Toronto Escorts

why are some escorts anti-review?

ottawasub

New member
Mar 20, 2005
795
0
0
I was browsing through some of the local escorts websites looking for some that may offer domination as well and noticed that two of them specifically mentioned on their site that they did not want the sessions to be reviewed on boards like this one.

My question to any escorts/customers on this board is should that have any influence on whether to try them out? Is it just that they want things kept discreet and private, or is it because they`re afraid of bad reviews ? Also, is this very common among escorts, or is it only a few?
 
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
It's rare. Reasons vary: privacy, SPs don't want to feel like they're being "rated", some members post reviews out of spite or other reasons which are in no way connected to the actual session, yadda, yadda, yadda. It's stricly enforced on this board.
 
Last edited:

too2shy

$ Talks Bullshit Walks
Nov 27, 2002
2,635
2
38
ottawa
lol. for some women.. they've established good reviews so far on the board.. and have brought in the no review policy afterwards.. kind of a dirty trick but shrugs.. it's not an easy profession so whatever works.
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
Exactly, John.

Also, reviews can sometimes bring negative attention on an escort, even if they're positive reviews. A friend of mine was reviewed here by a reviewer that I know to be legit (from Lyla's List) some time back, and simply because he didn't go into explicit details, he was accused of being her "brother" or "boyfriend" -- in other words, a shill. But from my perspective, I know all the parties, and I know she's an SP, he's a real client and it was a real (if respectful) review.

The other thing, too, is that SPs prefer to speak for themselves, whenever possible -- sometimes clients get it wrong. I've had clients give me glowing reviews, but misquote my rates. It's better if, as a professional, I speak for myself. This is why I don't prefer reviews -- but too, I realize that if I give someone bad service, it's unlikely he'll honour my request. Only those clients who are satisfied with my service and who want to see me again will honour my desire not to be reviewed.

Incidentally, my new wide-angle lens came this week, Julia was here today, and I had my first chance to play with it -- here is one of the pics we got of her...


Her favourite.

..c..
 
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
JoyfulC said:
This is why I don't prefer reviews -- but too, I realize that if I give someone bad service, it's unlikely he'll honour my request. Only those clients who are satisfied with my service and who want to see me again will honour my desire not to be reviewed.
QUOTE]

Both statements are too categorical. There are lots of reasons why someone might or might not post a review, apart from considering an SP's no review policy. Just an example: someone who is unsatisfied with the service might decide not to post to avoid being identified by the SP - they might wish to keep their identity confidential and this is a common concern. Tons of other reasons.

BTW, here are other pics of Julia from JoyfulC's site:

http://www.honeydelight.net/images/julia/images/
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
Ric, I appreciate that your posting of the link to the directory where Julia's additional photos are kept was probably well-intended, but this is exactly the sort of presumptuousness on the part of a customer that makes some escorts cringe. This was not your place to do. At the moment, I am working on setting up a new web site for Julia, and many of those photos were to debut on that site. You sort of stole that thunder, and it's not appreciated.

I don't see what the problem is with escorts requesting that customers not review them. You have the option of seeing only escorts who allow reviews and who have been reviewed, right? So why do you find it necessarily to infringe on someone else's right to make choices for herself. Escorts are human beings with the same rights and freedoms as yourself -- and deserving of the same respect. It's not your place to market them or make decisions regarding their marketing or how or where or when their images are posted.

..c..
 
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
The internet is a public domain and you yourself made the pictures available by including the link to your site through the picture you posted. I didn't for one second think that would be a problem nor do I now. If you wanted to hold onto them you should not have included the link or obscured it.

You've read me wrong. I personally always honour no review policies and respect all of the many good reasons why an SP would want to do so. I was only challenging the categorical statements you made as to why other members might or might not choose to respect a no review request.

You need to go back and read what I wrote.

I'm a great supporter of SPs' privacy and will go out of my way to protect that.
 
Last edited:
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
I'm certainly not "promoting" Julia. Just mentioned that I surfed Lyla's site (as members are free to do) and noticed more pics of Julia.

The thread you mention above I think was an honest mistake on Lyla's part where she thought reference was being made to local Julia as opposed to the East Indian SP from GOE named Julie who was scheduled to come to Ottawa.
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
First Ric posts a link to a directory containing Julia's photos (which I took with my brand-new wide-angle lens, I'm proud to say!) and then he professes to be able to read my mind and speak for me.

