This is a philosophical and hypothetical question and ought not be construed as pertaining to any provider past or present, reviewed or not. It's just a question.

Two pertinent stipulations:

1. Providers often choose simple non-responsiveness as a way of telling a client he is no longer wanted as a client. Most clients are aware of this fact and take some period of non-responsiveness as a cue to move on.

2. Sometimes providers and hobbyists arrive at individual arrangements based on a variety of factors. Presumably such arrangements, for their duration, are seen as mutually beneficial by both parties.

Given those stipulations, pretend that a hobbyist and provider have arrived at some sort of individual arrangement that involves a discount on the provider's part and some form of commitment on the hobbyist's part.

Question 1: For what length of time (or how many times and what modes of communication) must the hobbyist wait/try before concluding that the existing arrangement is null and void and he need make no further attempts at booking?

Question 2: Does the hobbyist have any obligation to inform the provider that any claim she might have has been vacated?

Question 3: Does the provider have a "right to cure," and if so, for how long does she have such a right? (i.e. can she call up the client X months down the road and remind him of his commitment?)

Yes, I know it is obvious who this alias is. lol