I think the new policy change has the potential to open up a whole new can of worms (or Treponema pallidum bacteria) on the board. In the past few months I have noted a lot of Atlanta ladies reporting fake reviews. I imagine the fallout from a false review reporting BBFS would be even uglier, and could very well cause ladies to lose business. As BigMac pointed out, a lot of guys (myself included) are hesitant to see a provider who offers BBFS. The allegation alone might torpedo a lady's reputation. Considering the horror stories concerning jaded johns, I can see this course of action being utilized to hurt a provider.
However, a fake review concerning BBFS doesn't just threaten a provider's reputation - it threatens her physical safety. I think it is entirely possible that some asshole would read a review that detailed BBFS, meet a provider, and expect the same treatment...even though the review is entirely false. Incensed, he might just decide to rape her sans condom.
In a similar vein, for those providers who actually offer BBFS, it may very well be a YMMV thing. Just because she does it with one client doesn't mean she is willing to do it with ALL clients. However, once she has been "outed" as a purveyor of bareback, subsequent clients will expect it as well.
Granted, these are all hypothetical situations. But I do think this policy change is very dangerous for providers. I can only hope that hobbyists do not abuse their new found freedom or the women who make our lives "a little easier and a whole lot brighter".
There's a new poll listed on the front page of the site, regarding BBFS. Something worth checking out.
Also....as of tomorrow....new policy in place.
The discussion of BBFS (bareback full service) will no longer be forbidden on the site, or from reviews.
I'm sure everyone will have their opinions of this....so let's take it in stride and see how things pan out.
Thoughts?
DD
Although I would certainly be hesitant to go see a BBFS provider, how would I know unless it was discussed & talked about. Without knowing, I might see such a provider & get a BBBJ which would run the same risk as FS.
I think the new policy change has the potential to open up a whole new can of worms (or Treponema pallidum bacteria) on the board. In the past few months I have noted a lot of Atlanta ladies reporting fake reviews. I imagine the fallout from a false review reporting BBFS would be even uglier, and could very well cause ladies to lose business. As BigMac pointed out, a lot of guys (myself included) are hesitant to see a provider who offers BBFS. The allegation alone might torpedo a lady's reputation. Considering the horror stories concerning jaded johns, I can see this course of action being utilized to hurt a provider.
However, a fake review concerning BBFS doesn't just threaten a provider's reputation - it threatens her physical safety. I think it is entirely possible that some asshole would read a review that detailed BBFS, meet a provider, and expect the same treatment...even though the review is entirely false. Incensed, he might just decide to rape her sans condom.
In a similar vein, for those providers who actually offer BBFS, it may very well be a YMMV thing. Just because she does it with one client doesn't mean she is willing to do it with ALL clients. However, once she has been "outed" as a purveyor of bareback, subsequent clients will expect it as well.
Granted, these are all hypothetical situations. But I do think this policy change is very dangerous for providers. I can only hope that hobbyists do not abuse their new found freedom or the women who make our lives "a little easier and a whole lot brighter".
Once again I will say that we need to approach this like adults and not drop our guard just because we do this every day and nothing 'bad' happens.
The truth of the matter is that a provider faces the prospect of being "raped" every single time she sees a client. She can never forget that.
Let's be real about this and not turn a blind eye to it.
Maybe...the possibility of it will cause some providers to screen more heavily....or at all (since some don't).
Now that would be a good thing.
Two sides to every coin.
I find it interesting everyone wants bbbjcim but scared to death of bb sex.
DirtyDaego,
I respect you as a mod and I loved your post last week. I also agree with you that BBFS DOES happen everyday and that every provider risks being attacked or raped every time she meets a client. In fact, I'd venture to say the latter occurs far more often than either you or I will ever know. While that risk would have existed regardless of policy change, the inclusion of BBFS in reviews and on boards (real or otherwise) magnifies that risk. A hobbyist who feels entitled to a lady's non-appointment time is annoying; a hobbyist who feels entitled to bareback is dangerous.
That said, I am not sure why you chose to encapsulate the word rape in quotation marks. Were you quoting posts on other boards or trying to indicate something else?
Furthermore, I would like to point out that even providers who DO screen heavily would be subject to the same problems associated with fake reviews advertising BBFS - as we all know, a reviewer doesn't need to have seen a woman to issue a review.
