Yet ANOTHER fake ad on Rentmen

[+ stevenkesslar]

Would you recommend dcman and silverdollar to go to the police?

 

That's their call.

 

As I said earlier in this thread, the more we self-police, the less we need to worry about real police. Maybe some people like hiring on the danger edge. I can't speak for anyone, but I was hired by silver dollar over a decade ago and I doubt he likes scammers or suffers fools gladly.

 

To me the key thing is getting Rentmen to adopt fair and reasonable policies that minimize opportunities for scammers to prey on people, even if its people who don't do the due diligence I think they should.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Also, an unhappy customer is more likely to be volatile than one who leaves the room relieved of stress and infused with a warm glow. Someone will get hurt or raise a ruckus -- forcing a police response.

 

This is the real rub, as Marylander points out. "Respectable" johns will likely want to avoid cops at all costs, even if it means losing money or capitulating to intimidation. That is why I think the burden falls on Rentmen to have fair and reasonable policies to disrupt scams before they get to the point of a personal confrontation in a hotel room.

 

Sorry to say, but so far my read of this is that Rentmen isn't doing that with Sean/Mike/Toby despite a growing mountain of bullshit documenting that this is a scammer at work.

[marylander1940]

yes, I agree with your 2 quotes of my reply, but it's up to us to check the forum too.

 

One more thing: so many of yinz instead fascinated by the "diamonds in the rough" the "boy next door" and "starving student" from Backpage... please let's don't even mention that website on here. Hiring someone from there BP like it happened to dcman despite the clear red flgs (BWI hotel, surprisingly cheap price) is asking/begging to get mugged...

 

That's their call.

 

As I said earlier in this thread, the more we self-police, the less we need to worry about real police. Maybe some people like hiring on the danger edge. I can't speak for anyone, but I was hired by silver dollar over a decade ago and I doubt he likes scammers or suffers fools gladly.

 

To me the key thing is getting Rentmen to adopt fair and reasonable policies that minimize opportunities for scammers to prey on people, even if its people who don't do the due diligence I think they should.

[+ stevenkesslar]

One more thing: so many of yinz instead fascinated by the "diamonds in the rough" the "boy next door" and "starving student" from Backpage... please let's don't even mention that website on here. Hiring someone from there BP like it happened to dcman despite the clear red flgs (BWI hotel, surprisingly cheap price) is asking/begging to get mugged...

 

You are right, Marylander. Perhaps not coincidentally, Backpage has been the most pro-active and aggressive in insisting that it is better to have US-based websites that will cooperate with law enforcement. I agree with that, at least at the 30,000 foot level. You could argue that's bullshit, because they also clearly host scammers, whether it is their intention or not.

 

I think it makes sense and is fair to focus on Rentmen first simply because they host ads from the better known and reputable escorts and I think it is a good start to work out reasonable policies that work in most cases. Backpage will be harder by virture of the fact that they have a different and edgier clientele, it sounds like, both in terms of the people that run ads there, and the risk apetite of the people who hire.

 

Rule #1 is always caveat emptor, but my view is that the smart websites will make it easier, not harder, for reasonably safe clients like you to do due diligence. The easiest way to do that is not run scammer ads in the first place, and quickly take them down if they are running but are shown to be scammers, which could be as simple as a "warn" button in cases like Robbyy.

 

Speaking only for myself, the irony of this is that I have never relied on Rentboy or Rentmen, and I don't particularly even like them. The one time I got a free promotional ad on Rentboy over a decade ago was a disaster - it attracted all kinds of (sorry, folks) "loser" clients, most of whom didn't really even want to meet with me, or who I didn't want to meet with. That is NOT Rentboy's fault. The few appointments I did get were with very marginal clients - one was high on cocaine when we met. I have always gravitated to this website because it attracts clients who are educated, safe, and kind. That's partly why I feel I can be relatively objective and fair in my thinking, although I may be kidding myself. I have nothing to lose if Rentboy, Rentmen, Men4RentNow, and Backpage all go under. You guys will be the big losers, sorry to say.

[Despardo]

We do agree Marylander. I'm glad. I think I made clear I'm not encouraging clients like you to get in dangerous confrontations with scammers in hotel rooms. My goal is to avoid that. And I think its fair to put some of the responsibility for that on Rentmen.

 

I did react to the idea that "respectable" clients have something to lose. Of course you do. We all do. If websites like Rentboy or Rentmen get shut down, we all pay a price. So no matter how "respectable" you think you are my view is we all ought to think through what we can each do to protect all of us, including Rentmen. And Rentmen ought to make that easier, not harder. Sounds to me so far like they are open to that.

I don't want to see anybody arrested--that would probably just cause trouble. Neither do I want to see clients putting themselves at risk through in-person confrontation. I would like to see it more difficult for people to run scams on sites like Rentmen. A reasonable system of new advertiser verification combined with an effective protocol by the site for addressing issues when brought to their attention would make it tough for scammers to operate. At least it would screen out the amateurs who, as we have seen, tend to be none too bright. The small minority of really clever and creative scammers could circumvent these safeguards, but that is unavoidable. Rentmen and similar sites need to be encouraged (pressured?) to build on and improve their procedures and policies already in place.

[Despardo]

Sorry, I wasn't being clear. I texted him Oct. 19 and we exchanged several very brief texts. I said I wanted to hire him, he said he was available, and his last text said "Let me book my hotel now." I never heard from him again.

 

I didn't follow up wih him because I had already said on a thread on Sean (the "traveling pack" thread in the Deli) that I planned to contact him from a 503 area code number, which I did. So I figured maybe he blew me off because he'd read this and was suspicious. Presumably he is currently under "investigation" from Rentmen anyway, so presumably his guard is up.

