An interesting dilemma

[maxwellissmart]

Gilbert's thread raises a question:

 

You see an escort. Through whatever means you are made aware that the pictures are not his. Even if you enjoy yourself, do you post a negative review?

 

This should be interesting.

[jjkrkwood]

I think a Review should be truthful and honest, and reflective of the time you spent with the person. If you had a good experience But the person was not who he advertised himself to be, the Review should say that. Give credit where credit is due, but make others aware that the person advertised is NOT the person that showed up.

 

Thats how I would handle it .

[Bosguy]

I think a Review should be truthful and honest, and reflective of the time you spent with the person. If you had a good experience But the person was not who he advertised himself to be, the Review should say that. Give credit where credit is due, but make others aware that the person advertised is NOT the person that showed up.

 

Thats how I would handle it .

 

I believe JJK is 100% correct in how to handle a situation like this. That is what objective reviewing should be.

 

Boston Bill

[seeker630]

I think a Review should be truthful and honest, and reflective of the time you spent with the person. If you had a good experience But the person was not who he advertised himself to be, the Review should say that. Give credit where credit is due, but make others aware that the person advertised is NOT the person that showed up.

 

Thats how I would handle it .

 

Yep!

[maxwellissmart]

I think a Review should be truthful and honest.

 

Considering that the escort himself was neither, would you hire him again (even if you had a good time) or would this be an automatic disqualification?

 

For me, this whole scenario has a little too much "bait-and-switch" sprinkled on it. I'd have a hard time (pardon the pun) with that—or justifiying paying someone who isn't who and what they say they are. You hire Jon Ramsey to show up, not someone who thinks their ass looks like Jon Ramsey's. If I were Gilbert, I'd contact the escort and tell him I was writing a negative review and why, and that if he wants to respond to it, here's the URL to the forum.

[jankeedaddy]

Dear Max,

 

You seem a little too passionate about this topic to be uninterested and uninvolved. Did you have a "bait and switch" experience with another escort? It think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I can imagine escorts who do not want their very own pictures up on the web, so they "borrow" what they believe are "look-alike" images of another. I'm not approving this practice, but I could understand it. And yes, I have had that experience a few times when "somewhat similar" showed up.

[cany10011]

i had a bait and switch with the famous group of revolving group of russian masseurs in nyc. Called one up and someone else appeared. Still cute, belami type and he did more than just massage. Called another "russian" masseur and the same original one showed up (the same one used a different cell phone). Did I turn him away? no, he performed and satisfied a need.

[JT Brooklyn]

i had a bait and switch with the famous group of revolving group of russian masseurs in nyc. Called one up and someone else appeared. Still cute, belami type and he did more than just massage. Called another "russian" masseur and the same original one showed up (the same one used a different cell phone). Did I turn him away? no, he performed and satisfied a need.

 

 

I'm thinking as long as you end up a "Satisfied Customer" does the situation really matter? I'd say no BUT then again not all "Bait and Switch" turns into a good deal for the Customer...

[Decatur Guy]

I think a Review should be truthful and honest, and reflective of the time you spent with the person. If you had a good experience But the person was not who he advertised himself to be, the Review should say that. Give credit where credit is due, but make others aware that the person advertised is NOT the person that showed up.

 

Thats how I would handle it .

 

I concur

[tsgarp]

i had a bait and switch with the famous group of revolving group of russian masseurs in nyc. Called one up and someone else appeared. Still cute, belami type and he did more than just massage. Called another "russian" masseur and the same original one showed up (the same one used a different cell phone). Did I turn him away? no, he performed and satisfied a need.

 

I had the exact same experience (with probably the same guy!) Only difference is when I reached out to a THIRD, supposedly different young man and this same Ukrainian kid appeared I looked at him, smiled and said, "No thank you - have a good night."

[jjkrkwood]

Considering that the escort himself was neither, would you hire him again (even if you had a good time) or would this be an automatic disqualification?

 

For me, this whole scenario has a little too much "bait-and-switch" sprinkled on it. I'd have a hard time (pardon the pun) with that—or justifiying paying someone who isn't who and what they say they are. You hire Jon Ramsey to show up, not someone who thinks their ass looks like Jon Ramsey's. If I were Gilbert, I'd contact the escort and tell him I was writing a negative review and why, and that if he wants to respond to it, here's the URL to the forum.

 

Max, with all due respect to the profession, its not a morality thing for me. So what, he Lied and misrepresented, BUT I enjoyed his company and the sex. Whats the problem here? NONE, for me... I think the intital die is cast as soon as you decide to procede with the session with the guy that shows up. You made the choice, and if its Good, why not repeat it ?

