Escort Responses

[Guest craigrc]

The response by an escort named "Zeus" in today's list of newest reviews raises an issue that our host may wish to consider: Should escorts be allowed to respond to a negative review when it is clear that the client said nothing untruthful, but merely expressed that he was less than completely satisfied with the escort's performance based on his own perceptions of what occurred?

 

I submit that if every escort is allowed to post a detailed, even nit-picking, rebuttal to every perception that a client shares with visitors here, many clients will be discouraged from sharing their experiences and an important function of this site will be effectively eliminated -- which is, perhaps, exactly what some escorts would like to see happen.

 

I for one would like to see limits placed on escort responses. If a negative review is posted that actually contains false statements about what occurred (e.g., it is claimed the escort arrived late when he was actually prompt), it is certainly appropriate to display an escort's response. But if the escort simply wants to argue with the client's subjective evaluation of the escort's performance -- which seems to be the purpose of the response from "Zeus" -- I don't see that anyone is benefited by posting that. When an escort responds to a client's less-than-stellar rating by saying, essentially, "Oh, I'm great, everyone else loves me, if you didn't there must be something wrong with you," I for one don't want to hear it.

[Paul Revere]

Actually, I think that all information is good.

 

While I agree that Zeus' response was long winded, overly detailed, and actually unecessary, it does tell us something about him. Just reading the response, and getting the feeling for the escort has some value I think.

 

I hope no client will withhold a review for fear of a rebuttal from and escort. I think that the more info that is exchanged, the better for all.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-00 AT 04:43PM (EST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-00 AT 04:25 PM (EST)

 

LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-00 AT 04:23 PM (EST)

 

> Should escorts

>be allowed to respond to

>a negative review when it

>is clear that the client

>said nothing untruthful, but merely

>expressed that he was less

>than completely satisfied with the

>escort's performance based on his

>own perceptions of what occurred?

>

How are we guaranteed to ascertain the 'truth' by listening to only one side of the story? The truth may not be so obvious to all of us.

 

>

>I submit that if every escort

>is allowed to post a

>detailed, even nit-picking, rebuttal to

>every perception that a client

>shares with visitors here, many

>clients will be discouraged from

>sharing their experiences and an

>important function of this site

>will be effectively eliminated --

>which is, perhaps, exactly what

>some escorts would like to

>see happen.

 

I disagree!

 

Nothing is lost allowing an escort to defend himself in this forum. It is better to let 10 bad escorts obfuscate their shortcomings than to deny one honest escort the opportunity to uphold his reputation smeared by soneone on a vendetta. Or for that matter to allow two people who saw the same accident to tell their side of the story and let the jury (us) decide. After all there are honest diagreements and differences of perception by men of good will, too.

 

 

Those escorts out to obfuscate their behavior are more often than not transparent and only add to diminish their credibility more -- would you deny them an opportunity to contribute their own bad review in their own words? I've seen it happen right on these pages. The more accomplished escort at obfuscating his behavior may succeed in forestalling an ultimate negative assessment of his performance, but it puts everyone on notice that there is a question regarding this guy. In a sense he's used his get out of jail card. He'll have to live up to his exemplary behaior which he probbly claimed or be seen as the liar he probably is.

 

I posted one negative review knowing that I might very likely be attacked as a liar and making wholly unreasonable demands -- and I was. I thought about whether I wanted to put myself in this position and decided that it was worth the effort to warn others about him. Without such contributions this site is impaired as a source of reliable information and I felt I should do my part to contribute if I enjoyed the benefits of the contributions of others.

 

Expecting that I might be rebutted and knowing that I had no second shot I tried to recount the circumstances as accurately and completely as I could. I had all my bases pretty well covered except one that I left only slightly open inadvertently. Well, that was enough just to leave a sliver of doubt to the casual reader -- maybe. Ceratinly one I wish I had fully plugged because I had the info to do it. This small opening might have afforded him some credibility to the several bald face lies he told. Even so, I think the review served its purpose -- it raised a question about him, it got him on the record denying it, thus burning his get out of jail card, and I may have even caused him to clean up his act because he was also working for an agency who might have applied some incentive to get past this blot on his reputation. Since then he has had two good reviews although I'm suspicious about one of them. My purpose was not to seek retribution against him but to warn others and if possible to get him to change his ways or get out of the business. He is a young guy and I dont believe he took what he was doing too seriously back then. Maybe he's changed for the better, if so then I'm satisified.

 

>

>I for one would like to

>see limits placed on escort

>responses.