Ok...everyone take a breath. Deep one.
Now let it oooooout. Sloooowly.
Repeat.
You good? I know I am. 
My PM box has been BLOWING UP here recently.
Let's clear this up slowly and rationally.
First....TER is NOT endorsing, rationalizing, or telling everyone to toss out the covers and boink bareback.
Do we have that?
Do we need to repeat it?
Please.....PLEASE....use your rational heads.
Now that we have that established....let's discuss what this means.
Whether you are in denial or not....BBFS happens every day. Deal with it.
Somewhere....someone in the hobby is doing it right now.
Maybe it's a drunken one-time thing. Maybe it's someone "special". Maybe there's a "connection". Maybe someone offers it for extra pesos. Maybe someone does it because they know they have something and want to hurt the opposite sex. Maybe it's for any number of reasons....but let's be adult and at least admit that it happens.
When it's not allowed to be discussed or reviewed....we have NO WAY of knowing who is doing it in our little community.
Don't think the community is little?
Just stop for a minute and think about the "six degrees of separation" thing. The odds are pretty good that almost everyone on this board is "connected".
That guy or gal you think is a douche....or you argue with all the time? Guess what....you're "tunnel buddies" in some way.
I know....makes you ill in some ways...huh? lol.
When it IS allowed to be discussed...at least we know who's doing it. We can then make INFORMED choices as ADULTS. Right?
So...to recap....TER is NOT endorsing the behavior or telling you to do it.
They are admitting that it happens...and taking a bold step to move out of the shadows of blind ignorance....and allow us all to help each other.
Hope this clears things up a bit...and diminishes the 'panic'.
Just sayin'
DD
on the subject. But mix these discussions with alias fake reviews and he said's and she said's and people already blacklisting each other over heresay, I can only imagine the possibilities from here.
I prefer to know who comes right out and admits in the open so I can avoid, but the possibilities lying with those who like to write fake reviews to get VIP and personal vendettas? How are providers to defend themselves in these scenarios?
Oh, never mind. I've been getting into enough trouble lately. 
I am not sure how allowing posts/reviews that talk about this are encouraging the practice. The more disclosure the better it is for both client and provider.
It's a rule change so perhaps there are issues that will happen that I am not thinking about but I am sure if it led to something it shouldn't the site and MODs would review the policy.
...that there's no reason to list them. Anyone alias idiot can make anyone and everyone's life in this biz WAYYY to difficult, extra paranoid, and ruin businesses. Agency owners wasting time trying to explain that their girls don't provide that because an alias says they did, hurts everyone...and fucks with the money flow.
DD, I hear ya on the 6 degrees thing but that's something that any of us that have been here awhile have already gotten their head around. Being warned, reminded, and scared because some moron is using bbfs as a weapon is gonna make a lot of dicks soft. On the other hand, if a lady has a potential client and sees that he has seen a lady being accused of this in the past might think twice about seeing him.
I also hear ya on the 'rape' point, but considering the 'lies and truth' aspect of that subject, do you really think all the other bullshit of allowing bbfs comments and what comes along with it, worth it?
Here's an idea. Let the rule stand of allowing bbfs comments but take away members (ladies and men) alias options. That would certainly level the playing field.
Sir Cumalot
... removing alias capabilities will surely
reduce the complexities generated by this new policy.
Gentle.
I also believe with doing away with alias for everyone! And with such a big policy change, it sure would be understandable.
I have been out of the hobby (and the Atlanta area) for close to a decade now, but I still read these boards from time to time just for memories. But I can say from personal experience that it happens, and, at least in my case, with two of the top providers in the community. Yes, I regularly engaged in BBFS with two of the most highly sought-after providers in the Atlanta area at the time. (Both have been retired for several years now, so no worries about that.) I was stupid. I shouldn't have done it. My little head told me I was "special" and that there was a "connection," because there was no extra charge. But in reality, looking back, I was probably one of several, maybe many. Fortunately for me, I have been tested and am clean.
Let's be clear here: these weren't "skanks" or anything close to it. Just about every time there's a thread about "the providers you miss the most," one or both of their names show up. In their respective heydays, both were highly reviewed and unquestioned "cream of the crop" type providers.