For the record, my participation in this thread was completely unrelated to my posting Julia's photo. I wanted to comment on the subject of the thread. I only posted her photo as an after-thought, rather than starting a whole new thread. I thought some people might enjoy seeing it.

In retrospect, I'm willing to concede that neither was a good idea.

..c..
 

dreamer

New member
Sep 10, 2001
1,164
0
0
Maple
JoyfulC said:
I don't see what the problem is with escorts requesting that customers not review them. You have the option of seeing only escorts who allow reviews and who have been reviewed, right? So why do you find it necessarily to infringe on someone else's right to make choices for herself. Escorts are human beings with the same rights and freedoms as yourself -- and deserving of the same respect. It's not your place to market them or make decisions regarding their marketing or how or where or when their images are posted.

..c..
Posting a review has nothing to do with rights, respect or privacy. It has everything to do with providing information about a service that was purchased.

It is called consumer protection. Most laws favour the purchaser. Reviews of products and services for sale protect the consumer and are widespread. Why would an escort offering services for a fee expect to be treated any differently.

Now given that, I would honour a no review request only if the escort provided the services advertised and was honest about their appearance. However it is my choice to review or not since I am the one who purchased that service. Terb honours all no review requests. I have always disagreed with that policy and especially in regards to poor services and false advertising.

The only thing that protects the consumer of escort services are review boards. There is no self-regulation and there is widespread false advertising in the escort business.
 
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
JoyfulC said:
First Ric posts a link to a directory containing Julia's photos (which I took with my brand-new wide-angle lens, I'm proud to say!) and then he professes to be able to read my mind and speak for me.
Lyla, give it up.

I was just speculating that you honestly thought the Julie being referred to was your good friend Julia. I could have implied that you purposely played dumb and mentioned Julia to get free advertising, but I didn't.

You posted pics of Julia on your website with a link to the pics on TERB. That was your mistake. Your website is in the public domain and unless you require a membership to access it (which you don't) everyone's at liberty to surf it.

End of story.

You haven't mellowed one bit over the years. You're still full of piss and vinegar.
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
dreamer said:
It has everything to do with providing information about a service that was purchased.
Agreed. And in cases of "consumer protection" -- or protecting consumers from dishonest advertisers, I fully support it.

It is called consumer protection.
They wouldn't -- but don't they have the right to request that they don't receive positive reviews?

When an escort has a "no review" policy, contrary to popular opinion on these boards, it's more about asking her satisfied customers not to review her. Not her dissatisfied customers. Most of the dissatisfied ones are going to do as they please.

Terb honours all no review requests. I have always disagreed with that policy and especially in regards to poor services and false advertising.
I'd disagree with that too -- in principle. But I think you need to cut the review boards some slack. They incur liability bringing this forum to you -- and you use it for nothing. There's nothing stopping word from getting around privately -- and sometimes, in the case of a litigious (or otherwise malicious) escort or agency, that's the only way to proceed.

I certainly agree that word should get out about bad services.

But that said, I also understand what these review boards are up against because I used to run one. People are quick to cry that greed for advertising dollars is the motivating factor in their review policies. I don't believe it because I've been in their shoes. I think there are few review boards that would welcome advertising from an unscrupulous escort or advertiser. Why would they? Wouldn't that just serve to degrade their credibility in an environment where their credibility is always in question?

On the contrary -- I think that some unscrupulous advertisers pressure boards like this to carry their advertising because they believe that if they pay, they'll get special considerations. And if they don't get them, then they'll raise holy hell.

The only thing that protects the consumer of escort services are review boards. There is no self-regulation and there is widespread false advertising in the escort business.
I disagree with this too. There is significant "self regulation." Many escorts, such as myself, do not accept payment until the END of the session. Many of us rely primarily on repeat business -- and you can tell an escort like that by how much and how broadly she advertises. If an escort isn't advertising all over the place, then obviously she doesn't need a ton of new business. Why doesn't she need a ton of new business? Because she has a lot of repeat business.

