Review & response of Daniel from L.A.

[Guest TwinkLoverr]

I just wanted to post some comments regarding this review & response. The original review is from 6/27/03. The response appeared today, 7/17/03.

 

I have to somewhat agree with the escort Daniel here. If this was the the first time the client "spent money on a guy" as he says, than how is it possible that this could be his third review?? His other reviews seem to indicate he has "spent money on a guy" before, and seemed to enjoy it. I tried to reconstruct some of the dates of hiring, but they didn't all appear to be listed in the reviews.

 

As for the escort Daniel, I did sense some degree of "attitude" in his response as well. So perhaps this attitude was present during the meeting too, and contributed to the bad outcome. However, he seems to be somewhat "straight trade", and this attitude is often appealing to guys who just want to suck a guy like him off.

[Guest ncm2169]

What the Reviewer says is:

 

< This was the first time I've spent money on a guy and felt ugly & undesireable >

 

I read it as if the Reviewer had said (or meant): "I've hired before, but this is the first time I've felt ugly and undesirable."

 

This version is consistent with his having Reviewed guys before. If true, it rather demolishes Daniel's response. x(

[N.N.]

I agree with ncm2169's interpretation.

 

I haven't reviewed Daniel but I have seen him. On the phone he can come across as aloof--not quite rude but not inviting either. In person he was a nice guy.

[Traveller]

>I haven't reviewed Daniel but I have seen him. On the phone

>he can come across as aloof--not quite rude but not inviting

>either. In person he was a nice guy.

 

I agree with N2. Dan was very nice in person. Not surprising giving that he was from the Mountain States. Definitely wouldn't be out of place hanging out in Park City or Telluride. Fun in the rack. Nice big cock.

 

Later.

[Guest DickHo]

My experience was the same as Travellers. Very nice guy.