MAG

Up at 2:00 AM (way too much binge-watching) -- expected to find fishndude online, where are ya? Anyway, a few weeks ago a good friend said something that stuck with me -- when it's no longer fun, it's time to move on. To what I'm sure may be the delight of a few folks (maybe more than a few ), I say: Adieu, adios, auf wienerschnitzel .......and HASTA LA VISTA, BABY!!!!!

Holy cow, you quoted the OP in your post and you STILL don't understand what he wrote. the OP was criticizing guys who complain about bad sessions, when there was plenty of information to be had beforehand that the session would be disappointing. You have to read PAST THE FIRST SENTENCE. its impossible to debate an issue with someone who doesn't even know what they're debating, LUCY. sheesh

i know of no-one who insists that a provider has reviews, though there may be a few of those on this board. If there are, I don't fault them one bit for that approach. There will always be a variety of risk takers, and I've seen at least one post from a guy who DOES provide reviews that he doesn't mind people benefitting from them. as big shot pointed out, there are many forms of research....reviews is only one source. Validating a provider is an art form. Look at the volume of data provided by Kaduk on the 411 board - all without the benefit of reviews. you seem to want to beat the review horse to death - I'm not sure why, other that to simply be argumentative. That's the one thing you're good at. also, who are you accusing of "putting down" guys who write reviews? The OP didn't. another fabrication on your part.

You don't disagree with the OP as much as you wish you did. the OP advocates reading & researching. His post did not advocate "only seeing reviewed providers" in fact, I see no posts on this thread advocating such. I do see MANY posts advocating research. YOU are the only one making a federal case out of reviewed providers versus non-reviewed providers. Mr Bigshot made a good point, which you have conveniently ignored. the consensus is that research is highly advisable, and you seem to have a problem with that. Why?

Remind us again -- when was YOUR last contribution to the review board? Oh, that's right......

There you go again, throwing around words like "hypocrisy" when it's clear you don't know what it means. I was addressing Lucy, not you. I noticed you didn't attempt to address any of my questions. Apparently "deflection" is another word you're unfamiliar with.

Are you suggesting that all hobbyists are obligated to see providers that have no reviews? How many non-reviewed providers should we see? One per year? One per month? Do you NOT believe that we have a right to choose who we see and how we do our screening? After all, providers have that right, don't they? What compensation do we owe the guys who see non-reviewed providers? Money?

You win the bet, but the passive-aggressive response didn't come from me..... There it is. <sarcasm> You're off to a "great" start here, Carp. </sarcasm>

Geez, this isn't a dating site. Just pick up the phone & make a call.

Yes -- some providers go right into the naughty portion without prompting, whereas others wait for the client to make the first move. Taking the passive approach is fine, but if the session gets down to the last 10 minutes or so and she hasn't done anything naughty, a little verbal prompting may be in order.

I suspect that Lakewood has that reputation because the PD goes after AMP's aggressively.

Agreed. I think this is why guys sometimes go after the unreviewed -- the "rush of the unknown" (thrill of the chase). And the possibility of getting way more than expected. It's probably similar to the reason some gamblers become addicted. I've had the same range of experiences -- disappointing (to say the least) sessions from the body rub section, up to FS sessions from the therapeutic section. I always go in with low expectations.

Yes, without hesitation.

This ^^^^^

So sorry, sparkey. I know how you feel. It really sucks.