Further, you guys have a great degree of regulation at your disposal. If you show up and the escort is not as advertised, then don't stay! How many times have we heard a tale of woe from some guy on here who claimed to be "thinking with the little head"?? That's about as legit as a chick claiming she has a shopping addiction.

Consumers have many methods at their disposal to avoid bad services. Relying on reviews is probably the weakest of the lot, because you don't know these reviewers any more than you know any advertising escort. When I ran Lyla's List, some of my so-called "reviewers" were actually agency operators or independent escorts whose service wasn't so great, but they figured they could level the playing field by generating doubt about other escorts and agencies.

If you are smart enough to determine the difference between a bogus reviewer, a shill reviewer and a legit reviewer, then guess what: you're smart enough to tell the difference between a bogus advertiser, a shill advertiser and a legit advertiser.

In the case of true rip offs, yes, I agree with consumer action in the form of reviews -- but otherwise, I personally don't see where what some third party says about an escort can be viewed as more legit than what you hear directly from her with your own discerning ears. Interviewing skills, people!

..c..
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
ricflairjuniour said:
Lyla, give it up.
Get with the times, guy. "Lyla" was a board. There is no "Lyla" anymore -- the board was sold and renamed. My name is Christine. Says so on my birth certificate, drivers license, marriage certificate and Chatelain subscription.

You posted pics of Julia on your website with a link to the pics on TERB. That was your mistake. Your website is in the public domain and unless you require a membership to access it (which you don't) everyone's at liberty to surf it.

End of story.
Sure everyone's at liberty to surf it. As you did. But you went beyond surfing to the point of publishing a URL. If "anybody" could figure that out for themselves, then why would you feel the need to publish the link?

Let's face it: this is about wanting to fit in, wanting to get attention, wanting to be accepted by the other boys.

You told me that I had misjudged you, and I thought maybe that was legit -- so I went and looked at your other posts here. You know what? I don't think so. I think you come here just to insult and irritate people, to be rude and abrasive.

So buzz off. I didn't stay as joyful as I have wasting time on people like you!

You haven't mellowed one bit over the years. You're still full of piss and vinegar.
Oh! Let's hope so!! ;)

..c..
 

dreamer

New member
Sep 10, 2001
1,164
0
0
Maple
JoyfulC said:
I think there are few review boards that would welcome advertising from an unscrupulous escort or advertiser. Why would they? Wouldn't that just serve to degrade their credibility in an environment where their credibility is always in question?
some very poor agencies have advertised here, $$$ rule

JoyfulC said:
I disagree with this too. There is significant "self regulation." Many escorts, such as myself, do not accept payment until the END of the session.
sorry, you are in the minority. There is absolutley no self-regulation in the industry, as comparable to say the legal or accounting professions, who are self-regulated

JoyfulC said:
Many of us rely primarily on repeat business
and many do not

JoyfulC said:
Further, you guys have a great degree of regulation at your disposal. If you show up and the escort is not as advertised, then don't stay! How many times have we heard a tale of woe from some guy on here who claimed to be "thinking with the little head"?? That's about as legit as a chick claiming she has a shopping addiction.
Actually it is a very legit reason, as is that they were too polite to say anything. There are some not so nice guys out there, but the majority of customers are gentlemen and simple accept what they get.

JoyfulC said:
Consumers have many methods at their disposal to avoid bad services. Relying on reviews is probably the weakest of the lot, because you don't know these reviewers any more than you know any advertising escort. When I ran Lyla's List, some of my so-called "reviewers" were actually agency operators or independent escorts whose service wasn't so great, but they figured they could level the playing field by generating doubt about other escorts and agencies.
true to a point, and the point is the more reviews and the more known the reviewers are the more the truth will prevail, but having a no review policy you will never get to that point. For example, shills give an escort great reviews. A well know reviewer who people trust takes the plunge and finds out that the escort is not so great. Suddenly the original reviewers are shown for what they are. If you think about it, and open board is very self-regulated.

JoyfulC said:
In the case of true rip offs, yes, I agree with consumer action in the form of reviews -- but otherwise, I personally don't see where what some third party says about an escort can be viewed as more legit than what you hear directly from her with your own discerning ears. Interviewing skills, people!
for all of the honest escorts like yourself there are many more who will tell you exactly what you want to hear, until they have your money

And for the record, a libel case against a review board is a minimal risk.
 

