Provider References

[fuji]

It hasn't affected normal Johns and if it did, then references would be the norm.

References create additional risk for clients. They are the norm in the US because the US also criminalizes escorts, who hope to reduce the risk that a client is a police officer by using references. Under c36 SP's don't care if police book them, they can't be charged.

References provide NO benefit to clients and in fact make things worse as if they do walk into a sting the references they provided to the undercover will be checked and used against them in court.

 

[Luton]

Maybe next time I'll do a little research before quoting someone and taking the time to reply.

BTW, have you seen "Fear the walking dead" yet? I heard it's a pretty good show [/QUOTE]

Am enjoying "Fear the walking dead."

 

[Gabriella Laurence]

Sorry, but that is a cop out. You want to play this card because you have no actual valid reason for your claim.

Your reference system creates HUGE personal risk for clients so don't you, the SP, dare say that it isn't a clients place to comment on the fact that the claimed justification is stuff and nonsense.

Clients here have a right to hear that it is purely an economic benefit try SP's, that reduces no shows, so that they can make an informed decision as to whether they want to take on personal risk for your financial gain.

Clearly there are many who are willing, but it is unreasonable in the extreme for you to try and shut down the discussion with this "only an SP can comment" BS.

You either can explain the benefits in clear and understandable terms or you cannot.



Once you have finished blowing your mind see if you can respond. This is a serious topic with serious consequences for everyone. It needs to be discussed openly and bluntly and without any bullshit about who is or isn't allowed to comment. We are all impacted.



First you admit that the reference system is full of holes then you try and save it with this classic, hysterical "but any extra step helps".

So let's talk about the specific cases your reference system would catch: no shows, people who are oblivious to their lack of hygiene, people who are oblivious to their lack of personality or their abrasive personality.

That is who you will screen out.

Here is who you will not screen out: anyone intent on robbing you, anyone intent on abusing you, anyone who is conscious that what they want to do is unacceptable. All these people will easily find a reference that will satisfy your check because they KNOW what they are doing isn't acceptable.

You are only going to screen out people who are unaware that they are unpleasant, and no shows.

As for your no condom guy let's be clear that after you declined him he can do this: go see another SP and behave well, using a new phone number. Then rebook you, pass your reference check, and then what?

As an SP you already know that you need to physically check for the presence of a condom when you change positions. You cannot rely on references for that!!

If you aren't physically checking then odds are that bad client has already easily gotten past your pointless reference check and you don't even know.

I would normally take the time to reply and explain further but I see it's a (totally) lost cause. Nothing I say will make you take the blinders off and see the big picture.

You obviously (willingly?) missed my point earlier but that's ok, I understand: you're the expert on the subject and I'm just an SP wasting her time asking for (and verifying) references because all I care is financial gain and not my own safety.

Fuji has exposed us for the lying frauds that we are! All of you should be greatful to him on the same level all escorts should be grateful to Harper (C-36) for calling us all victims when we are not. He must be right. Afterall he is Canada's PM.

OK, enough time wasted here. I'm outta here

Cheers xox

 

[mandrill]

It hasn't affected normal Johns and if it did, then references would be the norm.

I don't really want to flog a dead horse with this thread but your answers are either very cryptic or make no sense. How would giving a reference to an SP help a client avoid arrest?

 

[mandrill]

I would normally take the time to reply and explain further but I see it's a (totally) lost cause. Nothing I say will make you take the blinders off and see the big picture.

You obviously (willingly?) missed my point earlier but that's ok, I understand: you're the expert on the subject and I'm just an SP wasting her time asking for (and verifying) references because all I care is financial gain and not my own safety.

Fuji has exposed us for the lying frauds that we are! All of you should be grateful to him on the same level all escorts should be grateful to Harper (C-36) for calling us all victims when we are not. He must be right. After all he is Canada's PM.

OK, enough time wasted here. I'm outta here

Cheers xox

Someone summed Fuji up perfectly in another thread. He said: "Fuji would argue with his schnauzer about the best way to bite the postman."

 

[asuran]

Your reference system creates HUGE personal risk for clients so don't you, the SP, dare say that it isn't a clients place to comment on the fact that the claimed justification is stuff and nonsense.

And seeing someone for the first time is also a personal risk for SPs.

Gotta meet somewhere in the middle.

We read reviews and check history of SPs.
Is it not fair for them to get a fair shake about you?

Remember it goes both ways.

You have your self-interest, she has the right to have hers as well.

What you are saying is that all SP have to respect your rules, your way of doing things.

But in return you, fuji, will not respect theirs.

Is that what you are specifically implying by your comments in this thread??

If you don't like the way certain SPs do things then see someone else.
There is no need for you to come here and disrespect others safety requirements.

 

[fuji]

I would normally take the time to reply and explain further but I see it's a (totally) lost cause. Nothing I say will make you take the blinders off and see the big picture.

You obviously (willingly?) missed my point earlier but that's ok, I understand: you're the expert on the subject and I'm just an SP wasting her time asking for (and verifying) references because all I care is financial gain and not my own safety.

Fuji has exposed us for the lying frauds that we are! All of you should be greatful to him on the same level all escorts should be grateful to Harper (C-36) for calling us all victims when we are not. He must be right. Afterall he is Canada's PM.

OK, enough time wasted here. I'm outta here

Cheers xox

Thank you for conceding that you don't have any reasons that you can articulate. We can all conclude that references do not improve safety. What they do is screen out no shows, which saves SP's a lot of money.

