I have been emailing a newish provider located on CitySource among for a date and getting no response.  I tried again today and gotta interesting response:

Hi,
Thank you for your interest.
I thought it would be to my best fiscal interest too not pay my screener for over a month of screening work performed for me. As such this notice will inform of my two other franchises I operate under “-----------” and “-----------”.
 
  Have a nice day!    
 
So this same lady operates under 3 different names.

Is this something report to TER?  Of course it might to be true and only a disgruntled employe.  Which is why I am not including any names. . . . Yet.

Hi There

This is little strange. Anything goes !!! Good Luck

xo

That site. Hmm I am also curouis to know what the providers purpose for having three personas was for.

You imply that you are going to look further into this mess.  It doesn't concern you and outing a provider's other or former stage names can be dangerous to her and grounds for you to get banned or blacklisted.  The City Source girls do talk to each other.   Just move on and leave this train wreck alone.

I don't think I am going to do more.  However it does concern us all in that these are three simultaneous handles and it is relevant to getting an accurate view of a provider's ratings any prices.  

 

There aye good, legitimate reviews under all three names so in isn't a matter of the provider being a scam.  I think th 3 different personas allows the provider to pursue different price points and advertising strategies.

I posted more as an interesting anecdote.  The booker supposedly has not been paid and has thus responded to potential clients in a manner designed to retaliate.

...other stage names will NOT get you banned.  In fact, it will be appreciated by TER in the form of granting you additional free VIP days.

If the provider has three separate profiles, they should be reported to TER so that they will be combined into one profile.  Why do you think that profiles are listed as "Gertrude/Gladys/Grizelda?"

The only dangerous thing here is your uninformed, ignorant advice.

In fact, we all are.  We don't know what the situation between the provider and her booker is.  Is she actually using all three stage names?  Are they former names she had to drop because of LE, personal or stalker issues.  Or as may be the case, are they all just a marketing plot.  The booker is obviously grinding an axe here and until the actual situation is known with certainty, discretion is the better part of valor here.   I'm happy to see that Lucius agrees.  What's your interest in this again?  TER cop for free VIP days?  Kinda weak dude.

-- Modified on 10/17/2013 6:34:58 PM

...backpedaling and acting like Sgt. Schultz on Hogan's Heroes.

You should not "legitimize" this provider by trying to straighten it out. She appears to be trying to get away with some unethical behavior. "Straightening" this out with TER will only serve to make her appear more legitimate than she is. Would rather have you "out" her on this forum by providing various names and handles she is using.
BigPapsan responses are way too simplistic - that's why he uses childish put downs of anyone who doesn't agree with him.

Ladies who don't get much business or want more business have multiple personas. It's kind of obvious why she would have multiple persona's. Ladies do it all the time in Vegas.

I truly feel bad for this screener though. I can't imagine how difficult it was for her to screen unpaid for an entire month for this provider's 3 different persona's. That's a lot of work and she has bills to pay too. I understand why she's upset.

The whole gist of my post was that we shouldn't assume that anything was true.  I said in so many words that until we know with certainty what the situation was, we shouldn't assume anything.  We are all ignorant of the situation.   What about that did you not understand?  I do not consider that my posts may be read by persons where English may be a second language.  I make no apologies for that.

EDIT:  Humorous link there.  One of my all time favorite shows.  Childish, but thanks for the laugh.

-- Modified on 10/17/2013 8:25:44 PM

END OF MESSAGE

"Why would want to get involved with this dispute?"
Posted 10/17/2013 at 4:28:09 PM

Cumbledor

"You imply that you are going to look further into this mess.  It doesn't concern you and outing a provider's other or former stage names can be dangerous to her and grounds for you to get banned or blacklisted.  The City Source girls do talk to each other.   Just move on and leave this train wreck alone."

You assumed EVERYTHING was true and you responded accordingly.  NOW you're saying "we shouldn't assume that anything was true."  Try actually reading what you posted.

There is nothing assumed or implied as true in what I wrote.  In fact there isn't really much to assume in the OP other than a provider apparently didn't pay her booker and now the booker is vindictive.  Outing a providers real names or stage names is not something to do lightly.  Have somebody who speaks English fluently explain it to you in your own language because there is an obvious disconnect in your comprehension of what I wrote.

He's been harassing another board so most of us put him on ignore list. It's "see no evil, hear no evil". The guy clearly craves attention. As someone suggested before, he's exactly like a guy who exposes himself. He enjoys the exhibition regardless of whether people consider him good, bad or neutered.