RemyMartin

Active member
Jan 16, 2004
1,095
1
38
ricflairjuniour said:
Lyla, give it up.

I was just speculating that you honestly thought the Julie being referred to was your good friend Julia. I could have implied that you purposely played dumb and mentioned Julia to get free advertising, but I didn't.
ric, she didn't purposely play dumb. ;)
 
Aug 31, 2004
1,128
0
0
In the Ring
RemyMartin said:
ric, she didn't purposely play dumb. ;)

I suspect you're right !! .. hehe.

Lyla hasn't changed one bit over the years. She's notorious. Still full of invective, diatribes, skewed self-righteousness, illogical and preposterous delusions, underhanded games and piss and vinegar.

And she calls herself "JoyfulC" ..... buaaaaaaa !!

How to explain your resurgence now after so many years off TERB after you ran off with your tail between your legs and all of your posts (several thousand I believe) were yanked from the board ? I recall you as being the most hated member of TERB at the time.

As far as my reputation goes, my reviews are regarded as balanced and accurate.
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
sorry, you are in the minority. There is absolutley no self-regulation in the industry, as comparable to say the legal or accounting professions, who are self-regulated
We are self-regulated by competition -- the purest form of self-regulation.

Actually it is a very legit reason, as is that they were too polite to say anything. There are some not so nice guys out there, but the majority of customers are gentlemen and simple accept what they get.
Yes, I think that's an honest assessment -- but do you have an obligation to be polite to someone who is ripping you off?

It's not "impolite" to tell an escort that she is not as advertised or to note that her services are not what you expected (within reason).

We are both -- customer and escort -- dealing with some people who take a predatory and adversarial stance on this whole matter. And that's a concern for both you and me. Both of us can be ripped off -- and both of us might be. But at some point, each of us has to look beyond our fear of getting ripped off and get on to the business at hand: which is connecting with another good person for the purposes of pleasure and profit.


true to a point, and the point is the more reviews and the more known the reviewers are the more the truth will prevail, but having a no review policy you will never get to that point. For example, shills give an escort great reviews. A well know reviewer who people trust takes the plunge and finds out that the escort is not so great. Suddenly the original reviewers are shown for what they are. If you think about it, and open board is very self-regulated.
Sorry, I've had some bad experiences with the few reviews that have slipped by me, and I'm just not so convinced that reviews serve either you or me (except in the case of consumer alerts of dishonest dealings).

Sometimes I forget to mention that I prefer not to be reviewed, and such was the case with someone I met a couple years back. I didn't feel it was one of my better sessions. Usually, I try to "pace" things because -- forgive me for saying so bluntly! -- when a man is aroused, he has no sense of time. And yet, time is what we charge for. I usually try to slow things down a bit, tease, keep the level of arousal at a sustainable level, prolonging pleasure, until late in the session. I think most men who have seen me will agree with this. But in this case, I just wasn't able to. For one thing, I didn't get a lot of cooperation from him. He was very eager. Sadly, we weren't together a whole half hour, even though he paid for an hour. (Mind you, the time we were together was a whirlwind of activity, and based on the review he wrote, he obviously enjoyed himself.)

Afterwards, trying to be honest, I only charged him the half hour rate -- as we did not spend more than that together. I felt I was doing a good and decent thing. I didn't realize that he went off, wrote a glowing review of me (with the best of intentions, and I appreciate that even though I don't prefer to be reviewed), BUT he quoted my half hour rate as my hour rate.

Several months later, I was contacted by some guy in BC who wanted to see me -- but when I quoted my rates to him, he flipped out. He demanded that I "honour the rate posted" in the review, and accused me of trying to rip him off!

I was able to figure out who posted the review, I contacted him regarding the problem and he worked with me to resolve it -- but in the meantime, I have some jerk from BC calling me names and accusing me of all sorts of wrongdoing ----- when all I was trying to do was be decent in the first place!!

That's just one of many examples of why I think reviews are just more trouble than they're worth. And while I appreciate that some customers won't make a move without it being supported by reviews, I get enough business without them that I'm not inclined to take on the hassles.

