thoughts from what had been previously submitted. This was done not only to indicate that I concurred with what others had said, but also to illustrate how what others had said could be used to describe my own personal experiences. In other words, my use of quotations from the work of others was actually a creative tool used to compose an interesting an informative review.

 

That said, no matter what prompted the second plagiarized review on MER, it can be said with certainty that the person who submitted the piece was without doubt unoriginal, and uninspired… if not downright lazy.

[Epigonos]

One cannot assume that escortboi reads this board so the possibility of his responding to a question here is probably slight and none. The guy has been around for a number of year with nary a complaint. I would imagine that if you really want an answer from him, regarding this matter, you will need to contact him directly and NOT wait for a response here. However, what type of response would you expect from him? Wouldn't it be better to direct your question to the guy who wrote the review?

[+ deej]

>Wouldn't it be better to direct your question to the guy who

>wrote the review?

 

Posting this on the site that published the review would make more sense as well. The reviewer is more likely to be present. :o

[Louis]

Could be that the reviewer is just lazy, and did the old cut and paste. I would think that Ryan would have a lot of clients.

While reviews are fine, I am there are several excellent escorts who don't have any reviews, or don't find the need to have any reveiws.

[Guest zipperzone]

<He went from

>being mid 40's to being mid 50's in just two years.

 

That COULD be a typo - no?