Reviewing Escorts

[Mount N Do]

https://rentmen.com/Qbankiddo

 

I hired this kid recently and am struggling with the review. His ad is legit, though now expired, which is a completely different subject i suppose, since it wasn't even up that long. Anyways, his pics are accurate, a genuinely nice guy and definitely not a scammer. I suspect he's new to escorting as he was previously advertising as a masseur. Typically, if I am not satisfied with a session, and I feel that it was mostly a chemistry issue, I won't review either way. If the escorts ad is not misleading I will not review negatively. In this case, he is as his ad represents, actually hotter in person, real personable- i could probably spend a day with him and have a great time, but he didn't connect physically. Personally, that's never happened to me, but there may have been other factors as well. It appears his living arrangements are temporary and a little odd. I believe he may have tried to accommodate me so he could host and wasn't totally prepared. I'm allowing for a lot of different reasons this may not have gone as I expected. Is it fair then to recommend him? Even though my experience was not what I expected, I believe he could work for someone else.

[TruthBTold]

I would recommend saying that he matched his pics and actually was better looking and hotter than the pics may show. I would also say that he did the acts that you had agreed would take place. It sounds as if you would not hire him again and you could always check that box if there is one. I was surprised to read that you "could probably spend a whole day with him and have a great time" but not connect physically as the whole majority of the reason for your time together (I presume) was to have sex.

[+ Keith30309]

This is a tough one and I've struggled with it myself.

 

If I do decide to write a review but it's going to be mediocre due to chemistry gaps I tend to keep the content to the facts and reasonable inferences and leave out my opinions: how were the communications, timeliness, appearance as expected, preparedness, etc. Sometimes I will include a good faith recommendation intended to guide the reader: "John would be a good match for someone interested in going to a movie and dinner over more intimate time." (assuming it's true).

[Mount N Do]

I would recommend saying that he matched his pics and actually was better looking and hotter than the pics may show. I would also say that he did the acts that you had agreed would take place. It sounds as if you would not hire him again and you could always check that box if there is one. I was surprised to read that you "could probably spend a whole day with him and have a great time" but not connect physically as the whole majority of the reason for your time together (I presume) was to have sex.

What I meant to say was that we definitely had a personal connection, but I didn't feel a physical one from him. I definitely had chemistry. He was struggling. And it could have been for myriad of reasons that I can't go into without crossing the "review" lines. My point is that the appointment wasn't completely unsatisfactory, just not what I believe I paid for. And sometimes those things can happen because we're (escorts) human beings, not machines, and perhaps we should allow for those dynamics without reviewing someone negatively, if one feels the escort would otherwise be a slam dunk. I dunno, my apologies... I think I'm struggling in advancing my point here. Maybe I'm hungover, lol.

[rvwnsd]

I've been in the same predicament twice. The first was an escort who matched his pics perfectly, but was having trouble, ahem, rising to the occasion. I tried him again and was so wowed that I became a regular. The other is a guy who physically connected, with whom I had a great time, but who was too freakin' verbal. I would hire him again and ask him to cut the talk. I recommended both to other Forum members.

[Despardo]

What I meant to say was that we definitely had a personal connection, but I didn't feel a physical one from him. I definitely had chemistry. He was struggling. And it could have been for myriad of reasons that I can't go into without crossing the "review" lines. My point is that the appointment wasn't completely unsatisfactory, just not what I believe I paid for. And sometimes those things can happen because we're (escorts) human beings, not machines, and perhaps we should allow for those dynamics without reviewing someone negatively, if one feels the escort would otherwise be a slam dunk. I dunno, my apologies... I think I'm struggling in advancing my point here. Maybe I'm hungover, lol.

When I am not totally sold on an experience, as in we didn't connect, but it wasn't terrible, and the escort did not misrepresent himself, I generally decline to submit a review. No cause to do damage to someone's livelihood in the absence of a strongly felt complaint. Best let it drop. Recently I hired a very well known and very highly regarded escort. I cannot fault his attributes, professionalism or willingness and ability to do what I had requested. Problem was, we had zero chemistry. I felt he was in another world, just going through the motions (this is the entire time we were together) although "the motions" were hard to complain about, still there was just no connection. So, bad experience--certainly not. Met expectations--not really. Decision--no review.

[+ Kufrol]

Chemistry is in the eye (and soul) of the beholder. I understand why someone and I might not connect, but if a person has marketed himself honestly, I see no reason to write a negative review.

[MiamiLooker]

Is it helpful to other clients if no reviews are submitted for mediocre experiences?

[rvwnsd]

Chemistry is in the eye (and soul) of the beholder. I understand why someone and I might not connect, but if a person has marketed himself honestly, I see no reason to write a negative review.

 

You wrote what I omitted from my post. Thank you for saying that.

 

Is it helpful to other clients if no reviews are submitted for mediocre experiences?