 

Desperado, you said you found 3 to 4 reviews on him. Where? He has one review on Rentmen which as I said on the "traveling pack" thread sounds like total BS. He has no reviews on Daddys I could find. His alter egos, Mike and Toby, have no reviews anywhere.

 

I am going to pursue this series of ads because really my goal is about broad policies, not individual profiles. I'm not into wasting time playing whack-a-mole. Either Rentmen will agree to policies like what Adam Smith posted on Eros, or they won't. In this case, there really is a very simple solution. If Sean, Mike, and Toby can all send selfies with or without IDs proving they are really three different people, as in their pictures, and it is just an amazing coincidence that they travel and use computers like peas in a pod, so be it. I was 99.999 % sure Robbyy was a scammer, and I was right. I am just as certain Sean/Mike/Toby is a scammer.

Steven,

 

Mildly interesting update. Our boy Sean has just earned himself a one star review dated 10/21 on M4RN--"did not match pictures or provide desired services." Rather oddly, the link to the written review site is now absent from his ad as well as from the ads of several other escorts on the site. I thought at first that M4RN had discontinued the connection site-wide, but no. The link button is still available on a couple ads. The other ad links give access to the review site where if you input Sean's moniker, his reviews still pop up (you just can't enter the site directly through his own ad.) I thought for a minute that perhaps M4RN is allowing advertisers to opt out of displaying the review link, but ads for at least two escorts who had universally good reviews are also now missing the link, which makes little sense. So, some ads still have the link, but many now do not--with no discernible pattern. Don't know what M4RN is up to or the reasoning for the changes--a temporary glitch, perhaps? P.S.--the ad for Mike Reeves (now running in Salt Lake City) had a one star review, but the star is now gone.

[BabyBoomer]

Steven,

 

Mildly interesting update. Our boy Sean has just earned himself a one star review dated 10/21 on M4RN--"did not match pictures or provide desired services."

 

That's great news, although I feel bad for the client he scammed. How much longer is it gonna take these sites to pull Sean's ad?

 

~ Boomer ~

[Despardo]

That's great news, although I feel bad for the client he scammed. How much longer is it gonna take these sites to pull Sean's ad?

 

~ Boomer ~

No idea. They are gone from RM Seattle, but are now running on RM for Salt Lake City--all three of them--as well as on M4RN.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Our boy Sean has just earned himself a one star review dated 10/21 on M4RN--"did not match pictures"

 

Rentmen .... Hello? Are you out there?

 

HE IS A SCAMMER!

 

Fake photos. Ripoffs.

 

Fake photos. Ripoffs.

 

Fake photos. Ripoffs.

 

What more documentation do you need?

 

Seriously ... Rick ...Laars ...whoever

 

What more documentation do you need?

[+ stevenkesslar]

No idea. They are gone from RM Seattle, but are now running on RM for Salt Lake City--all three of them--as well as on M4RN.

 

Rentmen ... Do you want to just keep facilitating scamming by this fraud?

 

This is on you.

 

What more do you need to know?

[+ stevenkesslar]

Just sent Rentmen another request to suspend Sean/Mike/Toby's ad immediately based on the review above that Sean "did not match pictures."

[+ stevenkesslar]

Our boy Sean has just earned himself a one star review dated 10/21 on M4RN--"did not match pictures or provide desired services."

 

http://www.men4rentnow.com/gay/escort/male/massage/kansas_city/seanandrew1993/309865

 

http://rentmen.com/seanandrew

 

Despardo - I was travelling on Monday when you posted this, and because I was mostly working on my iPhone I did not bother to check. My bad. From what I can see above, at least of today, there are NO reviews of Sean on M4RN. His alter egos, Toby and Mike, are also all listed on M4RN and on Rentmen. None of the 3 has a review dated 10/21 on either site. Are you sure of what you said above?

 

The only review for any of the three on either site is the one for Sean dated Sept. 26 that sounds like total bullshit.

 

Meanwhile, I got the following message from Laars in response to my email above:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Steven,

 

We have received government issued ID's and performed phone verification's

on all three. We will continue to monitor. Thank you for your concern as

we too share a joint commitment to the community.

 

Regards,

 

Laars

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If you are new to this thread, Laars did suspend several accounts of escorts that clearly had multiple fake photos. So I have to take what he says at face value. He is trying to work with us, and if this scammer got through a government ID check, that is not Laars' fault. It does not surprise me that some scammers are smarter than Robbyy was at scamming.

[+ stevenkesslar]

I am cut and pasting below the email I just sent Laars at Rentmen as well as prior communications I could not cut and paste since I was using my iPhone while traveling:

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Laars:

 

Thanks for your reply re:

 

http://rentmen.com/seanandrew

 

http://rentmen.com/mikereeves

 

http://rentmen.com/tobygooden

 

I was traveling for a week and relying mostly on an iPhone. Now that I am home I'm better able to check things on the Web.

 

I appreciate that you performed the verification steps you outlined. In some ways it's good news that they passed the test you currently use. I'm not 100 % sure how I feel about the use of government IDs anyway, since you can pretty much photoshop anything. I understand that if they are using fake id's that match the pictures posted, you can't control that.

 

There are leading escorts on Daddy's like Tristan Baldwin and Killian James that have stated at various points that websites like Eros employ the use of current selfies for verification purposes. That would seem especially helpful to me in a situation like this. My own view is that for a lot of escorts who have been around for a long time and are well regarded and well reviewed (like Killian and Tristan) it is a waste of your time and resources to be requiring they prove who they are.