And for the record, a libel case against a review board is a minimal risk.
You might wish to speak to Canada's Best about that. They were sued by an escort -- and advised that, even though they'd probably win the suit, it would cost them so much to do so that it would be in their best interest to settle.

People don't need to win a suit to make life hell for you. Right now, my husband is embroiled in a bogus patent infringement situation with some nimrod down in the US. There is no patent infringement. We've done absolutely everything on our end (including spending $$!! and hiring a US lawyer) to ensure that we're on solid ground -- and yet, we fully realize that the jackass we're dealing with can cause us a lot of unnecessary trouble and expense. Sadly, that's just how things work. It's not always fair, and sometimes, you just have to figure out the most effective thing to do -- even if you feel a bit compromised by it.

..c..
 

dreamer

New member
Sep 10, 2001
1,164
0
0
Maple
JoyfulC said:
We are self-regulated by competition -- the purest form of self-regulation....
hmm, now let's talk economic theory :) you know, the theory about information

anyways, I am sorry but you are or have been in one of the most unregulated businesses in the world when it comes to business practices, advertising etc etc

JoyfulC said:
You might wish to speak to Canada's Best about that. They were sued by an escort -- and advised that, even though they'd probably win the suit, it would cost them so much to do so that it would be in their best interest to settle...
then they simply received bad advise

anyone who starts a libel suit better be on solid ground, all you have to do is look at the case law for those who start a groundless suit

A review is an opinion of an escorts looks and services and as long as board sticks to that and avoids posting personal information and engaging in flame wars they have nothing to worry about. I believe, but my memory is failing me, the Canada Best reference was more than just a problem with a review

of course maybe you can enlighten me
 

JoyfulC

New member
Sep 23, 2004
917
0
0
www.honeydelight.net
dreamer said:
hmm, now let's talk economic theory :) you know, the theory about information

anyways, I am sorry but you are or have been in one of the most unregulated businesses in the world when it comes to business practices, advertising etc etc
Only because you have allowed it to be so. In other businesses (aluminum siding, used cars, home renovations, etc.) such advertising was tried but consumers put their feet down -- and put a stop to it. (At least for a while.)

If the consumer allows himself to be suckered, then he must expect to be. The same is true for us -- if we escorts allow ourselves to be ripped off by clients, then we must expect to be.

Regrettably, this is an aspect of commerce which finds little sympathy from the mainstream -- and therefore, we must have the backbones to take care of ourselves. On BOTH sides of the equation.

then they simply received bad advise

anyone who starts a libel suit better be on solid ground, all you have to do is look at the case law for those who start a groundless suit
If this is what your lawyer tells you, you should shop for a new lawyer.

A GOOD lawyer is pratical... and realizes that even if someone is in the right, it can cost him so much to prove it that it would penalize him far more so than to be in the wrong.

I have extensive experience in this, in a wide range of circumstances. Sorry, but that's just reality. Sometimes, even if you are right -- being dead right can be worse or at least as bad as being dead wrong. If you're a person who stands entirely on principle -- and who can afford to do so -- then of course, you're right. But for most of us, the cost of proving we're right is often equal to what it were if we were proved dead wrong. And in a situation like that, only a fool or someone with unlimited funds would challenge.

A review is an opinion of an escorts looks and services and as long as board sticks to that and avoids posting personal information and engaging in flame wars they have nothing to worry about.
An opinion of a supposedly anonymous consumer -- who may or may not be someone with an axe to grind, a competitor, or elsewise. How can a board discern between them?

Most boards do exercise their best judgement in most situations -- but when things end up in court, it's unreasonable for any of us here to expect them to "take one for the team." People provide these boards for your benefit, to work as well as they can -- but you can't really expect them to incur liability for you, a non-paying user.

I believe, but my memory is failing me, the Canada Best reference was more than just a problem with a review

of course maybe you can enlighten me
I understood that it was just that. I am friends with both sides in this matter -- and I don't entirely agree with either's standpoint. It seemed to me a case of a simple "stand off" in which each challenged the other -- and the board lost. Sure, he could have paid the $$ to go the distance -- but wouild that have been repaid (or even appreciated????) by the consumers who used his services? I somehow doubt it.

There were no winners in this situation, I believe -- even though both sides claimed victory.

..c..
 
Toronto Escorts