[maxwellissmart]

Max, with all due respect to the profession, its not a morality thing for me. So what, he Lied and misrepresented, BUT I enjoyed his company and the sex. Whats the problem here? NONE, for me... I think the intital die is cast as soon as you decide to procede with the session with the guy that shows up. You made the choice, and if its Good, why not repeat it ?

 

Don't get me wrong—I see your point and I know there will be people on here who would make lemonade out of lemons, as long as Mr. Not-Jon-Ramsey is still hot in the sack. Speaking of, I note that Gilbert hasn't posted a follow-up message.

[down_to_business]

Gilbert's thread raises a question:

 

You see an escort. Through whatever means you are made aware that the pictures are not his. Even if you enjoy yourself, do you post a negative review?

 

If you thoroughly enjoyed yourself and your experience, I think its OK to say so in a review. You would be doing others a disservice, however, if you did not at least point out that the pictures were not accurate or that the person showing up (even if attractive) did not match the posted photos. I would probably word it a little stronger than that personally, because I would feel pretty crappy if someone else got taken on a bait-and-switch based on my recommendation.

[maxwellissmart]

If you thoroughly enjoyed yourself and your experience, I think its OK to say so in a review. You would be doing others a disservice, however, if you did not at least point out that the pictures were not accurate or that the person showing up (even if attractive) did not match the posted photos. I would probably word it a little stronger than that personally, because I would feel pretty crappy if someone else got taken on a bait-and-switch based on my recommendation.

 

I think this is why I would contact the escort and tell him "I'm posting a negative review and here's why. I found you acceptable, but the thing is—you're creating a no-win situation for a client who wants to hire you by using someone else's photographs. There's nothing that can be labeled other than fraud. I would want (and expect) other clients to do the same service for me. If you want to explain why you decided to do such a thing, the board is listening."

[instudiocity]

I think this is why I would contact the escort and tell him "I'm posting a negative review and here's why. I found you acceptable, but the thing is—you're creating a no-win situation for a client who wants to hire you by using someone else's photographs. There's nothing that can be labeled other than fraud. I would want (and expect) other clients to do the same service for me. If you want to explain why you decided to do such a thing, the board is listening."

I dunno, it bugs me that you keep saying "negative review". I'd prefer you posted a review - with truthful facts - both positive and negative. Just posting facts and letting the chips fall where they may is far more intellectually honest than posting a "negative review". It's almost like your predisposed to trashing an escort than reviewing him.

[crok]

I'm interested in what The Glutehole thinks on this issue.

[Phil_musc]

Yes, post the review. It might be nice to read something that showed how some things were not what you expected, and yet you found a guy who was worthwhile. It might actually help the new guy get one other clients and encourage him to come clean on the pictures. If he's that hot and appealing, fake pictures may be unnecessary and we'll all share in the new discovery. I get the significance of the honesty issue, but I also get that you might have a new find here that should be shared with the rest of our readers. What's the harm?

[maxwellissmart]

I dunno, it bugs me that you keep saying "negative review". I'd prefer you posted a review - with truthful facts - both positive and negative. Just posting facts and letting the chips fall where they may is far more intellectually honest than posting a "negative review". It's almost like your predisposed to trashing an escort than reviewing him.

 

In: here's why I keep stressing this encounter ultimately deserves a negative review—the escort is a liar. Period. The pics aren't his—and in fact, at least one belongs to another, very well-reviewed escort (who has worked long and hard for those reviews, in my opinion). We have thread after thread on this board where clients demonstrate an almost innate lack of the ability to say "no, that's not acceptable." We have post after post where clients say "he didn't deliver on what was promised, but I paid him anyway." And then they whine and bitch about it. This board is meant to provide a forum for honest reviewing of escort/client encounters so that other clients can make informed decisions about their hiring practices—before spending what usually amounts to a great deal of money. In my opinion—allowing an escort to get away with blatantly dishonest practices is no different than allowing the same escort to post his own reviews that are obviously self-penned. If you and other posters want to cut the guy some slack because he turns out to be a decent lay—fine. But doing so simply encourages others to try to get away with the same sort of dishonesty, and that sets a precedent which may eventually come back to bite you on the ass or in your wallet.

