Seems every provider and every hobbyist should be free to decide whether direct oral to genital contact is covered or not. Even if a provider advertises BBBJ (and has published reviews reporting about it), s/he should be able to change her menu at any time, without threat of retaliation (posting a NO review). This provider did not cheat or lie, instead she simply provided information of what was not on her menu. Cancelling an appointment is not so nice, but doing is this way is unjustified and a bit mean. Think of it from her perspective for a second: she has all YES (and one Hell YES) and was batting 100% positive... uh, until you came along and broke her record without even seeing her. Shame shame.
Originally Posted by 19Trees
Any hobbyist can post a NO review if he wasn't satisfied with the session, including the menu options not being what was advertised. It makes no difference how many others give a YES.
So much for that.
It seems in this situation more than others the devil is in the details with the twist that there was no session. Since there was no session, so no true review that implies no ROS to be hidden.
I definitely want to hear the details on this. Please move to CoEd. An implied downsell, if there is such a word, and a supposedly unjustified cancellation. It all comes down to what was said when.
Of course it may all turn out to be nothing more than an opportunity for folks to include one of these in their post ->
There seems to be a lot of it going around lately.