I had this happen a while ago, and I think I read a suggestion of same below. I gave my verification service ID to someone I wanted to see. She looked up my OKs and contacted two of the escorts to request references.
I wasn't exactly angry, but I found this inappropriate. Getting an "OK" and getting an agreement to serve as a reference are clearly two separate things in my mind. I had not asked either of the contacted escorts to be references, and was put in the position of contacting them afterwards to explain and apologize for the episodes. They were both exceedingly cool about it, but they might well not have been. Besides which, for whatever dumb hangup I have, I strongly prefer not to ask for references at all if possible. That's why I have the verification service. Treating "OKers" as if they are references seems to me to be a misunderstanding or willful misuse of the "OK" processI have had providers look up my OK's and reach out to a couple of the girls for further verification. No one seems to mind, although I am not sure?
Research beforehand to see what their requirements are.If not sure,you can always ask them
That's what it's for. And that's why girls give their OK.
That's the essence of my question. My understanding is that an OK is different from a reference, in most cases a simpler substitute for references (since the escort only has to give an "OK" once whereas she could conceivably be contacted multiple times for a reference).
I have no expectation that an escort who gives me an OK is also agreeing to act as a reference, and I doubt that most escorts do, but I'd be interested to hear anyone's thoughts on this. For starters, many escorts reasonably expect that their permission will be obtained before being used as a reference and that they will be notified of a specific reference request so they know that the request is legitimate and should respond to it. In the case of the person contacting my "OK-ers," I had done neither of those things. If I were an escort being asked for a reference, I might also wonder why I needed to be contacted given that I already gave the guy an "OK," though I suppose the personal contact could make someone feel more secure.
I understand that for some escorts, OKs are not enough, and I have no problem with that. But isn't the solution to then ask if I am willing to provide references, not to directly contact my "OK-ers" without my prior permission?
Am I splitting hairs??
I think perhaps you are misunderstanding what is the purpose of an 'okay'. I would wager that the majority of providers see an 'okay' as a reference. I have zero problem if another provider contacts me for further information regarding an 'okay' that I have given.
The problem stems from the fact that P411 often pressures providers to give 'okays' even if the person truly wasn't a good client. There are only two options: give the okay or decline it. If you decline it and don't have a very compelling reason, P411 becomes a bit aggressive. I think it is simply prudent to check to make sure that 'okay' was actually given for a good client. Some gentleman cherry pick which providers they want you to contact for references so I actually think it is suspicious if a gentleman told me to only contact X and X from their list of 'okays'.
As someone else mentioned, if you are not comfortable with providers contacting ladies who have given you an okay, why are you on the site? Just give references then.
If that's the case - that OKers are "OK" with being contacted - then indeed I have been misunderstanding the intent of the site. I thought the whole purpose of giving an OK was to eliminate the need for personal contact. The escort gives the OK and anyone I direct to my ID knows the escort thinks I was OK. If P411 pressures escorts to give OKs - which sounds unethical on their part since it potentially undermines escorts' safety - that's certainly a good reason for someone to want direct confirmation of my standing.
As to why I'm on the site - because I thought it would eliminate the need for references, both me requesting them and escorts providing them, thus greatly simplifying the screening process. My question would be, if OKs aren't typically satisfactory (and maybe they are - I assume but don't know that it was only the one time that personal follow-up was done), what's the purpose of the site?
The problem stems from the fact that P411 often pressures providers to give 'okays' even if the person truly wasn't a good client. There are only two options: give the okay or decline it. If you decline it and don't have a very compelling reason, P411 becomes a bit aggressive. I think it is simply prudent to check to make sure that 'okay' was actually given for a good client. Some gentleman cherry pick which providers they want you to contact for references so I actually think it is suspicious if a gentleman told me to only contact X and X from their list of 'okays'.
As someone else mentioned, if you are not comfortable with providers contacting ladies who have given you an okay, why are you on the site? Just give references then.
and the purpose of the site originally was to speed the process of screening with a simpler way to make it happen. The fact is that there will always be flaws to the system, because in fact it is very difficult to come up with a perfect system that absolutely works.
