Safety for hobbyists.

For incalls to your location in addition to screening on the net, you may want to consider insisting on IDs and background checks/health etc.

I have raised my level of qualification way high because of the company I now get and their standards!

Not saying you need go that far, but for your own safety some of these precautions are well worth the effort in screening out providers who are fronts for criminal gangs.

Be safe :0)

So, in two previous threads you railed on those who supported screening because, according to you, your number of posted reviews and number of years on this site are enough and screening is not needed.

Now you are encouraging screening by promoting additional screening methods.

So...

I have one question...

Does this thread amount to your admission that your previous stance on screening was, shall we say, misguided?

Also, for your information, a lot of ladies have been employing the methods you mentioned for quite some time. Nothing new there.

second that Mokoa

That is why you are one of my favorite moderators Mokoa. You tell it how it is.
Sanan, You my friend should not be schooling anybody on safety. I have gone down your reviews that you posted. All Backpage and streetwalkers. A lot of them don't even exist anymore! That tells me that they have been busted by YOU or the session never took place. You say you have raised your standards. To what? I sat back and watched you disrespect all our fellow hobbyist and providers. You my friend are part of LE or a lying troll. Are you getting irritated that well none Providers are not seeing you? You thought by starting these threads, it would make you more credible.
You are very transparent.

This guy is dumbass.
This is just pointless, but its given me a good laugh!
Mokoa you are amazing
sanan I hope you enjoy that crazy world you live in lol

If I am reading his post correctly he is refering to what the hobbyist should do not the provider. He still has no clue as to the risks a provider takes and the precautions they have to take.

Im thinking this is like Cat in the Hat


Sanan 1 and Sanan 2

Sigh....... Dude, just let it go..........

People just don't respond to his post and he will go away,simply as that.

So, in two previous threads you railed on those who supported screening because, according to you, your number of posted reviews and number of years on this site are enough and screening is not needed.

Now you are encouraging screening by promoting additional screening methods.

So...

I have one question...

Does this thread amount to your admission that your previous stance on screening was, shall we say, misguided?

Also, for your information, a lot of ladies have been employing the methods you mentioned for quite some time. Nothing new there. Originally Posted by Mokoa

You are asserting that screening for both client and provider is the same? Thanks for bringing this disparity into clear view!

Well Sir, it isn't and with due respect, you are misreading my postings about this topic.

1
Hobbyists rules for screening of new providers/&pimps, to provide better protection from criminal gang/s etc., may now include criminal history background checks and proof of good health i.e, recent STD screening results - and these might be posted in plain view as is required in most jurisdictions where the activity is legal.

2
Providers streamlined screening ( ATXdream started the topic) for established hobbyists DOES include looking at how long they are on this site, and their reviews. I added to that debate, this should be enough and any more is both silly and a waste of time.

3
Again thanks for your input which highlights the need for better exhibition of the difference between screening for clients by providers, on the one; and, screening for providers by clients on the other hand.

That is why you are one of my favorite moderators Mokoa. You tell it how it is.
Sanan, You my friend should not be schooling anybody on safety. I have gone down your reviews that you posted. All Backpage and streetwalkers. A lot of them don't even exist anymore! That tells me that they have been busted by YOU or the session never took place. You say you have raised your standards. To what? I sat back and watched you disrespect all our fellow hobbyist and providers. You my friend are part of LE or a lying troll. Are you getting irritated that well none Providers are not seeing you? You thought by starting these threads, it would make you more credible.
You are very transparent. Originally Posted by Salsa man

Because you see Mokoa posting a critical comment, you may feel you can disrespect folks who, according to you do not exist- BP providers etc -, and make abusive allegations about me, but I think you expose your own weakmindedness by falling for the pimp play. Except that you yourself are a pimp too?

Noted thanks for the alert.

This guy is dumbass.
This is just pointless, but its given me a good laugh!
Mokoa you are amazing
sanan I hope you enjoy that crazy world you live in lol Originally Posted by ~SummerBaylee~

\
Off topic and irrelevant

Using abusive language about another member.
ECCIE GUIDELINES

• #1 - Avoid cases of unprovoked rudeness to others. No place for it here. Yes, with the dynamic nature of the threads and topics, tempers will flare and things will become heated from time to time. You may often encounter individuals who become passionate or emotional when expressing one's opinion or point of view. That's all understood and perfectly acceptable within reason…….but, start slamming or bashing another member and be met with consequences. "

If I am reading his post correctly he is refering to what the hobbyist should do not the provider. He still has no clue as to the risks a provider takes and the precautions they have to take. Originally Posted by Laz

NOTE the poster is taking to somebody else not the thread!

Finally you are beginning to see the light!

When you address a person it is customary to use the word 'you' if known to you. If not use the word 'Sir'. Using the word 'he' or 'him' to refer to me is rude, and makes your contribution ad hominem and so off topic.

Now you say that I do not know the risks to a provider?

That is not the topic.

Maybe you should try to use your brain instead of your elbow and start your own topic on provider safety?

Sigh....... Dude, just let it go.......... Originally Posted by Desperado

Dude, yeah I do, and will continue to do so.

You are asserting that screening for both client and provider is the same? Originally Posted by sanan

Sauce for the goose.

So, you state that a hobbyist such as your self should have strict screening methods when encountering providers.

You also say that providers should not screen you because of your review count and length of membership...

i'm sorry ladies but the idea that an established hobby member who has reviews needs to provide references sounds like paranoia to me. Originally Posted by sanan

So realistically ladies if you want the regulars off of this board you need to adjust the reference rules for them. And to be quite honest with you, some of yall's conditions for applying for a pre approval read like a college law book! Originally Posted by sanan

But when a hobbyist with a dozen reviews over like three or more years sends a pm about a session, you'd be nutz to ask for a reference. Originally Posted by sanan

Yes, that certainly is, as you say, a disparity.

Then you start a thread where you state this...

Solution; how about, we TRUST one another. Originally Posted by sanan

Then you start this thread where you state this...

For incalls to your location in addition to screening on the net, you may want to consider insisting on IDs and background checks/health etc.

I have raised my level of qualification way high because of the company I now get and their standards!

Not saying you need go that far, but for your own safety some of these precautions are well worth the effort in screening out providers who are fronts for criminal gangs. Originally Posted by sanan

That is quite hypocritical.

You want to screen the providers and yet you do not want the providers to screen you.

More hypocrisy.

Yes, quite a disparity indeed.