Encounter: Queen Sophie

so I guess your, not interested in asking QueenSophie to a Stars game Originally Posted by cupcak

At least WEC makes contributions to the board by writing reviews. Your contributions seem to be being a WK and posting about girls you know that need some help so you advertise for them.

I’ve been on both ends of the Sophie spectrum. All out full on non stop and other times where she seemed totally out of it and uninterested in anything than other let’s hurry up and get this over with. Hard to believe it’s the same woman. If you get her on one of the good days, you’ll get an amazing session. To me she’s YMMV.

I’ve been on both ends of the Sophie spectrum. All out full on non stop and other times where she seemed totally out of it and uninterested in anything than other let’s hurry up and get this over with. Hard to believe it’s the same woman. If you get her on one of the good days, you’ll get an amazing session. To me she’s YMMV. Originally Posted by AzSt22

Both ends of the spectrum, huh?

Let me ask you, whenever she was on the low end, how much did you pay for her donation? And whenever she was on the high end, how much did you pay her for that?


If your donation was the same amount in both situations, doesn't it stand to reason that her service should also be the same?

Both ends of the spectrum, huh?

Let me ask you, whenever she was on the low end, how much did you pay for her donation? And whenever she was on the high end, how much did you pay her for that?


If your donation was the same amount in both situations, doesn't it stand to reason that her service should also be the same? Originally Posted by Wile E Coyote

Be careful WEC. You're making too much sense for some to understand. LOL

Be careful WEC. You're making too much sense for some to understand. LOL Originally Posted by ntxguy

Yep....

And that is why I despise providers who play be YMMV card, always have and always will.

I don't know about the rest of the guys that hobby, but I pay a provider to have that guarantee that she will be at the top of her game every time I see her, not hope for the best and cope with the rest.

I’ve met Sophie but once, a long time ago, but have stayed in touch and want to spend some time with her again when I have enough to spare to do so.

Having said that, the OP gave his reason for the “no”, and there is no objective way to say he shouldn’t hold that opinion. He wasn’t mean or over-the-top in his description of the encounter.

Sophie is a tough gal. She doesn’t need guys running to her defense because she got a “no” recommendation. Originally Posted by TinMan

I agree TM, she can take care of her self, and I was not defending her per se. To me his review is a "yes" review, he got what he bargained for and a very reasonable emolument. He could always have said "yes, but will not return because of her age/looks", that to me would have been more appropriate. JMO of course. Just seems to me that reviews should be as accurate as we can make them. Not really picking on him, just that he could be more accurate in his assessment.

I’ve not done it in awhile, but I do think more guys shouldn’t just settle for the “yes/no” option, and change it to something that reflects what their recommendation really is. The edit feature is wonderful that way.

I agree TM, she can take care of her self, and I was not defending her per se. To me his review is a "yes" review, he got what he bargained for and a very reasonable emolument. He could always have said "yes, but will not return because of her age/looks", that to me would have been more appropriate. JMO of course. Just seems to me that reviews should be as accurate as we can make them. Not really picking on him, just that he could be more accurate in his assessment. Originally Posted by Gandalf4301

The false advertising on age and looks is a major no no, why post old pics? Doesn't make sense to do that in the hobby, it's not like tricks don't discuss that major issue and risk getting a page full of no's for lying

I’m not sure if anyone commenting in this review is claiming this (haven’t gone back and read all the comments), but I’m pretty sure Sophie’s pics on tryst are recent.

Agree. That’s the main reason I don’t see her anymore.

I’m not sure if anyone commenting in this review is claiming this (haven’t gone back and read all the comments), but I’m pretty sure Sophie’s pics on tryst are recent. Originally Posted by TinMan

I concur. I saw her at a recent social. However, her face is very weathered, which is why she doesn't show it. I think she just recently stopped putting "GFE of the year" in her ads. that designation was given to her in 2000, 22 years ago I believe.

I have a policy-- if she asks for money up front, no tip. Rarely is that a problem because I see few women who would require that.

Yep....

And that is why I despise providers who play be YMMV card, always have and always will.

I don't know about the rest of the guys that hobby, but I pay a provider to have that guarantee that she will be at the top of her game every time I see her, not hope for the best and cope with the rest. Originally Posted by Wile E Coyote

Agree whole heartedly WEC. But the fact is that I have had bad experiences with girls that were great 99% of the time. I guess it sort of fall under the everyone has a bad day or they are tired, something has changed. There is always a risk of a less than satisfactory engagement. Not defending it, of course, just stating my real world experiences.

When you take these women to an event, are you still on an hourly clock or do you negotiate?

When you take these women to an event, are you still on an hourly clock or do you negotiate? Originally Posted by smooth player

Don't they pay you?