 

I disagree again! Nothing is gained by cutting of the opportunity for one to defend himself. Or for that matter letting him have more chain than he can swim with.

 

>If a negative

>review is posted that actually

>contains false statements about what

>occurred (e.g., it is claimed

>the escort arrived late when

>he was actually prompt), it

>is certainly appropriate to display

>an escort's response.

 

How are we to tell what are false statements without hering both sides??

 

> But

>if the escort simply wants

>to argue with the client's

>subjective evaluation of the escort's

>performance -- which seems to

>be the purpose of the

>response from "Zeus" -- I

>don't see that anyone is

>benefited by posting that.

 

I read the review on Zeus and his response this am and feel that I have a better picture after reading his response. It is clear that the client is unhappy and there is a definite difference of opinion going on here, however, Zeus made some compelling points on is behalf. It is also pretty clear, not just from this case, that we clients as a group don't voice are expectations and concerns nearly enough when we are disappointed or dissatisified with our experience or more importantly up front when making arrangements or at the beginning of the evening. If we give our escort the benefit of the doubt that he is an honest caring professional who wants to be successful then we ought to be able to address these issues and resolve them or agree to differ and go our separate ways without rancor. Of course not all escorts fit this bill nor do clients. But we loose nothing trying this approach and may gain.

 

>When an escort responds to

>a client's less-than-stellar rating by

>saying, essentially, "Oh, I'm great,

>everyone else loves me, if

>you didn't there must be

>something wrong with you," I

>for one don't want to

>hear it.

 

You may not want to hear it and I may not want to hear it either, nevertheless it may be instructive. Depending on what has gone before, it may tell me something about the arrogance of the individual, which adds to my perception of him and colors my attitude about engaging him.

[Guest Matt In Vancouver]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-00 AT 04:26PM (EST)[p]i posted on this in the lounge... didn't read this thread first.. see lounge: )

matt

[Guest Sean]

I have to agree that Escorts have a right to defend themselves against negative reviews. How are we to ascertain the truth if both sides of the story are not heard? The bad review that was posted about me was from another Escort (I know who he is now and will deal with him accordingly)There are vindictive Clients as well as Escorts who will try and tarnish ones reputation. It happened to me. It can happen to anyone. This Steroid Freak who is well into his 40's and should have given up escorting YEARS ago even went as far as posting on the MSS as a client claiming I took money from his wallet, LOL!! That has got to be the MOST ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Anyway the point being is that anyone can say ANYTHING about you on these boards and if its a lie the Escort has a right to defend himself. PERIOD! As far as who's telling the truth, that's up to you to decide.

[Guest craigrc]

Tampa, thanks for your response. As someone who has had the opportunity to see our society's adversary system of justice function at close hand, however, I've learned that allowing both sides to tell their stories does not always result in a clearer picture of what occurred.

 

Escort reviews, like restaurant reviews or film reviews, are necessarily subjective to some degree. My point is that where there is no disagreement over objective facts, such as an escort's promptness or willingness to provide advertised services at an agreed-upon price, there is little point in listening to two people argue with each other. If a client says "He wasn't as muscular as I'd hoped," how is anyone to disagree with that? What is the point of allowing an escort to bicker with someone who writes a less-than-satisfactory review on such a basis? An entertainer's job is to please his audience with his performance. If the audience is not pleased, I don't see what is accomplished by hearing the entertainer complain that the audience is unreasonable.

 

Escorts can and do present their opinion of their merits in their ads. This site is the only opportunity clients have to present their opinions. Anything that interferes with that should be curbed.

[+ bigjoey]

i don't mind the escorts postings as they are often very telling about the escorts themselves.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

craigrc,

 

You are right that our adversarial justice system is seriously flawed often failing to achieve true justice for which it really wasn't designed. It was designed to adminsiter the law which is not necessarily always just and for which we should speak to our legislators about their shortcomings and to our creator about ours, collectively.

 

But this makes my point, at least to my mind -- no matter how flawed, I am loathe to leave the system soley in the hands of the prosecutors who often pursue the prosecution of the law over zealously when it was apparent to me and to others that it was contrary to the just outcome, particularly with so much discretion available to them.

 

For me the same principle applies here with us clients as with the prosceutors. Of course I am one of the just and I'll know that you are too -- but how many of us are there, we can only tell by the secret handshake (lol).

[Guest craigrc]

Tampa, I'm afraid your last post falls into the category of putting words in my mouth, and I'd appreciate it if you would refrain from doing that. I didn't say anything about laws or injustice, and I don't agree with the opinions you expressed. All I said earlier was that letting both sides tell their stories does not always lead to the truth.

