Who is responsible in an AGENCY?

That doesn't say much about Anna's skills........................ ...........

That doesn't say much about Anna's skills........................ ........... Originally Posted by dearhunter

Or speaks volumes about how much some luv to kvetch....

That doesn't say much about Anna's skills........................ ........... Originally Posted by dearhunter

YET THEY WERE GLOWING IN BCD...........He wen't home and was really pissed because he did not get a 2 hour session...Can't pony up the cash, you gotta go.....That's in any business.....

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6086435/

... Anna offered him 30 minutes to shut up about it already, we got the point. But no, complaining is so much more satisfying than 30 minutes with Anna... Originally Posted by sofiaofhouston

Uh.. I never complain ... could I have the 30 minutes if he doesn't want it... I'm old and slow and am lucky to get one bell ... and even then with my loss of hearing ... I never know if the bell rang or not... but I am really grateful for women that try... or don't try ... or try not to try... did I mention I never complain...

Could I have the 27 minutes TMFT doesn't use?

Those are what are known as "Roll Over Minutes", Wayward. Some up-scale coin-ops on the left coast are staring to implement this innovative concept.

"Roll Over Minutes" Originally Posted by SofaKingFun

I thought that was some secret code for greek?

Not in high-class, up-scale, coin-op vernacular, it isn't.

Did Big Louie just call me a Nazi? Originally Posted by Wayward

No I said that RR is out of his league when he starts arguing with you via post on a board. It's like in poker when you hit four (4) Aces on the turn but the other person flopped a Royal Flush. You have no outs, well RR has no outs in this case.

I'm all in.............

I have decided to come out of retirement to finish some business.

Alexis, I believe your response is spot-on-target, IMHO.

Let me reply for the record and then inquire regards your response.

1. Had all concerned dealt only with the original question, the chaos and conflict would not have ensued.

2. I am not requesting any thread be locked.
The 'appeal' to the Mod's was tongue in cheek. I need no such relief. I was twisting the thread a bit with reference to the pix the two antagonists had posted (mp's pix in an old thread that became a Yo Momma riot; and WW's family picture of his birth taken just as the doctor was about to slap his bottom.)

3. Let me now inform those concerned that this morning I have received an offer from Sofia of a 30 minute session 'to make it right.'
Good for her.

I had sought through private emails to make my complaint known to her. She did not respond until this became public. So I consider it too little too late and have declined, because I want no more dealings with her. This is not a ploy. Having received numerous emails from her on this, I have asked her to let it drop. The decision is final. I have wished her well in her endeavors, and I have asked her to leave me alone. Any further communications from her will be considered stalking.

I want to move on and find other partners in other corners of this large playground in which to play.

4. Alexis, your assessment and response are right on target, IMHO.
Let me affirm and recapitulate:

4.1. I concur with your judgment.
4.2. I asked a general question pertinent to the hobby community as a whole without mentioning any names.
4.3. The whole identity thing came when a certain person posted a reply a bit similar to yours, but then again quite a bit different. It was similar in its suggestion to contact the 'agent'.
4.4. The conflict erupted as I redirected the question to that person, asking, 'What should be the next step if the 'agent' is not forthcoming to the complaint?' Then the shit hit the fan so to speak.

May I ask you the same question that I posed to Sofia?

'What do you think should be the client's next step if the 'agent' is not forthcoming in response to the complaint?'

Before posting this general question, I had asked some of my PA brethren in private what they thought, and almost to a man they said, 'You should have put this info in the review and should put it in Co-Ed so we can chime in against her for this crap.' I accepted that criticism and considered how best to proceed. Blunt? or subtle? Blunt usually makes a person defensive. Subtle usually has a better chance of persuading for change.

I chose a more subtle, civil course, asking a general question of the community at large, seeking general answers or even specific examples from members who wished to chime in to shed light on the topic.

I knew that Sofia would see it, and hoped that perhaps she and others so motivated might take the messages conveyed as constructive criticism, 'a word to the wise' that she should do some house cleaning for the sake of her enterprise.

I knew I might become a target for the haters' cheap shots. Nothing new there. They are laughably lame in their predictability.

Not everyone will concur with this summary or approach to the issue. Some will complain that it is too long. I suppose reading is not their strength, nor logic, and would wish me to insert some connect-the-dots-pix for them to draw and color. You cannot please everyone and I do not care to try.

But I wonder what are your thoughts regards an agent / provider who is not forthcoming regards a private complaint like mine?
What might be the disgruntled client's next step toward an indifferent agent / provider?
And at what point do you as a provider of some note and reputation think one of your counterparts might merit being 'outed' for similar misdeeds?

Please, I am sincerely curious regards your constructive perspective.

If you prefer we can continue this dialogue by PM.

With respect to you, the PA brethren and the GOOD ladies (especially my FAV's),

rr Originally Posted by randyrogue

Pure and simple RR, I think it is bad business ethic on the part of the agent to not address the situation. The agent could have taken it up with the provider in question, and you could have talked to them both, but instead you got blown off. I now see why you brought this complaint to the board. It does look rather bad on the agents part to come onboard after the fact and only to offer a 30 min free session. A day late and dollar short,, IMHO..

I still think the lack of supplies or services offered is the providers part and not the agent, although if you had certain request that were not met, then that would be the agents fault for referring you the wrong provider.

It is a catch 22 on behalf of the agent when a lady says she provides certain services but then does not fulfill them, which sounds like the kind of deal you were handed. Agent refers, ladies provide,, an agent manages the ladies, minds their security and keeps the client's happy by referring certain ladies to the clients preference.. When a situation comes up and the service is not provided that the client wished for,,, then the fault lies on both. In this case,, it is the providers fault for short sighting you and a bad business call on behalf of the agent for not responding to you sooner. .

Babe,,,wash your hands of it and move along, there are better fish out there. .

Just curious, but how does SOH know that the review BCD was Glowing?

And,,,, why is an agency provider being reviewed in the independent review forum? Shouldn't the review be in the agency review forum?

If Sofia was is so smart, she should have given me the thirty minutes with Anna and I would have locked this bitch up on the first page

Pure and simple RR, I think it is bad business ethic on the part of the agent to not address the situation. The agent could have taken it up with the provider in question, and you could have talked to them both, but instead you got blown off. I now see why you brought this complaint to the board. It does look rather bad on the agents part to come onboard after the fact and only to offer a 30 min free session. A day late and dollar short,, IMHO..

I still think the lack of supplies or services offered is the providers part and not the agent, although if you had certain request that were not met, then that would be the agents fault for referring you the wrong provider.

It is a catch 22 on behalf of the agent when a lady says she provides certain services but then does not fulfill them, which sounds like the kind of deal you were handed. Agent refers, ladies provide,, an agent manages the ladies, minds their security and keeps the client's happy by referring certain ladies to the clients preference.. When a situation comes up and the service is not provided that the client wished for,,, then the fault lies on both. In this case,, it is the providers fault for short sighting you and a bad business call on behalf of the agent for not responding to you sooner. .

Babe,,,wash your hands of it and move along, there are better fish out there. . Originally Posted by AlexisSoftTouch

Thanks for the feed back, Alexis.
I have moved on.
Had a wonderful session today with a young INDIE.
Review is pending.

Best regards,

rr

Had a wonderful session today with a young INDIE. Originally Posted by randyrogue

She brought a spare condom?