In one of the cases, the provider initiated. I had seen her maybe a half dozen times, some CFS, but mostly BBBJTC. We were kissing, hadn't covered up yet, and the next thing I knew, she had put me inside her uncovered. That time, the condom was sitting on a bedside table. The rest of the times I saw here, she didn't bother to even put one out. I saw her at least a dozen more times after that, but probably only did BBFS two or three times. Several people on here have said that she was one of the top BBBJTCNQNS ever, and I agree. FS with her was only for the sake of variety. She once made me pop three times in less than 45 minutes with just BBBJs.
In the other case, it was an ego play on my behalf. I'd seen her three or four times and something just told me that if I tried, she'd let me, and she did. Once I was inside her she just said "no cumming inside me," and we proceeded. (I pulled out as requested.) I saw her several more times after that. From then on, she initiated the BBFS every single time. Unlike the other lady, her forte was FS, so every session after that (maybe 5 or 6) included it.
As said before, I was stupid to do this. My ego and my little head got the better of me. I convinced myself that I was the only one getting this level of service. But to be clear, if there had been ANY whispers in reviews or on the page that either of them were offering BBFS to anyone else, I would *not* have engaged in this incredibly risky behavior. So, yeah, I applaud the decision. It will very likely save someone like me from their own stupidity. No, I didn't get anything, but the years of fear after I came to my senses about it weren't worth those few minutes of extra pleasure.
Will the system be set up to allow a search for BBFS providers as it does BBBJ, etc..?
There is only accountability on the provider's side. With alias reviews. any numbskull can say anything about anybody.
I'm all for accountability but it's useless if it doesn't apply to both sides of the coin.
Rewarding people with VIP for bad behavior is idiotic as well.
But I guess it sellls vip memberships and that's all that matters so people can come and read all the backstabbing lies, grade school name calling, and trainwreck threads.
Interesting comments here but a bit puzzling too. I recall vividly most of the threads where the topic is high rates or limited menu, or whatever other symptom somebody felt like mentioning about a provider. And of course, there are those that cast negativity about client behavior too. And by and large, the bulk of the responses to those sorts of things was "it's the lady's choice to make up her rules", and "if you don't like it, just move on". In deed the mere mention of those sorts of threads sparked outrage by about half the respondents.
Now, we have a very basic and simple change in TER policy to allow the mention of BBFS. But, instead of hearing all about how it's the lady's choice and no one has any right to question how they run their business, we see this double standard. We see those who would silence the very use of the term. How interesting is that... LOL...
More curious is the mention that this change in policy is somehow going to result in "inaccurate" reviews. Are you kidding? Wish I had a dollar for every thread on TER where some provider complained that what a reviewer said is not true. So, a policy that allows the use of the term BB whatever, is going to matter? I don't think so. Nothing about the policy change is advocating BB whatever. I mean you still have the so-called "right" to hobby set your rules as a provider/hobbyist. And of course, that means you don't have to partake of BB anything is that's your preference. So, what's the big deal here such that it warrants all this commotion and a desire to stifle speech. Guess one of the requirements to hobbying is to also be hypocritical? Or have I completely misunderstood this entire thread?
I think you're right - there may very well be a double standard at play here. However, I also think that the stakes are a hell of a lot higher. If a provider is known for offering a limited menu or having high rates, I might not see her. If a provider is known for offering BBFS, there is NO way I would see her. Now I am only one guy, so my refusal means nothing. But, if you check the poll DD referenced, you will note that A LOT of hobbyists feel the same way about bareback intercourse. That means that any provider outed as a BBFS provider stands to lose a significant amount of her business.
I also agree that every lady has a right to conduct her business the way she sees fit, charging whatever she is comfortable with, etc. and hobbyists who don't like it should move on. BBFS falls into the category of "things a provider should control" and I absolutely respect any woman's right to establish limits (or lack thereof) regarding her body. Also, I respect any hobbyist's right to engage in whatever act he chooses with a provider, so long as said act is consensual.
I am more concerned that providers who DON'T offer bareback and who DO screen will be falsely stimagtized or finds themselves in nightmarish situations because someone has abused the policy change. As you noted, the boards are already full of providers castigating hobbyists (or aliases) for writing fake reviews. While I don't think the policy is going to catalyze an explosion of fake reviews, it WILL add a complicating factor to any fake review in the future. I can already imagine some lady getting flooded with emails and calls concerning FFBS after a fake review. You thought the threads regarding fake reviews were intense before? You ain't seen nothing yet.