 

In my view, Americans have made such a fetish of the adversary system that they insist on applying it in areas where it is quite out of place. Your suggestion that clients who review escorts are in a position analogous to that of prosecutors is an excellent example of what I mean. Clients are not prosecutors, they have no power to impose criminal or even civil penalties on the escorts they review. Their only power is to express their opinions and have them considered by others. Since the sanctions clients can apply are not the same as those that can result from a courtroom proceeding, there is no reason why the same procedures should be used.

 

Neither you nor any of the other posters in this thread has addressed my point: If a negative review is based on subjective rather than objective issues, what is the purpose of disputing it? If a food critic writes that the meal he was served was not hot enough for his taste, how is it possible to argue about that? Is the chef going to say, "Oh yes it WAS hot enough for your taste"? What would be the point of publishing such a statement? And if "Zeus's" client says that the escort was not muscular enough for his taste, how can "Zeus" or anyone else argue with that? "Zeus's" reply is simple bickering, an attempt to beat up on a client who gave him a bad review. Why should that be condoned? I think it shouldn't.

[HooBoy]

When I first put this site on the net in August, I created the rule that the escort has the final say. It's because of ugly things that go on in this industry.

 

I did not want to get into a "I said, you said" diatribe that I understand existed on another web site and that sometimes exists on this Message Center - but I don't control this joint.

 

As an editor and not a writer, I can only site Big Joey's succint post "they are often very telling about the escorts themselves"

 

And that, my friends is the crux of the matter. READ the escort's rebuttal and then determine if that's your guy.

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

craigrc,

 

I stand rebuked and properly so. I did not intend to put words in your mouth but that was the effect and I apologize for it. This justice issue is really my one of my sore spots and I just took off on it -- sorry.

 

Also, I tried to address most of your points in the previous message since you went to the trouble to make them. However, to cut to my bottom line if you want, just go to he last paragraph which makes my case for Zeus' rebuttal being published.

 

I also agree with you that the adversary system is not the answer to every problem and often aggravates the problem.

 

Now to address some of your other points:

 

>Clients are not prosecutors,

>they have no power to impose

>criminal or even civil penalties

>on the escorts they review.

>Their only power is to express their

>opinions and have them considered by others.

 

This is all true as far as it goes ... almost. While there are no criminal or legal civil penalties imposed there are practical civil penalties in the form of financial penalties, potentially. If you don't think so then I recommend you review some of the emails HooBoy has received from escorts threatening dire consequences because of the purported 'lies spread about them'. They are not objecting because their feelings are hurt but because their business is hurt. Such is the real power of client reviews, with the negative ones having several times more impact than the positive ones.

 

>Since the sanctions clients can apply

>are not the same as those that can

>result from a courtroom proceeding,

>there is no reason why the same

>procedures should be used.

 

Well, I think this is a nonsequitir -- there are many arenas where an adversary system is used that are extra-legal. But to address your question of why should it be used and lets be specific here -- we really aren't talking about the adversary system but rather about an individual being able to defend himself against charges leveled at him that may affect his reputation and income. I think it comes down to fair play. If the review were really harmless then fair play might not be an issue but there is a real potential for the review to have a material adverse effect on the escort. I certainly read them and make note for future reference if I'm convinced there is likely some validity. The reviews have a real impact -- consider one of the other current threads bemoaning the fact that good reviews are driving up the demand for certain escorts causing price inflation and serious advanced booking.

 

>If a negative review is based on

>subjective rather than objective

>issues, what is the purpose of disputing it?

 

None, other than getting a feeling about the circumstances: are these two earnest guys who just didn't have the chemistry to make a go of it, was there deception on either part, was their lack commitment to fulfill services, was the client unreasonable either in his expectations or communications. Why is this important to me? Because I want to know the real deal on this escort. If he deserves being trashed then I want to avoid him for sure. If he is the subject of a vendetta or smear job for some real or imagined slight I want to know that too, if the situation is unclear, its best to avoid him until more information comes in (there's the damage). And BigJoey is right -- the best source of information for making these judgments about this escort is straight from the horses mouth, the response of the escort himself in his own words with his own explanations. And if the is just spreading the BS it is apparent more often than not.

 

>If a food critic writes that the

>meal he was served was not hot enough

>for his taste, how is it possible to

>argue about that? Is the chef going

>to say, "Oh yes it WAS hot enough

>for your taste"?