 

This also goes to what I see as the fundamental point: the best way of preventing scams is to have clear policies and to work together in enforcing them, including documentation. It does not surprise me that might be difficult in some cases, like this one.

 

I do believe that Sean/Mike/Toby is one individual who is a scammer. Here's why:

 

1. These three escorts have been traveling across the US and are in the same cities on the same days. I have been keeping track of it, as I am sure you have the capacity to do, and here is the pattern for all three:

 

Oct. 19th Sacramento

Oct. 20th Portland

Oct 21-25 Seattle

Oct 26 Salt Lake City

Oct 27 - Nov 1 Denver

Nov 4-5 St. Louis

Nov 6 - 9 Chicago

Nov 10-11 Detroit

 

I have traveled with various escorts where we shared hotel rooms in one city at one time for a few days. In 15 years as a leading escort, it would be totally unprecedented that three escorts travel to the same cities on exactly the same days with this complicated of a travel schedule.

 

2. None of the escorts have any reviews on Daddy's, Rentmen, or Men4RentNow, except for one review about Sean on Rentmen that sounds like total bullshit. As a review, it would serve the interest of a straight guy who wants to get paid and taken to dinner by a client who is "mesmerized" by him. Like #1, it is possible, but it is so unlikely that it extremely difficult to believe. Escorts that are sophisticated enough to work as a team and travel this way would almost certainly have multiple reviews somewhere, since they are good for business, and at least some of those reviews would actually seem real.

 

3. Your website helpfully allows viewers to monitor log-in times. Each of these three escorts tend to log in at exactly the same time, especially during their active travels. I have documented this in posts on Daddy's and I believe in prior emails to you. Again, it is possible that three escorts with no reviews, except one fake sounding one, are traveling across the US, going to the same places at the same time, and are so joined at the hip that they always check their ads at the same time, perhaps even using the same computer. But again, it seems impossible.

 

There is also anecdotal evidence from members on Daddy's that they tried to contact one or more of these escorts and got blow offs. That in and of itself is not sufficient for pulling an ad, in my mind, but it also suggests this is a scammer.

 

I also assume you have access to information people like me don't, and shouldn't, like the name on the credit card used to pay for the ads, and whether it is the same or different for these three individual advertisers, and whether it matches the names on the government id. I realize that is also not foolproof. In theory, I could use my boyfriend's or partner's credit card to charge an ad, and it doesn't prove I'm scamming. But when you add all these things together, it does seem to make a sufficient case that these advertisers are not real.

 

So now let me put the question on you. What would it take in terms of documentation to get you to pull these ads? I assume you are not under any obligation to run them, and you can pull any ad you want at your discretion without fear of being sued for discrimination, for example. I also assume that you want to be fair, both to advertisers who want to be hired, and the patrons who hire them and don't want to be scammed. So what would it take?

 

I did make a mistake I apologize for. Someone on Daddy's stated that Sean received a bad review on Men4RentNow dated 10/21 stating that Sean "did not match pictures or provide desired services." As i said, I was traveling when I read that post on Daddy's a few days ago, and I did not attempt to independently verify the information. It's a good lesson for me, because that review on Sean is not on Men4RentNow as of today. Sorry about that. It's a good lesson about your point about documentation.

 

I do plan to continue to follow up on this. As i said, I'm kind of glad this one is more complicated than other phonies you've suspended like "Robbyy." Under any set of policies, it is not reasonable to think you can prevent all scamming all the time. The goal in my mind is to figure out what fair and reasonable standards are the most effective to protect the community of escorts and clients you serve. So it would be helpful to know what you think is fair and reasonable in a situation like this.

 

As you may have read, Jeffrey at Rentboy is now publicly asking for help with his legal defense. As I have stated, my goal in raising these issues with you is to be pro-active in trying to develop both partnership and policies that make people who use escort websites feel like they want to defend websites like Rentboy and Rentmen if and when they come under attack or censorship, in any way. I spent about an hour on the phone with Daddy today and I think now that Jeffrey has weighed in and identified who his lawyers are and how we can help there will be a lot of energy going into that as well, on my part and on the part of many others.

 

Thanks,

 

Steven

 

From: "WEBMASTER" <[email protected]>

To: "Steven Kesslar" <[email protected]>

Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 8:59:03 AM

Subject: RentMen.com New Message from WEBMASTER

 

Subject:Re: RentMen.com New Message from Steven Kesslar

Message:

Hello Steven,

 

We have received government issued ID's and performed phone verification's

on all three. We will continue to monitor. Thank you for your concern as

we too share a joint commitment to the community.

 

Regards,

 

Laars

 

*RentMen.com *

Questions? Contact us now, we will be happy to help you!

e-mail: *[email protected] *

contact phones:

 

- *Netherlands: +31 858 888 318*

- United Kingdom: *+44 (20) 7558 8575 *

- Australia: *+61 (8) 7111 3999*

- *USA | Canada:* *+1 646 808 0709, +1 888 233 9994*

 

 

 

 

From: "WEBMASTER" <http://rentmen.com/seanandrew

> *Message:*

> I've emailed repeatedly. How much more documentation do you need that

> Sean/Mike/Toby is running ads on your website to scam people. You are

> suppoesdly investigating this scammer, but nothing is happening, other than

> ongoing scamming.

>

> The latest is Sean has a review on M4RentNow saying Sean "did not match

> pictures."

>

> Please suspend the ads immediately. What more do you need?