Like any privilege, the ability to mention BBFS (whether on the boards or in reviews) can be used or abused. Given the conduct of some hobbyists, I firmly believe that it WILL be abused. That doesn't mean that no one should have the privilege - it just means that women are going to get hurt because of it.
Agreed on what you're saying about double standards but considering the topic and what effect it can have in the long run, I don't think your looking at the whole picture.
Free speech is one thing, some moron that's fucked up on crack using free speech and bbfs as a weapon in this community is another.
1. a lady complaining on the board that a reviewer gave her a low score was 'inaccurate' is one thing.
2. The same lady coming on here claiming that the BBFS claim by the reviewer in her latest review was 'inaccurate' is another.
Which one of those scenarios would make you hesitate to see her more? What if you reviewed her and because she's been labeled with this, another provider you're wanting to see won't book with YOU because she can see that you've seen her.
How fast do you think a gent is gonna line up to put that he bbfs'd a provider in a review? Would you?
Sir C
Bbfs is offered up more often then you think.
Make no mistake she probs is or has bb if at the very
Least her husband or boyfriend! Or special lover. Or customer.
Deal!
...from the link DD posted (you have to vote to see the results).
The percentage of guys that would rush to see a BBFS provider compared to the 'no fucking way' percentage is mind boggling.
Fucking scary,
Sir Cumalot
as we see frequently on here, and elsewhere, people don't read very carefully
Sure, I might see her, but I'm wrapping it up!!
and agree that there are merits to both. As a hobbyist it is information I would be interested in having. We KNOW it happens. Hobbyists are having BB with their SO's as are providers. Some of the ladies are doing it with their regulars and some ladies do it for more money and some do it because they just don't know/care. It happens. The only thing you can truly control are your own actions. Just because a chick is offering that doesn't mean you HAVE to take it. Be safe yourself. That said, if a chick is doing it with everyone I'm going to avoid her. Yes, that might cost her my business but, and maybe I'm just a selfish fuck, but that is information I would like to have.
Now, as to the potential for it being used as a weapon there are a couple of things TER could possibly do to prevent some of the problems. Reviews are reviewed before being accepted. So rule #1, don't accept any reviews alleging BBFS from new people or people with a limited track record. Rule #2, no posts from aliases regarding BBFS. If you won't make the post using your handle then no BBFS talk from you.
I don't see "unknowns" anymore. Can't justify the risk. If I'm doing homework on a lady and there are reviews claiming BBFS I'll ask her and I'll ask any of the hobbyists I trust whether the rumor is true. I do my homework relatively diligently and that would just be one more step in the process.
For the individuals that are worried that this is like TER is endorsing or pushing BBFS I have a question. Does that fact that TER accepts reviews of transsexuals mean that TER is trying to push a guy to go out and suck a he/shes dick? Of course not. It is simply one more piece of information you can use when deciding to see a particular lady.
As always, be safe and have fun
one where the handles are shown---Otherwise it could be fiction.
That being said,
Anyone in this hobby that casually goes bareback is a fool. ( note the word "casually" )
Anyone in this hobby that goes bareback then has any relationships outside the hobby bareback; Is both a fool and potentially putting the health of their non-hobby partner at risk and more than likely without their consent.
So, question for anyone that does or would like to go bareback, do you inform your non-hobby partners prior to going bareback with them?
Finally, I didn't know this topic was banned. I know that I've personally commented on this subject a few times over the last 10 years or so...
Anyway, information is power. That is A big part of what this site is all about, information!
Since this topic isn't banned any longer...there is a provider in town that advertises on BP and has several girls that work for her and they advertise a service that can only be done during BBFS. I notice that a lot of guys see these girls knowing they provide BBFS but they opt for protection. Now I have two questions...why would someone see one of these girls knowing they provide this service regardless if they opt out of the BBFS. And second, is anyone else like me in assuming that if the provider advertises she does BBFS that she will give me something to remember her by?
I hope they find a cure for STD's but you know if that happens someone will contract the super STD and then we are back to square one.