 

At first glance this example seems to bolster your position, but I don't think it is really analogous to the bad escort review situation. This is because a single restaurant review by an unknown reviewer carries little weight, at least with me, although it does have the potential to be harmful. I put little stock in movie and restaurant critics, until I've seen enough to get some idea of their taste and how it relates to mine, so I need a track record before I accept their views. Unfortunately, we don't have this luxury in the M4M ER. No real track record for the most part, at least for negative reviews although there are instances where some reviewers appear to have established reputations for their reviews. Thus we have an unknown reviewer reviewing an unknown escort or worse yet an escort previously reviewed with possibly good to glowing reviews. How do we decide where the truth lies? Let each have their say and judge their statements and attitude behind them if we can.

 

And if "Zeus's" client says that the escort was not muscular enough for his taste, how can "Zeus" or anyone else argue with that?

 

This is one of the more obvious points I had to award to Zeus. He made a compelling argument that his picture was on his web site and was a reasonable shot to get an idea of this body type, at least in my opinion.

 

craigrc, after all of this analysis here is my bottom line -- I got more out of Zeus' response with regard to my assessment of him as an escort for me than I got from RubIt, although RubIt was the catalyst. Zeus states clearly what he is and what he does and does not do. It puts into some context to what happened between him and RubIt -- that this was not an isolated incidence of bad chemistry, but rather bad communication and definite policies of the escort. Its all out there for us to consider. Would we have gotten that just from RubIt's review? -- I dont think the picture would have been quite as clear for me. I would have known RubIt's experience but now I think I know what my experience would be -- which is, after all, what I'm really after.

[Bilbo]

As has been basically suggested elsewhere, chill dude! Happiness is inside you. It is a style, not a destination. There will always be people upset at you (if not, you're a totally boring person), but if you stay upset just because they want you to be, you're hurting your own silly self.

That said, and probably not listened to, may I add, "Oh, jeez, there goes another speaker!"

[CT Dick]

Along with Zeus, there were two other escorts responding on 6/13. I found all three very telling: Tom #1 of NYC doth protest too much, methinks. Matthew #2 of London came across as honestly surprised at the reaction but honest about having a bad day. Zeus brought up a good point about excessive precum.

By all means, the escort responses should be listed. I ALWAYS read them, even for cities I don't plan to visit.

[Guest sizequeen]

Court of Public Opnion

 

I have examined all evidence and material presented to the public court of opinion in this case and I find as an independent judge I must rule in the favor of the defendant (the escort).

The plaintiff (client) claims that the defendant (escort) was not all he expected and did not perform an oral service, thereby the contract between them was unfulfilled. The defendant claims he did not misrepresent his services, and that excessuve pre cum from the plaintiff's cock was a factor in prevented his completing oral copulation. He stated that he would have performed this service had a condom been avalable. The fact that the defendant (escort) did kiss, lick the balls and nipples and the plaintiff seemingly enjoyed this and paid $200.00 without compalint, is evidence that the contract between the plaintiff and defendant was fulfilled. Escorts have every right to present their case to the public. This is a free country, and democracy will prevail, even though I do call myself a "queen", I am a democratic old queen. Case closed.

[Guest craigrc]

RE: Court of Public Opnion

 

I still can't figure out why Americans insist on applying the forms of a criminal trial to a process that is actually more analogous to a restaurant or film review. It really is quite absurd.

 

If you insist on making such a fetish of the adversary system of justice, then consider the fact that the law has many ways of discounting the testimony of those who have a motive to testify falsely. In some states, for example, a criminal defendant may not be convicted soley on the basis of testimony by an accomplice to the crime. The rationale, obviously, is that an accomplice will testify only if he has been promised leniency by the prosecution, and is therefore likely to testify to whatever the prosecution wishes. So, the law discounts his testimony. In this situation, who has the stronger motive to testify falsely -- the escort who hopes to earn money by convincing people of his merit, or the client, whose only motive is to express his irritation at an unsatisfactory experience (and help others avoid the same)? Clearly it is the escort whose statements are more likely to be self-serving. A rule in which escorts "always have the last word," then, is exactly the opposite of the rule that should apply.

[Traveller]

RE: Court of Public Opnion

 

Wow. I just come to this site for the pictures. Party down dudes.

 

Later.

[Guest Matt In Vancouver]

RE: Court of Public Opnion

 

tooo funny... traveller I'm likeing you more and more: )

Matt

[Guest sizequeen]

RE: My last posting on this subject

 

>I still can't figure out why

>Americans insist on applying the

>forms of a criminal trial

>to a process that is

>actually more analogous to a

>restaurant or film review.