>

>

> http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/yet-another-fake-ad-on-rentmen.108377/page-6

>

> --------------------

> This message was sent by a RentMen client: http://rentmen.com/WEBMASTER

RentMen.com

[Despardo]

http://www.men4rentnow.com/gay/escort/male/massage/kansas_city/seanandrew1993/309865

 

http://rentmen.com/seanandrew

 

Despardo - I was travelling on Monday when you posted this, and because I was mostly working on my iPhone I did not bother to check. My bad. From what I can see above, at least of today, there are NO reviews of Sean on M4RN. His alter egos, Toby and Mike, are also all listed on M4RN and on Rentmen. None of the 3 has a review dated 10/21 on either site. Are you sure of what you said above?

 

The only review for any of the three on either site is the one for Sean dated Sept. 26 that sounds like total bullshit.

 

Meanwhile, I got the following message from Laars in response to my email above:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Steven,

 

We have received government issued ID's and performed phone verification's

on all three. We will continue to monitor. Thank you for your concern as

we too share a joint commitment to the community.

 

Regards,

 

Laars

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If you are new to this thread, Laars did suspend several accounts of escorts that clearly had multiple fake photos. So I have to take what he says at face value. He is trying to work with us, and if this scammer got through a government ID check, that is not Laars' fault. It does not surprise me that some scammers are smarter than Robbyy was at scamming.

Steven, I am quite sure. This is what I found last week. Mike Reeves got a 1 star rating on M4RN stating that he did not match his pictures. The 1 star stayed on his ad for about 4 days, then vanished. About a day later, the guys moved on to Salt Lake City, where Sean's ad got a 1 star (did not match picture, did not perform desired services) rating. That was a few days ago. I did not know that Sean's rating had since been dropped from M4RN.

 

The other issue with written review links on M4RN being dropped from some ads, but not from others seems to have been resolved, as all ads now seem to have the link at the bottom of the ad restored. So, my feeling about that is M4RN has been having glitch problems, which does not surprise me. Since they updated their format, a number of features have had technical problems. The new "near me" feature is a good example--it was quite literally all over the map so to speak.

 

The appearance and subsequent disappearance of 1 star reviews on M4RN may have either to do with the advertiser challenging the review and M4RN taking it down, or another case of technical glitches. Neither explanation would surprise me.

 

My only criticism of Sean/Toby/Mike based on actual personal experience is extremely poor communication, mainly a huge runaround involving emails and texts, mixed signals, lack of response, lake of details, questions left unanswered, general confusion and overall flakiness. I made a specific proposal initially by email and got a positive response. Then I followed up by text as they requested I do and got mostly ignored. Weeks later when they got to town, they texted me! When I replied, again I got ignored. What is ironic is that if I had gotten a satisfactory response, I was actually prepared to go through with a meet up. If they had delivered the goods, I had planned to write a favorable review, even if they hadn't looked exactly like their pictures.

 

So, if Rentmen says there are actually 3 living bodies and they are who they say they are, more or less, it could be true. All I know for sure is that they (the guys) have an oddly ineffective way of doing business. Or, they could be accomplished scammers. There is a saying I quote often that goes, "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence."

[+ Gar1eth]

Steven,

 

Mildly interesting update. Our boy Sean has just earned himself a one star review dated 10/21 on M4RN--"did not match pictures or provide desired services." Rather oddly, the link to the written review site is now absent from his ad as well as from the ads of several other escorts on the site. I thought at first that M4RN had discontinued the connection site-wide, but no. The link button is still available on a couple ads. The other ad links give access to the review site where if you input Sean's moniker, his reviews still pop up (you just can't enter the site directly through his own ad.) I thought for a minute that perhaps M4RN is allowing advertisers to opt out of displaying the review link, but ads for at least two escorts who had universally good reviews are also now missing the link, which makes little sense. So, some ads still have the link, but many now do not--with no discernible pattern. Don't know what M4RN is up to or the reasoning for the changes--a temporary glitch, perhaps? P.S.--the ad for Mike Reeves (now running in Salt Lake City) had a one star review, but the star is now gone.

 

 

I just looked at M4RN and couldn't find an ad for Sean Andrew in Salt Lake or Denver which are two places he had ads previously.

 

I usually look at the mobile M4RN site which functions a bit differently from the full site. I see the lack of review links on the full site. It seems that maybe M4RN with their most recent update has tied the links being able to get to the Cruising For Escorts Review Site from an escort's ad to whether the escort has allowed the Review option on his ad for the Full Site.

 

Every mobile site ad that I've ever seen seems to automatically have an option to look up reviews/review him whether there are any starred reviews or not. So on a mobile ad-and I haven't tested this out completely yet-but it maybe that the escort can't prevent going to the Cruising For Escorts Site from his ad.

 

 

As for a starred review being removed that's not unknown. Long before M4RN was affiliated with Cruising For Escorts when they only had the starred reviews, a lot of us noticed that some escorts would have a 1 or 2 star review one day and 'lo and behold' it would be gone a few days later. I think people questioned the powers that be at M4RN or maybe an escort spilled the beans, but M4RN did, and most likely still does, have a policy where escorts could remove so many unfavorable starred reviews per month. I used to wonder sometimes about the escorts who would have several 1 or 2 star reviews and then didn't delete them.

 

Gman

[Despardo]

I just looked at M4RN and couldn't find an ad for Sean Andrew in Salt Lake or Denver which are two places he had ads previously.

 

I usually look at the mobile M4RN site which functions a bit differently from the full site. I see the lack of review links on the full site. It seems that maybe M4RN with their most recent update has tied the links being able to get to the Cruising For Escorts Review Site from an escort's ad to whether the escort has allowed the Review option on his ad for the Full Site.