 

That's a great question, but I'm wondering why you used the word "mediocre" rather than "satisfactory?" If people did not equate anything but stellar with "negative" I would agree that every experience would warrant a review with those that were not stellar being rated "satisfactory" and those that were not negative be rated "mediocre." But here's the thing: "satisfactory" is looked upon as a negative. Every experience can't possibly be stellar or extraordinary or [fill in your favorite superlative here] because then those experiences become average, ordinary, and the norm.

[jojo]

From my perspective, I believe there is a lot of "grade inflation" when it comes to rating of escorts. If one believes in the pareto principle and applies it to escorts, then only 20% of these guys should be rated "5" and the vast majority fall into the 2, 3 or 4 rating. I know escorts can delete "bad reviews" but this just reinforces to me the lack of creditability is almost all reviews on RM or other such sites.

[+ Axiom2001]

https://rentmen.com/Qbankiddo

 

I hired this kid recently and am struggling with the review. His ad is legit, though now expired, which is a completely different subject i suppose, since it wasn't even up that long. Anyways, his pics are accurate, a genuinely nice guy and definitely not a scammer. I suspect he's new to escorting as he was previously advertising as a masseur. Typically, if I am not satisfied with a session, and I feel that it was mostly a chemistry issue, I won't review either way. If the escorts ad is not misleading I will not review negatively. In this case, he is as his ad represents, actually hotter in person, real personable- i could probably spend a day with him and have a great time, but he didn't connect physically. Personally, that's never happened to me, but there may have been other factors as well. It appears his living arrangements are temporary and a little odd. I believe he may have tried to accommodate me so he could host and wasn't totally prepared. I'm allowing for a lot of different reasons this may not have gone as I expected. Is it fair then to recommend him? Even though my experience was not what I expected, I believe he could work for someone else.

 

In November I engaged the services of a very well-known, highly regarded, gorgeous, and highly reviewed escort. He's done great porn as well. With me he was a complete let-down. He was cool in his demeanor; he did not hug or shake hands after he had opened the door to his hotel room, and my hour with him to the tune of, I think, $300 was totally futile. I "chose NOT" to write a review because he'd received stellar one's in the past, for I thought: "what good would it do?" And I had not wanted to have received a barrage of comments regarding his greatness from those who'd been with him in the past.

 

Since your guy's ad is no longer up-- why bother with a review? "My guy's" ad and website and reviews and brief films are still rather extant!

[Despardo]

You wrote what I omitted from my post. Thank you for saying that.

 

 

 

That's a great question, but I'm wondering why you used the word "mediocre" rather than "satisfactory?" If people did not equate anything but stellar with "negative" I would agree that every experience would warrant a review with those that were not stellar being rated "satisfactory" and those that were not negative be rated "mediocre." But here's the thing: "satisfactory" is looked upon as a negative. Every experience can't possibly be stellar or extraordinary or [fill in your favorite superlative here] because then those experiences become average, ordinary, and the norm.

I am a huge fan of Rex Stout's great detective Nero Wolfe. In fact Nero Wolfe is my role model. When his assistant Archie Goodwin does something right, Wolfe calmly says, "satisfactory." When Archie does something downright brilliant, Wolfe says, "very satisfactory." My point is that in an escort review, the term "satisfactory" is generally regarded as a negative, whereas it really shouldn't be. I have a favorite travel company that asks travelers to rate all aspects of a trip by checking boxes Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor. What I have found out is that when evaluating these questionnaires, "good" does not mean good. "Good" means nothing. Anything less than "Excellent" is considered a negative comment. So if one rates a restaurant or hotel as "good" the company wants to know what was wrong. It comes down to damning with faint praise.

[rvwnsd]

...My point is that in an escort review, the term "satisfactory" is generally regarded as a negative, whereas it really shouldn't be...

Agree 1000%

 

... "good" does not mean good. "Good" means nothing. Anything less than "Excellent" is considered a negative comment. So if one rates a restaurant or hotel as "good" the company wants to know what was wrong. It comes down to damning with faint praise.

 

I know, and it pisses me off.

[Mount N Do]

Is it helpful to other clients if no reviews are submitted for mediocre experiences?

No. But my 'mediocre' experience may not be someone else's. And that's my point. If the escort is everything he advertises physically, how fair is it to say he's lame, if he didn't connect with me?

[MiamiLooker]

No. But my 'mediocre' experience may not be someone else's. And that's my point. If the escort is everything he advertises physically, how fair is it to say he's lame, if he didn't connect with me?

You wouldn't be able to explain the lack of connection without calling the escort lame?

[Mount N Do]

You wouldn't be able to explain the lack of connection without calling the escort lame?