>It really is quite absurd.>

 

My remarks were in reply to Hooboy's posting which implied read the comments and judge for yourself. I was not in the room or hiding under your bed listening when you were having the affair with Zeus, so I only know what has been said in the postings, from Zeus and from you. Zeus has behaved in a very gentle and understanding manner towards you, however somewhat shocked by your critical reamrks. Your most recent remarks to me reflect a condesending attitude towards Americans and escort contracts in general. A contract is a contract, whether verbal or written, not a menu featuring the latest "plat du jour". We have a major epidemic of a deadly disease spreading throughout the world. Licking pre com is dangerous and one cannot expect excorts to take that risk, at least not in this country. What is your origin? Where do they expect escorts to lick cum at the danger of becoming infected? Gobi desert, New Guinea, Iraq, Pakistan, or the darkest most parts of Africa???

[Guest craigrc]

RE: My last posting on this subject

 

You seem to be confused about several things. First, I am not the author of the negative review on "Zeus" and have never seen him -- I was merely commenting on the review posted by his client and his response to it. If you will take the trouble to read the post with which I started this thread, that may become clear to you. If you have some argument with the person who posted the review, address it to him, not to me.

 

Second, a contract is in fact NOT a contract under these circumstances. Under the law of contracts as applied in all 50 states, a contract to perform acts prohibited by law -- such as acts of prostitution -- is not valid.

 

Third, I myself am an American born and bred. I believe that fact does not prohibit me from pointing out what I and many others see as an unhealthy obssession with legalistic forms that is afflicting this country. In my view, allowing escorts to post rebuttals of negative reviews with respect to subjective rather than objective issues makes about as much sense as giving air time to people who deny that the Holocaust occurred. Applying the forms of the adversary system in a completely different context, not surprisingly, does not in my opinion contribute to the search for truth.

[Guest Quinte]

Me thinks Big Joey and HooBoy have said all there is to say:

 

"they are often very telling about the escorts themselves"

 

Read between the lines.

[Guest sizequeen]

RE: My last posting on this subject #2

 

Prostitution is legal in areas of Nevada and I wouldn't be surprised that case law exists validating prostitution contracts. I misread your original posting. I thought you were the critical client. My apologies.

[Guest craigrc]

RE: My last posting on this subject #2

 

If you will take a look at the review of "Zeus" that prompted me to begin this thread, I believe you will see that the transaction in question occurred in Florida, not Nevada.

 

I find it very difficult to believe that any court in this country has ever enforced a contract for the payment of money in return for sex acts. If you actually know of such a case, please cite it. If you don't know of such a case, the statement that the existence of one wouldn't surprise you hardly supports your argument.

 

Returning to my point, I remain unconvinced that allowing escorts an unlimited right of rebuttal here serves any useful purpose. Filmmakers and restauranteurs have attempted in various ways over the years to discourage critics from posting negative reviews of what they offer, and since escorts have the same motive for doing this it seems obvious that they will try it as well. It would be a great pity if they succeeded.

[MiamiLooker]

I gotta ask a dumb question. Assuming an escort sees many clients, and since the reviews are probably several weeks old by the time they're posted, how does an escort remember enough about one particular session to post a valid rebuttal?

[Guest cleverock]

HooBoy deals with the negative ones first and tries to contact the escort. My own experience is that it's difficult to write a review unless it's very soon after seeing an escort; I would guess that this true of others.

 

BTW--Tampa Yankee and craig---I hope you guys have a sense of irony because I can't imagine being able to tolerate reading your lofty prose (esp. Yankee) unless I laugh. As others note, the escorts' rebuttals are pretty telling about them. the same can be said for the clients' reviews---(positive or negative). It would be a gross mistake to assume that absolute truth resides with anyone here or suppose that credibility always resides with one side or the other. You gotta make your best guess what's right and you still may find that the escort is a bad match for you your or that he has bad days like everyone else. Judging from the sense of entitlement some posters have, may be you're just a jerk 9escort or client).

[Guest craigrc]

You seem to have read my lofty prose without understanding much of it. My point is that giving escorts the right of rebuttal they currently enjoy on this site in hopes that this simulacrum of the adversary system will lead to the truth is taking the whole thing far too seriously. Escorts are not being put on trial here, they are merely having their performances reviewed in the same way that the performance of an actor in a film or a chef at a restaurant is reviewed. Unless there is some issue as to the genuineness of the review, as there occasionally is, the only purpose there seems to be in allowing these rebuttals is to let the escort give a negative reviewer a hard time in order to discourage negative reviews. That's why I think this practice should be curbed.