 

Every mobile site ad that I've ever seen seems to automatically have an option to look up reviews/review him whether there are any starred reviews or not. So on a mobile ad-and I haven't tested this out completely yet-but it maybe that the escort can't prevent going to the Cruising For Escorts Site from his ad.

 

 

As for a starred review being removed that's not unknown. Long before M4RN was affiliated with Cruising For Escorts when they only had the starred reviews, a lot of us noticed that some escorts would have a 1 or 2 star review one day and 'lo and behold' it would be gone a few days later. I think people questioned the powers that be at M4RN or maybe an escort spilled the beans, but M4RN did, and most likely still does, have a policy where escorts could remove so many unfavorable starred reviews per month. I used to wonder sometimes about the escorts who would have several 1 or 2 star reviews and then didn't delete them.

 

Gman

A policy that would allow an advertiser to delete a fixed number of bad reviews would explain a lot of things, such as why some bad reviews vanish and others don't. Given the fact that some clients can be extremely unfair or there might be mitigating circumstances, the policy may have merit.

[sincitymix]

its also kind of easy to fake a picture of a state issued id. scan it, cut and paste in a new picture, edit, save, send.

I would be curious on exactly what form and type of government issued id they take.

[+ Gar1eth]

A policy that would allow an advertiser to delete a fixed number of bad reviews would explain a lot of things, such as why some bad reviews vanish and others don't. Given the fact that some clients can be extremely unfair or there might be mitigating circumstances, the policy may have merit.

 

Yes-but it's also probably more commonly-as most likely has happened in the case of Mike Reeves- allows a bad escort or scammer to continue to get away with his con of us honest :rolleyes:clients.

 

I believe one of the massage sites-Masseurfinder or MassageM4M-possibly both allows the masseur to delete bad reviews too.

 

Gman

[Despardo]

Yes-but it's also probably more commonly-as most likely has happened in the case of Mike Reeves- allows a bad escort or scammer to continue to get away with his con of us honest :rolleyes:clients.

 

I believe one of the massage sites-Masseurfinder or MassageM4M-possibly both allows the masseur to delete bad reviews too.

 

Gman

No doubt the policy works in favor of a possible scammer (or really lousy escort,) however, I suppose the paying advertiser should have some recourse.

[+ Gar1eth]

I just looked at M4RN and couldn't find an ad for Sean Andrew in Salt Lake or Denver which are two places he had ads previously.

 

I usually look at the mobile M4RN site which functions a bit differently from the full site. I see the lack of review links on the full site. It seems that maybe M4RN with their most recent update has tied the links being able to get to the Cruising For Escorts Review Site from an escort's ad to whether the escort has allowed the Review option on his ad for the Full Site.

 

Every mobile site ad that I've ever seen seems to automatically have an option to look up reviews/review him whether there are any starred reviews or not. So on a mobile ad-and I haven't tested this out completely yet-but it maybe that the escort can't prevent going to the Cruising For Escorts Site from his ad.

 

 

As for a starred review being removed that's not unknown. Long before M4RN was affiliated with Cruising For Escorts when they only had the starred reviews, a lot of us noticed that some escorts would have a 1 or 2 star review one day and 'lo and behold' it would be gone a few days later. I think people questioned the powers that be at M4RN or maybe an escort spilled the beans, but M4RN did, and most likely still does, have a policy where escorts could remove so many unfavorable starred reviews per month. I used to wonder sometimes about the escorts who would have several 1 or 2 star reviews and then didn't delete them.

 

Gman

 

A policy that would allow an advertiser to delete a fixed number of bad reviews would explain a lot of things, such as why some bad reviews vanish and others don't. Given the fact that some clients can be extremely unfair or there might be mitigating circumstances, the policy may have merit.

 

Yes-but it's also probably more commonly-as most likely has happened in the case of Mike Reeves- allows a bad escort or scammer to continue to get away with his con of us honest :rolleyes:clients.

 

I believe one of the massage sites-Masseurfinder or MassageM4M-possibly both allows the masseur to delete bad reviews too.

 

Gman

 

No doubt the policy works in favor of a possible scammer (or really lousy escort,) however, I suppose the paying advertiser should have some recourse.

 

Maybe but if total fake scammers and non-total fakes but still bad escorts can hide their failings how can a naive defenseless client brave the cruel world and find the true gems of the escort world?

 

Well I'll tell you how, Despardo through Daddy's Reviews and this here Forum. I don't know if you've been around long enough, but from my understanding that was Hooboy's goal to begin with. Hooboy's motto was "Honest in Our Judgements & Truthful in Our Reporting." And while no system is perfect, those of us with this hobby have Daddy and the Moderators to thank for continuing to keep up the site. We also have each other to thank-all of us wonderful little people out there in the dark of client-land who write reviews about their encounters and also those of us who contribute here on the Forum. G-d Bless Daddy, the Moderators, and all of us-everyone one!!!

 

 

Gman

[+ tristanbaldwin]

Steven-

 

Just got word from Rentmen...they weren't able to return your 113 Emails on this matter...they were too busy running credit cards(that did successfully clear, too), on Ads for fake escorts. Ka-Ching! MONEY TALKS IN THIS INDUSTRY. If they pay the money, they apparently don't care who is getting burned.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Steven-

 

Just got word from Rentmen...they weren't able to return your 113 Emails on this matter...they were too busy running credit cards(that did successfully clear, too), on Ads for fake escorts. Ka-Ching! MONEY TALKS IN THIS INDUSTRY. If they pay the money, they apparently don't care who is getting burned.

 

Tristan:

 

I hit the like button on your post because I LOVE the spirit of it. Thanks for sticking up for integrity and honesty in advertising. But I will make some distinctions on what I view as critical details of what is going on with these ads.