I gather from when I was 1st on there that a new guest without ok's was work screened, a provider could choose to see those guys or not as well she could even put her profile into a +1 or +3 or whatever so that her page could be viewed only by the types on the site she would visit. The Ok system started as a yes or no and we could kinda give either without much reason. Many providers thought they would only get the points if they gave an ok so they did so even if the guy just sounded familiar. However what has also happened over the years is a tightening. We now have to give the date we met the guest in order to give the ok, so it makes you think a little more so that it is more likely you actually met the guy. In like there was also a tightening on the reasons we could decline to give an Ok.
They will not allow us to decline an ok for many reasons, some of them a bit unsavory. The only allowance we are given is if the guest hurt us physically(and not just being a little rough in the sack, like hitting), stealing from us in the form of the entire donation(not paying) or not paying and stealing more $(which has happened) and a STI I think. Otherwise the guests are to be given an ok, for the most part. So absolutely, you have to check with them and make sure the guy didn't short her, or get rough, or try to get BBFS or other unsavory thing.
Kinda wish they had a system like Date-Check where they have catagories like Highly Recommend, Recommend, YMMV(contact me), and Do Not recommend that the guys are unable to see. It would make the whole system so much easier. Even that though gets abused. The ladies that want to keep guests to themselves posting Do Not recommend or the YMMV(contact me) so that others will be less likely to book them. See every system is flawed, there is no way for it to be completely above board unless like RS all they say is YES or NO and that is pretty much it take it or leave it.
Personally I would never take P411 unless I have all off the real personal info and the ability to reach out to reputable and recent Ok's. It does make it much easier to reach out to the ladies and I think with the ladies if they check your profile they more easily remember you. So it does help with that.
GL, and know that part of the reason we screen so hard is not just to protect ourselves, but also to protect you and keep you and any info we might have about you safe.
Thanks for the detailed and informative reply Sage, I did not know a lot of that.
And I agree completely about our collective safety being intertwined, no pun intended.
Well it MAY eliminate the need for personal contact. If a gentleman has seen a few ladies I am close with and he is respectful in his communication with me, I will not contact these ladies. Also, if a gentleman has 50+ okays, I'm certainly not going to go through the list.
I think the purpose of the site is simply to speed up the process of screening because you can see who the gentleman has seen and when. If it has been a long time since the gentleman has seen a provider or if he only has two 'okays', then I will go about things much differently than if he has a few recent 'okays' from reputable ladies.
I don't mind when I get contacted through Oks. It's just a part of screening.
Brief version: because I was under the impression that it was an unwarranted imposition on OKers. It seems I was wrong and most here think it is actually commonplace and acceptable, so my concern has been put to rest.
Is that it would have been courteous of her to ask, but that she was not out of line in going forth. Especially if she has made clear on her site that references are part of her screening.
Just to clarify - the escort who did the followup let me know she was doing it, albeit after the fact. I asked her about it and she directed me to an article describing how LE had used P411 in a sting as explanation of her additional scrutiny. I don't mean to suggest she was being underhanded in any way. Based on the small sample of responses to this post, it sounds like her understanding of appropriate P411 etiquette, if that's the right word, is closer to the majority view than mine, probably not too surprisingly since I'm an occasional hobbyist.
I retract that "willful misuse" phrase in my original post - that doesn't reflect how I thought about the situation at the time or think about it now. In any case, she was just attending to her safety as she saw fit.
Thanks everyone for the replies, it's been very enlightening for me.
Guys that prefer the level of privacy you desire select verification options that exclude a 3rd party.
What if you and this lady were a super match -or not? Was involving a 3rd party worth it?
There are p411 gents who have no OKs, as they value other conveniences of the site without a lady knowing their rendezvous.
You could always state what verification you prefer and share with the lady that you don't want her to contact P411 OKs. The more forthcoming & clear you are, the less upsets. But then you appear to be a man with something to hide. I guess my point is that you introduce complexities when it's another party involved and that comes with the territory of the option since no matter what there is no one size fits all. This is a colorful lifestyle for the man & woman
See thats the thing, a lot of times there is honestly nothing the gent wants to hide and he just wants to keep the OKs out of it. But there is an assumption that a man with OKs doesn't mind his OKs being contacted. Which I'm not saying is cool because its not cool when a guy assumes a lady wants to be reviewed. To elaborate, I completely understand you not wanting to annoy the ladies who have Ok'd you. There's one gent I OK'd who made some newbie mistakes when he first started so he's on the list men dread landing on. As a result, 15 women have contacted me to ask if he's ok. After a while anyone would think "ok thats enough" lol, but I suppose they just want to make sure that he's learned how to be a good client.