[jjkrkwood]

Max, from the beginning of time, people have always made concessions for Hot looking, sexy people. Its no difference with escorts. We have read many horror stories on this site about guys who have had BAD encounters with guys they have chosen to be with because they were Horny and the guy was HOT.. The escort police wont change that. and there will always be a new crop of scammers coming up to take their places... So the only thing you can really do is to recount the situation in your review if you choose to write one (which in itself is an individual decision) and be honest pointing out that the guy was Hot, you enjoyed your time with him but he is not the guy advertised. Yes the escort is at fault for trying to scam you, but ultimately YOU are the one that made the decision to procede with him, so you hold as much fault in the situation. Lets not create a witch-hunt here. Remember the purpose of hiring is to have FUN...

[instudiocity]

In: here's why I keep stressing this encounter ultimately deserves a negative review—the escort is a liar. Period. The pics aren't his—and in fact, at least one belongs to another, very well-reviewed escort (who has worked long and hard for those reviews, in my opinion). We have thread after thread on this board where clients demonstrate an almost innate lack of the ability to say "no, that's not acceptable." We have post after post where clients say "he didn't deliver on what was promised, but I paid him anyway." And then they whine and bitch about it. This board is meant to provide a forum for honest reviewing of escort/client encounters so that other clients can make informed decisions about their hiring practices—before spending what usually amounts to a great deal of money. In my opinion—allowing an escort to get away with blatantly dishonest practices is no different than allowing the same escort to post his own reviews that are obviously self-penned. If you and other posters want to cut the guy some slack because he turns out to be a decent lay—fine. But doing so simply encourages others to try to get away with the same sort of dishonesty, and that sets a precedent which may eventually come back to bite you on the ass or in your wallet.

You posed the scenario. Personally, that scenario would never happen to me, because the minute the person didn't match the photos, I'd be outta there! I recognize that there is some need for less than full-disclosure and/or full un-clothing. But lying with the purpose of maintaining anonymity and discretion versus lying to deceive the client about what he's hiring are two different things in my feeble mind. I don't care if Brandon is really Jake is really Troy, but I do care that the pictures match the escort. So if they don't match, I don't proceed with the date.

 

But, you're hypothetical says the client proceeds with the date. Well, he knows he's been given a 'stage name' and now he knows he's been given phony pictures, yet he proceeds with the date. If he chooses to review Stage name/phony pictures, the review should include the FACTS, but this idea of a 'negative' review simply because his pictures didn't match, while the client proceeds with the appointment and has a good time - that's CHILDISH - "I DIDN'T GET WHAT I WANTED!!!! WHAAAAYY! While at the same time, GETTING SOMETHING PRETTY GOOD.

 

So REVIEW THE BASTARD - BUT be honest in your review - say the guy doesn't match the photos - if the facts are read as a negative by those reading your review, so be it. But if the facts are read as positive, then so be it also. But telling an escort you're going to do a negative review achieves no purpose except to turn you into a bitch. You had a date, you paid for it and you enjoyed it. Geez! What else can the escort do? It's like saying, "I bought something I knew wasn't right, I paid full price, I used what I bought and enjoyed it but now I'm going to bitch about it to the whole world." I think that's the definition of a bitch.

[maxwellissmart]

You posed the scenario. Personally, that scenario would never happen to me, because the minute the person didn't match the photos, I'd be outta there! I recognize that there is some need for less than full-disclosure and/or full un-clothing. But lying with the purpose of maintaining anonymity and discretion versus lying to deceive the client about what he's hiring are two different things in my feeble mind. I don't care if Brandon is really Jake is really Troy, but I do care that the pictures match the escort. So if they don't match, I don't proceed with the date.

 

But, you're hypothetical says the client proceeds with the date. Well, he knows he's been given a 'stage name' and now he knows he's been given phony pictures, yet he proceeds with the date. If he chooses to review Stage name/phony pictures, the review should include the FACTS, but this idea of a 'negative' review simply because his pictures didn't match, while the client proceeds with the appointment and has a good time - that's CHILDISH - "I DIDN'T GET WHAT I WANTED!!!! WHAAAAYY! While at the same time, GETTING SOMETHING PRETTY GOOD.

 

So REVIEW THE BASTARD - BUT be honest in your review - say the guy doesn't match the photos - if the facts are read as a negative by those reading your review, so be it. But if the facts are read as positive, then so be it also. But telling an escort you're going to do a negative review achieves no purpose except to turn you into a bitch. You had a date, you paid for it and you enjoyed it. Geez! What else can the escort do? It's like saying, "I bought something I knew wasn't right, I paid full price, I used what I bought and enjoyed it but now I'm going to bitch about it to the whole world." I think that's the definition of a bitch.