 

In my defense, you're close to correct that I've sent 113 emails. Not only does that waste my time. It wastes Rentmen's time. I'll send 1000 or 10,000 more if that's what it takes to get to the point where we all feel that there are a fair and reasonable set of policies in place to protect ALL OF US.

 

Mostly, I think we - meaning anybody active on this site or on this thread - now need to get clear about EXACTLY what we want. And Rentmen needs to come forward in a way they have not yet, and tell us what their specific policies are, or tell us that they simply don't want to have consistent policies. So my goal right now is to encourage discussion and debate about EXACTLY what we want Rentmen to do. I'm picking on specific ads to get to underlying policies. What I really want to do is persuade Rentmen to have policies to protect us as users, and cooperate with us on what those policies are.

 

Here's what Rentmen has done recently, that I appreciate:

 

1. They removed several ads of advertisers who were clearly using fake pictures after making what they called a "picture verification request." Laars sent this message which was posted earlier on this thread: "We have removed Robbyy and Niconico profiles today as you and another via email advised the photos were fake which was verified. We are investigating 5 other Seattle profiles requiring additional verification or they will be removed."

 

2. After an investigation, they have left the ads of Sean/Mike/Toby [3 of the Seattle profiles] up based on the following message to me from Laars: "We have received government issued ID's and performed phone verification's on all three. We will continue to monitor. Thank you for your concern as we too share a joint commitment to the community."

 

On the face of it, I give Laars credit for trying to cooperate with individual complaints or verification requests. In one case, he agreed with us that the pictures were fake. In another case, he is saying that the escort satisfied Rentmen's current picture verification policy, which is to ask for a government issued ID. His cooperation begs the question of having clear written policies or processes, which Rentmen doesn't. But it's a good start, I feel.

 

I still think that Sean/Mike/Toby is a scammer, and is just way more clever than Robbyy. The recent post by Grey, who apparently joined this forum to "defend" Sean/Mike/Toby, provides yet more evidence of that. Grey defended Sean/Mike/Toby by arguing he has hired them, and that the pictures are fake, and the escorts in the picture are not the ones you meet on an appointment, but they may actually be hotter. To me, that sounds like more of the bullshit you would use to try to justify something unjustifiable. He is essentially saying - yeah, the photos or fake, but who cares? On the face of it, this also suggests that the verification process Rentmen used failed to detect that the pictures are fake. That does not surprise me, because whoever is behind the Sean/Mike/Toby thing seems sophisticated enough to be able to photoshop fake government IDs, and also potentially join this forum for the purpose of defending escorts who use fake photos.

 

I want to ask everyone reading this to THINK and COMMENT on what policy you think makes sense to try to prevent sophisticated scammers like Sean/Mike/Toby from getting away with scamming. Included in that could be this. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say let's put this to bed, because Laars has told us he did ask for a government ID, and Sean/Mike/Toby passed that test. I think that is a very reasonable things for Laars to say, that demonstrates good will on his part.

 

To me, personally, I think a much better policy would be what Tristan and Adam Smith I think both advocated: require a current selfie or set of selfies, either instead of or in addition to a government ID, that would be harder to fake. In particular, I think requiring a selfie would make sense in a situation where there are reasons to be concerned the advertiser is scamming. In this case, as Rentmen acknowledges, the concerns about scamming are quite legitimate.

 

I actually don't like the idea of requiring a government ID, anyway, certainly as a general policy. It would have deterred me from using Rentmen. Given that I now know that DHS can and will bust escort websites, why would I want them to have a photocopy of my real name on a government ID on file? I've NEVER done that with any website, ever, and I won't. I don't think government ID verifications weed out bad apples, as this instance probably demonstrates, and they could hurt the vast majority of escorts who are totally legitimate and reputable.

 

If what Grey said in his post of a few days ago is correct, there is a 0 % possibility that Sean and Mike and Toby can send Rentmen selfies of themselves standing together with a currently dated newspaper or doing something else that identifies the picture as current. The reason I say there is a 0 % possibility is Grey is saying the photos are fake. If Grey is "real," that means Sean and Mike and Toby are not.

 

The pictures that Sean Andrews using are of a guy that used to travel with them who I did book a couple times, and he was really really hot - actually hotter than the pictures he was using to lure clients. But it seems like he doesn't anymore.

 

As far as the experience goes, the guys are legitimately good looking, and they come off as straight - you just don't know who you're going to get since they don't send their own photos. They ask you for cash up front, because they upcharge the crap out of you during the session and some of them are real pushy salesmen.

 

Also, everybody who has actually had an experience trying to hire these guys (if it is these guys) has felt burned, as the other thread running on them documents:

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/this-traveling-pack-has-me-concerned.108007/page-4

 

I think EVERYBODY is saying that, at the very least, the pictures are fake. Beyond that, most people are saying the service is at best poor and at worst scammy or fraudulent. As Gareth asks, the question is: why are we still even discussing this?

 

So here's my question to ALL OF YOU. As a group, should we just drop this, or should we insist that we want something more from Rentmen than their current response, which is we did a government ID check? And if we want something more, what do we want? And are we willing to all advocate with Laars and Rentmen to do that?

 

To that end, here are the three things I would like Rentmen to do, all of which I think are very reasonable, along the lines of what Adam Smith has already suggested and that Eros is doing:

 

1. Have a clear written anti-scamming policy on the website that is easy to find. One thing it should say is that the photos used in the ad have to be real.

2. Have a warning button that is easy to find on each ad that allows people to issue a warning to Rentmen, based on their written policies, that they think the advertiser is scamming.