Pretty much... that's why I was "struggling" with this one. Sometimes those terms can be mutually exclusive. I can say that I described, fairly I think, how my meeting went on PM with several who inquired. Daddy's isn't accepting reviews currently where one can expand. RM doesn't have that option outside a few short answers. Either way, its a moot point as his ad has expired after only being up for about a week. A good indication that he may be a good masseur, but not ready for "Prime Time".

[filmbuff78]

I was struggling with this too. I hired a guy from Chicago visiting LA - late night hire. I got there and he didn't look that much like his pics. Eh. But he seemed rushed. I was out the door in 20 mins. We both got off, but I wanted to leave a negative review, but I thought "What if he was just tired... blah blah blah." I chose not to, but it's bugged me. I almost felt like saying "I'm paying for an hour", but I decided against it.

[Mydavid]

I was struggling with this too. I hired a guy from Chicago visiting LA - late night hire. I got there and he didn't look that much like his pics. Eh. But he seemed rushed. I was out the door in 20 mins. We both got off, but I wanted to leave a negative review, but I thought "What if he was just tired... blah blah blah." I chose not to, but it's bugged me. I almost felt like saying "I'm paying for an hour", but I decided against it.

 

I have similar experiences. Sometimes I had unsatisfactory experiences, and I didn't know it was because of his attitude or his physique. I am considerate, but I could feel he took advantage of my kindness. I don't want to argue or whatever, so I always swallowed it. And I don't know how to review about my feeling.

[+ Eric Hassan]

This is a tough one and I've struggled with it myself.

 

If I do decide to write a review but it's going to be mediocre due to chemistry gaps I tend to keep the content to the facts and reasonable inferences and leave out my opinions: how were the communications, timeliness, appearance as expected, preparedness, etc. Sometimes I will include a good faith recommendation intended to guide the reader: "John would be a good match for someone interested in going to a movie and dinner over more intimate time." (assuming it's true).

 

This seems like a great strategy to employ for reviews in general - whether you had an excellent time, a satisfactory time, a less than satisfactory time or a poor time. We all know there are many variables that go into a meeting, and reviews that are fact-based would probably be most helpful to other clients and least damaging to escorts with whom you might have had a not-so-great time but who might be great for others. Opinions are important, too, and it can be relatively difficult to separate facts and opinions when offering a review. I imagine a review that informs the reader if the person was as advertised in looks and personality, stayed for the time agreed upon, was able to make a human connection, etc would be very helpful. Then a statement about who might want to hire that person might help guide people in the right direction and increase the usefulness of reviews.

[+ deej]

This seems like a great strategy to employ for reviews in general - whether you had an excellent time, a satisfactory time, a less than satisfactory time or a poor time. We all know there are many variables that go into a meeting, and reviews that are fact-based would probably be most helpful to other clients and least damaging to escorts with whom you might have had a not-so-great time but who might be great for others. Opinions are important, too, and it can be relatively difficult to separate facts and opinions when offering a review. I imagine a review that informs the reader if the person was as advertised in looks and personality, stayed for the time agreed upon, was able to make a human connection, etc would be very helpful. Then a statement about who might want to hire that person might help guide people in the right direction and increase the usefulness of reviews.

 

Hooboy's original motto was "Honest in our judgement, truthful in our reporting".

 

That's not a bad motto to keep in mind when writing reviews, but it's a two-way lens that focuses both on the escort and the client. If the escort is (or isn't) as advertised, that should be reported honestly and truthfully and without judgement.

 

If there was no "click" between escort and client, no harm-no foul, just report that. Just the facts.

 

Judgements about who "might" work better, what might "work" better, are just that. Judgements. They are projections of your perceptions.

 

Stick to the facts and there isn't much to argue with.

[+ othermanc]

After being with an escort I will submit a review right away. For one thing, other clients have contacted me if they were considering hiring that escort and they tend to trust a fellow client's honesty. I have referred several escorts this was and both the escorts and clients are very appreciative of that gesture. While the rentmen review structure isn't very thorough it at least lets other clients know that the escort has something another client wants to post about. I have posted narrative reviews on daddys and will continue to do that when that feature is reinstated. For now, I feel this helps escorts and clients a bit.

[+ tylerthebadwolf]

This seems like a great strategy to employ for reviews in general - whether you had an excellent time, a satisfactory time, a less than satisfactory time or a poor time. We all know there are many variables that go into a meeting, and reviews that are fact-based would probably be most helpful to other clients and least damaging to escorts with whom you might have had a not-so-great time but who might be great for others. Opinions are important, too, and it can be relatively difficult to separate facts and opinions when offering a review. I imagine a review that informs the reader if the person was as advertised in looks and personality, stayed for the time agreed upon, was able to make a human connection, etc would be very helpful. Then a statement about who might want to hire that person might help guide people in the right direction and increase the usefulness of reviews.

 

I wish there were some way for me to 'like' this multiple times per day. Because I would.