We don't know the story other than this is a dispute about money.  There are two sides to it and we just don't know.  Maybe the screener screwed up in doing her job abd got fired.  I think the screener is completely wrong to violate the trust between her and the provider by outing all of her names.  That is also going to hurt her business.  I would say the screener waived any right to get paid by violating that trust.  It's a really asshole thing to do.  How would you feel if your doctor, claiming you owed him money, told everyone about your medical issues?  Yeah it sucks not to get paid, but to start doing bad things like invading privacy and violating what should be a sacred trust like this is just wrong.  The better course would have been to behave like a professional, dissolve the relationship and move on chalking it up to the cost of doing business.

But what of the “trust” the screener put in her ‘boss’ for week after week? These are the very reasons for legislative acts such as FLSA.  

      “Maybe the screener screwed up in doing her job abd got fired”
 Then pay her what she is owed up to the day/moment of her termination. By how the ‘notice’ was written it doesn’t seem as if the screener had been still screening after “Maybe” being fired.  

      “I would say the screener waived any right to get paid by violating that trust”
IMO things had already disintegrated to where the screener had lost any hope of ever seeing any compensation for her time and labor.

     “The better course would have been to behave like a professional, dissolve the relationship and move on chalking it up to the cost of doing business.”
So if an employee of ANY legitimate business gets jacked for over a months work on their paycheck they should just chalk it up to the cost of working for a living?
 
WTF does the FLSA exist for then? I'm sure however you voted for Mitt Romney, and therefore LOATH such acts of legislation

Regardless of what happened, PAY what is owed., and THEN go your own way., PEACEFULLY....There is no reason why that cannot happen..

Booking/Screening/Answering e-mails/Assisting/etc..., can be a 24/7 job., if you are working with a high volume, or very popular provider....Not everybody is gracious, or cooperates with the screening, and it can get quite frustrating., no doubt.

A screener/booker, does not only answer ONE e-mail, and then the Client is booked....Some clients are VERY high maintenance, book a month ahead of time, and then require daily e-mails/flirting, until the day arrives....Wanting more and more pics, telephone conversations, etc.....Provider Assistants do not get enough credit, and can MAKE or BREAK the entire process/Appt.....They are the first ones the Client speaks to, and cooresponds with.....They are VALUABLE.

Ladies, PAY your Assistants., and give them BONUSES when you are doing well!!.....If you are doing well, it is likely that SHE is doing her job WELL...

Peace out.....

Kayla~ Xo  

 

 

 

You might reread what Lucius said: “So this same lady operates under 3 different names. Is this something report to TER?

Cumbledor said this:  “It doesn't concern you and outing a provider's other or former stage names can be dangerous to her and grounds for you to get banned or blacklisted”

Big Pappasan said this: “...other stage names will NOT get you banned.  In fact, it will be appreciated by TER in the form of granting you additional free VIP days.”

Well it appears TER wants to know about all providers handles. Otherwise a provider will just create a new handle to avoid legitimate reviews. I read and re-read the minute meetings, articles of incorporation, bylaws, conditions, covenants, and restrictions;  as well as recently enacted rules and regulations. It would seem that Big P. has got this one in the bag. He could have omitted that last insult though. “The only dangerous thing here is your uninformed, ignorant advice.”

To quote Strother Martin in Cool Hand Luke, “What we have here is a failure to communicate."
I am getting laid tomorrow…or is that today now?

Literally speaking, the original post was never about the screener/booker outing out anybody. It was whether the names should be reported to TER.

So you know where I'm coming from and this is the last explanation

GENERAL POST CONTENT GUIDELINES  
Posts which do not conform to the Post Content Guidelines will be removed.  Continuous or habitual posting of non-conforming posts may cause the poster to lose posting privileges for a period of time.  Further ignoring of the rules may cause the poster to be banned from TER.  

PERSONAL INFORMATION  
Posting personal information of members or providers, including content copied from their emails and Private Messages, is grounds for BANISHMENT.  This includes PMs between TER and members.

We don't know what the situation is, why the provider uses or has used three stage names in the past.  It certainly seems like it could be personal information subject to these rules.  I know of at least four ladies here that if I were to mention their old stage names, I would be banned because those were removed and changed for various very good personal reasons.  I do realize that TER will combine various stage names, but they will also decline to do so if there is good cause not to like one of the personal reasons I stated earlier.  

The OP did not know the situation and I simply expressed my opinion that it would probably be wise not to get involved in a dispute between two people over money.  I also stated my opinion that, not knowing the situation, disclosing what the screener told him may be a violation of these rules.  

I also stand by my opinion that if you are screening for somebody and you know personal information about them, you absolutely should not be disclosing it because you have a money dispute.  I'm sure s/he's not the first screener who claims he wasn't paid, but s/he appears to be the first to breach that trust.  Thats reprehensible and certainly grounds for blacklisting.  I can promise you that person will never screen for anybody again.

I k now exactly what the post is about, Darling., but THANK YOU for watching out for me!.

XoXo