3. Have a clear written policy of requiring escorts suspected of scamming or fraud to verify that their photos are real through selfies - whether it is holding a newspaper, holding an item (like a pillow), or something that clearly would have to be impossible or difficult to photoshop.

 

Here's something similar Tristan already posted on photo verification:

 

Here's an interesting one to check out- some of the female dancers I used to manage advertise on a site called RS2k.com / RS2ktravel.com. (Nothing interesting to look at here except the FORMAT, it's all plastic chicks...)...in order to advertise with them, you have to VERIFY your identity through selfies or a drivers license picture held up against your OWN HEAD, to the website. Doesn't get posted in public- but they won't even represent you unless you are who you purport yourself to be.

 

Like that idea; not afraid of it one bit.

 

I'm less interested in the idea of government IDs, and more interested in the idea of "unique" verification requests that are impossible or near impossible to fake.

 

What do you guys think. Is this worth pushing any further, and if so what should we push for?

 

I am very happy to put a lot of time and effort into proving definitively that Sean/Mike/Toby or other advertisers are scamming. But I don't want to play endless whack-a-mole. So the whole point to me is we have to be able to agree to a fair and reasonable set of policies that Laars and Rentmen can live with and that they feel are cost-effective to enforce, with our help.

[Despardo]

Tristan:

 

I hit the like button on your post because I LOVE the spirit of it. Thanks for sticking up for integrity and honesty in advertising. But I will make some distinctions on what I view as critical details of what is going on with these ads.

 

In my defense, you're close to correct that I've sent 113 emails. Not only does that waste my time. It wastes Rentmen's time. I'll send 1000 or 10,000 more if that's what it takes to get to the point where we all feel that there are a fair and reasonable set of policies in place to protect ALL OF US.

 

Mostly, I think we - meaning anybody active on this site or on this thread - now need to get clear about EXACTLY what we want. And Rentmen needs to come forward in a way they have not yet, and tell us what their specific policies are, or tell us that they simply don't want to have consistent policies. So my goal right now is to encourage discussion and debate about EXACTLY what we want Rentmen to do. I'm picking on specific ads to get to underlying policies. What I really want to do is persuade Rentmen to have policies to protect us as users, and cooperate with us on what those policies are.

 

Here's what Rentmen has done recently, that I appreciate:

 

1. They removed several ads of advertisers who were clearly using fake pictures after making what they called a "picture verification request." Laars sent this message which was posted earlier on this thread: "We have removed Robbyy and Niconico profiles today as you and another via email advised the photos were fake which was verified. We are investigating 5 other Seattle profiles requiring additional verification or they will be removed."

 

2. After an investigation, they have left the ads of Sean/Mike/Toby [3 of the Seattle profiles] up based on the following message to me from Laars: "We have received government issued ID's and performed phone verification's on all three. We will continue to monitor. Thank you for your concern as we too share a joint commitment to the community."

 

On the face of it, I give Laars credit for trying to cooperate with individual complaints or verification requests. In one case, he agreed with us that the pictures were fake. In another case, he is saying that the escort satisfied Rentmen's current picture verification policy, which is to ask for a government issued ID. His cooperation begs the question of having clear written policies or processes, which Rentmen doesn't. But it's a good start, I feel.

 

I still think that Sean/Mike/Toby is a scammer, and is just way more clever than Robbyy. The recent post by Grey, who apparently joined this forum to "defend" Sean/Mike/Toby, provides yet more evidence of that. Grey defended Sean/Mike/Toby by arguing he has hired them, and that the pictures are fake, and the escorts in the picture are not the ones you meet on an appointment, but they may actually be hotter. To me, that sounds like more of the bullshit you would use to try to justify something unjustifiable. He is essentially saying - yeah, the photos or fake, but who cares? On the face of it, this also suggests that the verification process Rentmen used failed to detect that the pictures are fake. That does not surprise me, because whoever is behind the Sean/Mike/Toby thing seems sophisticated enough to be able to photoshop fake government IDs, and also potentially join this forum for the purpose of defending escorts who use fake photos.

 

I want to ask everyone reading this to THINK and COMMENT on what policy you think makes sense to try to prevent sophisticated scammers like Sean/Mike/Toby from getting away with scamming. Included in that could be this. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say let's put this to bed, because Laars has told us he did ask for a government ID, and Sean/Mike/Toby passed that test. I think that is a very reasonable things for Laars to say, that demonstrates good will on his part.

 

To me, personally, I think a much better policy would be what Tristan advocated that Eros does: require a current selfie or set of selfies, either instead of or in addition to a government ID, that would be harder to fake. In particular, I think requiring a selfie would make sense in a situation where there are reasons to be concerned the advertiser is scamming. In this case, as Rentmen acknowledges, the concerns about scamming are quite legitimate.

 

I actually don't like the idea of requiring a government ID, anyway, certainly as a general policy. It would have deterred me from using Rentmen. Given that I now know that DHS can and will bust escort websites, why would I want them to have a photocopy of my real name on a government ID on file? I've NEVER done that with any website, ever, and I won't. I don't think government ID verifications weed out bad apples, as this instance probably demonstrates, and they could hurt the vast majority of escorts who are totally legitimate and reputable.

 

If what Grey said in his post of a few days ago is correct, there is a 0 % possibility that Sean and Mike and Toby can send Rentmen selfies of themselves standing together with a currently dated newspaper or doing something else that identifies the picture as current. The reason I say there is a 0 % possibility is Grey is saying the photos are fake. If Grey is "real," that means Sean and Mike and Toby are not.