But this can easily go into a new topic lol. So I'll end now before I go off on a tangent. 
I had a feeling I'd hear this eventually. Not sure on what basis you are saying it. It's not true... at least not in the sense you imply (hobbying misbehavior). I do happen to prefer not to be reliant on references, mostly because I tend not to repeat so inevitably I'd be imposing a reference request on someone I've seen infrequently or not in a while, which feels like an imposition to me.
I would imagine sex workers who give an ok on that site are aware another sex worker mak ask them for details about the person they oked. This seems normal and beneficial to me, so I'm not sure what the problem is. If the two people she contacted were upset by it then I really don't understand why.
No, they were not bothered by it at all. I probably should have taken my cue from them that the practice is more common and accepted than I thought. In short, it sounds like I am the one making the mountain.
But some ladies contact me on P411 to ask things like what kind of service the client had, what things did he like in the bedroom and was he polite and nice to deal with.
I guess that's up to them and normally I don't hand out much detail about the session I'll just write back and say the client was funny or good company or polite or punctual or whatever.
unless I have a specific question or the guy seems flaky. I do other forms of screening that usually verify the guy before I even check P411.
I usually feel dumb PMing and saying "Hi, I see you OK'd this guy. Is he OK?" Like - what is she going to say, "Oh, I OK'd him, but I've never seen him." If she did, she's not going to tell me that. But you can tell by the list of ladies who is serious about making sure a guy is OK.
P411 OK's to me are simply that added layer of screening that says he is not going to show up and arrest me. I honestly feel more comfortable with a slew of OK's over a period of time as well.
That's what I always figured. But from Sage's comment above, it sounds like she COULD say "He shorted me" or "He was an obnoxious jerk" because in P411s eyes such guys are still OK?? Kind of ridiculous really.
I usually feel dumb PMing and saying "Hi, I see you OK'd this guy. Is he OK?" Like - what is she going to say, "Oh, I OK'd him, but I've never seen him." ...
No, if he shorts Gina wouldn't make a girl ok. At least that's what it was two years ago.
I usually feel dumb PMing and saying "Hi, I see you OK'd this guy. Is he OK?" Like - what is she going to say, "Oh, I OK'd him, but I've never seen him." ...
that it was my responsibility.
I'm out of the loop. Yikes. That sucks. 😒
is for the lady to confirm full name, contact #, and email address. There have been cases of guys(they are not gentlemen at this point) sharing accounts and while it could be likely for them to share an email, it is rather unlikely they would all share the same cell # and name(which is why many of us ask for ID, we look briefly to make sure it is you and that the name is correct). So for me I do want to ensure that the guy who reached out to me is in fact the one the account belongs too and not his buddy that hobbies infrequently and who might not have the same desires to keep us safe as the account holder.
So for me, that is why I ask. If I know the lady that gave the OK though and I know she is always above board I will generally not check with her and just know the guy is fine. He still has to give me his details but it does stream line things.
Take care all, and know we all have our comfort levels. If a lady is outside of yours then move on, if you "have" to see her conform. GL all
This makes total sense. Thanks Sage 
Of course, and I also want to remain on good terms with the women who previously gave me OKs.
Sometimes a lady can share details with me that are helpful. Sometimes guys are able to cheat the system and they can share profiles. Same with whitelists on here- I always contact them. As Sage said, just because someone gave a gentleman an okay doesn't always mean that the gentleman was a client that is someone that I would want to see.
The only time that I don't contact ladies on your profile, is if I see ladies that I work with and / or know in some way have given you okays- because then that okay carries more weight to me.
If you don't want someone contacting your okays- maybe you should mention that in your initial message that you don't want them to reach out to your okays.
I wasn't exactly angry, but I found this inappropriate. Getting an "OK" and getting an agreement to serve as a reference are clearly two separate things in my mind. I had not asked either of the contacted escorts to be references, and was put in the position of contacting them afterwards to explain and apologize for the episodes. They were both exceedingly cool about it, but they might well not have been.
Besides which, for whatever dumb hangup I have, I strongly prefer not to ask for references at all if possible. That's why I have the verification service. Treating "OKers" as if they are references seems to me to be a misunderstanding or willful misuse of the "OK" process.
I see a thread from another provider has disappeared who has yelled at customers and set over bad Johns has been removed. Things that make you go hmmmmmm m