wow you got me Gilti1

....Gilti1 is my ex boyfriend . The review he has posted is fake and in no way real. This was the only way he could manage to get my attention because of how far I have distanced myself from him. This is my defense and I hope the MODS TAKE DOWN THE REVIEW now that I have reported it and posted this thread.

I had a sneaking suspicion about that. That review had a very vindictive tone to it leading me to believe it was either A) a female or B) a spurned ex lover.

So you had your SO writing fake reviews for you then? The review you are referring to is not his first on you.

No his previous reviews are real but we have since seperated & he is not legally allowed to contact me anymore for 2 years

No his previous reviews are real but we have since seperated & he is not legally allowed to contact me anymore for 2 years Originally Posted by crystalwhite69

Ohhh. So your ex-SO 's first 2 reviews of you are real but the last one is fake. Funny, I never thought of reviewing a SO.

Is that bridge in Brooklyn still for sale?

Well neither one of them are fake. First one may be biased. Second one is real but the dates might be wrong. Either way what's the big deal? Lol With all the talk about barebacking your SO being okay and all lol.

You should screen better.

no make up sex for him

Screen better ??? IT IS FAKE BECAUSE WE NEVER HAD A SESSION THAT WENT DOWN LIKE THAT AT ALL ! I am clean , I don't offer bareback service and because more than time place dates and description is not true it needs to be taken down.

Well neither one of them are fake. First one may be biased. Second one is real but the dates might be wrong. Either way what's the big deal? Lol With all the talk about barebacking your SO being okay and all lol. Originally Posted by newcumerz

SECOND REVIEW IS FAKE IN EVERY WAY !

It looked like he plagiarized a cheap pulp novel.

I recently had a session with Crystal White and she did not mention anything about bbfs being on the menu. Haven't had time to write a review yet.

This is going to be interesting, to say the least!

Wait, I'm confused. So CW is okay with reviews as long as they paint a flattering picture of her but as soon as she gets a 'no' review its absurd and must be taken down? Didn't she claim the same things on her last 'no' review?

Wait, I'm confused. So CW is okay with reviews as long as they paint a flattering picture of her but as soon as she gets a 'no' review its absurd and must be taken down? Didn't she claim the same things on her last 'no' review? Originally Posted by aim2please89

Quite the opinion for someone that joined 2 days ago................