 

 

 

Also, everybody who has actually had an experience trying to hire these guys (if it is these guys) has felt burned, as the other thread running on them documents:

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/this-traveling-pack-has-me-concerned.108007/page-4

 

I think EVERYBODY is saying that, at the very least, the pictures are fake. Beyond that, most people are saying the service is at best poor and at worst scammy or fraudulent. As Gareth asks, the question is: why are we still even discussing this?

 

So here's my question to ALL OF YOU. As a group, should we just drop this, or should we insist that we want something more from Rentmen than their current response, which is we did a government ID check? And if we want something more, what do we want? And are we willing to all advocate with Laars and Rentmen to do that?

 

To that end, here are the three things I would like Rentmen to do, all of which I think are very reasonable, along the lines of what Adam Smith has already suggested and that Eros is doing:

 

1. Have a clear written anti-scamming policy on the website that is easy to find. One thing it should say is that the photos used in the ad have to be real.

2. Have a warning button that is easy to find on each ad that allows people to issue a warning to Rentmen, based on their written policies, that they think the advertiser is scamming.

3. Have a clear written policy of requiring escorts suspected of scamming or fraud to verify that their photos are real through selfies - whether it is holding a newspaper, holding an item (like a pillow), or something that clearly would have to be impossible or difficult to photoshop.

 

Here's something similar Tristan already posted on photo verification:

 

 

 

I'm less interested in the idea of government IDs, and more interested in the idea of "unique" verification requests that are impossible or near impossible to fake.

 

What do you guys think. Is this worth pushing any further, and if so what should we push for?

 

I am very happy to put a lot of time and effort into proving definitively that Sean/Mike/Toby or other advertisers are scamming. But I don't want to play endless whack-a-mole. So the whole point to me is we have to be able to agree to a fair and reasonable set of policies that Laars and Rentmen can live with and that they feel are cost-effective to enforce, with our help.

I think that a selfie with some proof of the date it was taken would work nicely--e.g. a magazine cover from a recent issue. Most escorts should easily be able to do that. I can see how producing a government issued ID (easily faked) might make advertisers uncomfortable. Nothing short of a retinal scan would be completely foolproof. A video chat between the escort and the site via Skype or some such free app would be a good option as well. One of the massage sites does that already, at least for the guys it labels as "verified" masseurs.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Since many of you don't like my long posts, which in the instance above I felt was necessary to provide specific details, I cut and pasted the end of what I wrote above in hopes that you will all read the questions at the end.

 

If nobody responds, I will take that as "It's not really that important" and I will probably just drop this.

 

Rentmen has made some effort to be responsive, and I don't want to keep pushing this if I am not speaking for the group. I don't think we have to be in consensus, but I would like to have some confirmation that there's a set of reasonable ideas a number of people broadly agree with

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So here's my question to ALL OF YOU. As a group, should we just drop this, or should we insist that we want something more from Rentmen than their current response, which is we did a government ID check? And if we want something more, what do we want? And are we willing to all advocate with Laars and Rentmen to do that?

 

To that end, here are the three things I would like Rentmen to do, all of which I think are very reasonable, along the lines of what Adam Smith has already suggested and that Eros is doing:

 

1. Have a clear written anti-scamming policy on the website that is easy to find. One thing it should say is that the photos used in the ad have to be real.

2. Have a warning button that is easy to find on each ad that allows people to issue a warning to Rentmen, based on their written policies, that they think the advertiser is scamming.

3. Have a clear written policy of requiring escorts suspected of scamming or fraud to verify that their photos are real through selfies - whether it is holding a newspaper, holding an item (like a pillow), or something that clearly would have to be impossible or difficult to photoshop.

 

I'm less interested in the idea of government IDs, and more interested in the idea of "unique" verification requests that are impossible or near impossible to fake.

 

What do you guys think. Is this worth pushing any further, and if so what should we push for?

[Despardo]

Since many of you don't like my long posts, which in the instance above I felt was necessary to provide specific details, I cut and pasted the end of what I wrote above in hopes that you will all read the questions at the end.

 

If nobody responds, I will take that as "It's not really that important" and I will probably just drop this.

 

Rentmen has made some effort to be responsive, and I don't want to keep pushing this if I am not speaking for the group. I don't think we have to be in consensus, but I would like to have some confirmation that there's a set of reasonable ideas a number of people broadly agree with

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So here's my question to ALL OF YOU. As a group, should we just drop this, or should we insist that we want something more from Rentmen than their current response, which is we did a government ID check? And if we want something more, what do we want? And are we willing to all advocate with Laars and Rentmen to do that?

 

To that end, here are the three things I would like Rentmen to do, all of which I think are very reasonable, along the lines of what Adam Smith has already suggested and that Eros is doing:

 

1. Have a clear written anti-scamming policy on the website that is easy to find. One thing it should say is that the photos used in the ad have to be real.

2. Have a warning button that is easy to find on each ad that allows people to issue a warning to Rentmen, based on their written policies, that they think the advertiser is scamming.

3. Have a clear written policy of requiring escorts suspected of scamming or fraud to verify that their photos are real through selfies - whether it is holding a newspaper, holding an item (like a pillow), or something that clearly would have to be impossible or difficult to photoshop.

 

I'm less interested in the idea of government IDs, and more interested in the idea of "unique" verification requests that are impossible or near impossible to fake.

 

What do you guys think. Is this worth pushing any further, and if so what should we push for?

As I implied in my last post, I think we should push for some form of reasonable photo verification by the escort to Rentmen, such as a selfie with some proof that it is current. Actually, Steven, all three of your ideas are good ones and worth pursuing.