That is your opinion. Others seem to think otherwise including the OP of the thread. You to easily discount what the guy has to say, when there is no history to support that he is not accurate and trustworthy, to champion the cause of some whore with a very questionable side to more than one incident.Two people know beyond a doubt what the facts are. I don't know either party so I don't know which is correct. If what SFK says he was told is accurate I agree with him. If not then it was an NCNS. All I know for sure is that the hobbyist claims x and the provider claims y. If I knew one of them it would probably sway my opinion but I don't. So all anyone in my shoes can do at this point is be aware of it and be careful about confirming the appointment. If we hear other hobbyists stating the same thing it will carry more weight. The so called white knights can help by pointing out that she is reliable with them.
Originally Posted by Whispers
One thing is certain, assuming the hobbyist is correct is just as dumb as assuming the provider is correct if all you have is what you see here. Criticizing others for there opinion based only on what is stated here is also foolish.
General statements about providers or "whores" are not helpful. I know you are referring to a specific person but your statements do not make that clear. You state "some whore" which is generic. I know you mean "this whore" but that is not what you wrote. But even that implies you consider them all whores which, while technically accurate, is insulting. I doubt that is how you think of all of them but it is how you sound.