 

You DO realize this is not a "hypothetical" situation, right? The initial question poses Gilbert's situation from a rhetorical standpoint, but it really happened with the escort he recently saw, whose pictures are all fakes or belong to other escorts.

[Steven_Draker]

You DO realize this is not a "hypothetical" situation, right? The initial question poses Gilbert's situation from a rhetorical standpoint, but it really happened with the escort he recently saw, whose pictures are all fakes or belong to other escorts.

 

From what we know, only one picture (the one with the butt) doesn't belong to him.

Until Gilbert comes forward to set the record straight would you tone it down just a bit.

 

Pretty, pretty please.

[RockHard]

Copyright law is a good law to protect.

 

this encounter ultimately deserves a negative review—the escort is a liar. Period.

 

I agree.

 

However, no two customers think exactly alike. Some men appear to be desperate for sex and will accept any Russian twinky who shows up, in spite of the fact that an illegal Bel Ami photo was used to make the sale. (It's very difficult for Bel Ami to legally fight copyright infringement in the U.S.) Whereas, other men see this as a violation of basic trust. In my case, I see it as breaking a law that matters.

 

In America, we have copyright laws. You need permission to use someone's intellectual property to promote your business, unless you are the creator of that intellectual property. If you choose to go the illegal route to sell your "product," you open yourself up to costly litigation.

 

Rentboy makes all escorts "agree" to their legal terms. Here are two abridged excerpts:

 

5. I agree that all materials provided to RB shall become the property of RB to use as it sees fit.

 

7. I agree that RB shall not be liable for any failure of performance, error, omission, delay in operation or transmission, communications line failure, theft or destruction or unauthorized access to or use of records, whether for breach of contract, tortious behavior, negligence or any other cause of action.

 

Regarding #5, if a professional photographer has not re-assigned photo ownership rights to you, you do not have legal permission to assign those rights to anyone else. That means, without written consent from your photographer, you are not legally permitted to upload those fabulous new photos to Rentboy, because, you are not the legal owner of those photos, therefore, you don't have the legal right to grant RB the legal right to use those photos "as it sees fit."

 

Regarding #7, if you fuck up and ignore RB's terms and upload illegal materials to RB, RB will not be legally responsible in any way. You, the escort, will assume all legal responsibility. If someone files a lawsuit, the investigation may force the exposure of the escort to more than just copyright infringement.

 

A lot of escort's aren't very smart and fooling around with photos that don't belong to you is a fool's game.

 

Since (I assume) most escort businesses work in the shade, some people are willing to take on more risk, assuming no one will complain, or know any better, or care. There will always be customers who are content to "get-off" no matter how that encounter transpired.

 

I have a career invested in protecting copyright, so this type of fraud hits home with me. If I discover a fraudulent escort, I would reveal his fraud to as many people as I can. I would NEVER hire the guy again, even if he provided the best power ass and/or Electrolux mouth in the business. But that's me. Other men seem to have no problem with unethical behavior, as long as they get off.

[+ Lucky]

"A lot of escort's aren't very smart..."

Rockhard, why, in an otherwise good post, would you toss in a comment like that? No doubt some escorts are not smart, but my experience is that most of them are very smart.

 

As for an escort bait and switch, my best experience was when I went to see a known porn star, one whom I had seen at the park on occasion in his neat little speedos. The guy that answered the door was not him, but was pretty darn hot. He maintained that he was the escort, and so I went along to see what developed. We had a spectacular time. When I was leaving, the real escort came in the door. I took a look at him and decided not to say a word. Turned out that my guy was a houseguest who had taken the call and decided to see where it would go.

[RockHard]

Really?

 

"A lot of escort's aren't very smart..."

Rockhard, why, in an otherwise good post, would you toss in a comment like that?

 

I'm not shy when it comes to speaking the truth. Smart is not the same as "very smart."

 

 

No doubt some escorts are not smart, but my experience is that most of them are very smart.

 

Again, "not smart" is not the same as "not very smart." Escorts aren't alone. Many people don't read the fine print "terms," and, if they do read the legalese, many don't have law degrees to decipher the language.

 

As for "most of them," Rentboy claims 1,796 in America. Have you really experienced "most of them?" You slut! I sincerely doubt a majority of them read Rentboy's legal terms. I also doubt most of them possess legal ownership of the photos they uploaded to the RB site. I also doubt anyone would come forward to say that I am correct.

 

But since you have personal experience with "most of them," I defer to your knowledge.