Clients can then decide on their own whether they are willing to take on the huge personal risk to themselves of providing references in order to help SP's avoid that financial cost.

Some will be happy to. Others won't.

But at least people will make that decision fully understanding that references, while valuable to SPs in a business sense, contribute nothing to their security.

 

[fuji]

And seeing someone for the first time is also a personal risk for SPs.

Gotta meet somewhere in the middle.

We read reviews and check history of SPs.
Is it not fair for them to get a fair shake about you?

Remember it goes both ways.

You have your self-interest, she has the right to have hers as well.

What you are saying is that all SP have to respect your rules, your way of doing things.

But in return you, fuji, will not respect theirs.

Is that what you are specifically implying by your comments in this thread??

If you don't like the way certain SPs do things then see someone else.
There is no need for you to come here and disrespect others safety requirements.

No one has been able to articulate any meaningful way in which references actually reduce SP risk. Other than risk of a no show and similar non security issues.

Gabrielle tried to claim it screens out people who secretly remove condoms, but since those guys KNOW their behavior is wrong all they have to do is behave for one session and they have a good reference they can use with a dozen SP's. References do not help, she STILL has to physically check for the condom and that guy she thought she avoided presumably booked her again the next week with a reference and she didn't even know.

Meanwhile if a client walks into a sting having provided references to an undercover cop he is screwed huge, the references will have been checked and verified by the cop and then used against him in court.

 

[Hiding]

But of course, it raises the question of how ladies deal with guys who are problematic and how difficult a client someone has to be before girls bother to bring up that topic.

The litmus test is pretty much "would you repeat". If you wouldn't, a quick sentence for why you wouldn't ("I found him aggressive because XXX", etc) and you leave it to the lady to decide. There's really no gossiping or oversharing, it doesn't benefit anyone and really, who has time for that. A good reference from someone I trust is the fastest way of verifying someone. There are other ways, but that one is quick and painless.

Fuji, your arguments verge on ad absurdum. "You shouldn't ask for references because someone can behave for an appointment and then come back and do bad things to you"? C'mon man, even you know that's crazy. People CAN do all kinds of things, it takes a dedicated sort of obsessive asshole to bother doing what you're presenting. There's really no way to screen for that that isn't a blacklist. If you're going to fight against something, keep it in the realm of reasonable. I'm looking for cases in Toronto where police have operated stings like you're suggesting and coming up with nothing... but I can think of two specific instances where references have stopped me from seeing someone whose company I wouldn't have enjoyed. It's simple and painless, not that invasive, and really just not a big deal. If it's something you're not comfortable with, there are other ways to skin a cat.

 

[Victoria~Catherina]

Bill C-36 HAS been in effect for 9 months and it only criminalizes GUYS. You appear to be confused.

Rarely confused ......... in a affect meaning , haven't been any arrest.

 

[Luton]

The litmus test is pretty much "would you repeat". If you wouldn't, a quick sentence for why you wouldn't ("I found him aggressive because XXX", etc) and you leave it to the lady to decide. There's really no gossiping or oversharing, it doesn't benefit anyone and really, who has time for that. A good reference from someone I trust is the fastest way of verifying someone. There are other ways, but that one is quick and painless.

Fuji, your arguments verge on ad absurdum. "You shouldn't ask for references because someone can behave for an appointment and then come back and do bad things to you"? C'mon man, even you know that's crazy. People CAN do all kinds of things, it takes a dedicated sort of obsessive asshole to bother doing what you're presenting. There's really no way to screen for that that isn't a blacklist. If you're going to fight against something, keep it in the realm of reasonable. I'm looking for cases in Toronto where police have operated stings like you're suggesting and coming up with nothing... but I can think of two specific instances where references have stopped me from seeing someone whose company I wouldn't have enjoyed. It's simple and painless, not that invasive, and really just not a big deal. If it's something you're not comfortable with, there are other ways to skin a cat.

Oh no Becky, I'm afraid you don't realize Fuji is never wrong in his delusional mind. You will get a long response to prove how wrong you are and how correct he is. IMHO it is best to ignore the idiot.

 

[fuji]

There's really no way to screen for that that isn't a blacklist.

The point is the real security risks KNOW that they are offside and in fact will take those steps. And seriously, getting a good reference isn't exactly difficult, and once in hand can be used dozens of times.

The stuff you screen out with references may be in various ways valuable to you, but it ISN'T security.

I'm looking for cases in Toronto where police have operated stings like you're suggesting and coming up with nothing.

There aren't any. An SP above speculated that if the police did start targeting the high end industry that references would be required by everyone.

I pointed out that in the hypothetical case police decided to do that they could get reviews posted by taking over the accounts of any client they bust, and that the sting operators themselves would check references and use that as evidence of intent against the stung.

But it was my response to somebody else's speculation that references would become common if ever there were too be heavy enforcement of c36.

In fact in such a hypothetical world references help the police and harm clients.

 

[DaleyDDD]

Can this thread stop yet? It's clear those disagreeing will never settle. That's life. If you have a problem with a girl requiring references, see another girl. That's it.

Next please.

 

[Luton]

Can this thread stop yet? It's clear those disagreeing will never settle. That's life. If you have a problem with a girl requiring references, see another girl. That's it.

Next please.

Probably the best post for this thread.