I also have read their screening is quite intrusive.
I've been banned!
Seriously ... my review was 100% honest.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/detail/catherine-review-by-hockeyguy73-2033964
Has anyone else been banished from XO?
Reading your reviews, I'm thinking fat ugly fucker.
I also have read their screening is quite intrusive. If I was going to use an agency, it wouldn't be them.
I also have read their screening is quite intrusive.
... your being banned had nothing to do with what you wrote about Catherine but rather about the personal information you gave about someone else... which was totally unnecessary IMO.
What personal info are you referring to? Perhaps I missed it despite reading that review a couple of times. I didn't read anything in his review that would out her or that I haven't read in dozens, if not hundreds, of other reviews. Some of those details might be "personal" but not identifying, and I think there's a big difference. Seems to me the review was merely his notation of the experience and good info for fellow hobbyists. But I would like to know what you deemed to be too personal. Feel free to PM me if you don't want to make it public. I really would like to know... not being argumentative- just inquisitive.
... that you are being inquisitive, not argumentative. Since it's in the General section of the review, I can post it here:
.
"I was supposed to see Steffany, but she decided to head back back to Russia (not happy with her career choice - and she hadn't even seen me yet!)."
.
This is personal information about another provider. As I said above, it wasn't necessary for the review of Catherine and thus there was no reason to include it. A simple "I was supposed to see a different provider, but she became unavailable" would have sufficed.
.
You and others may not think this is any kind of problem. I disagree. While it's not outing anyone, it exhibits a lack of discretion about the private life of a specific provider. I think one of the most important qualities of anyone involved in this "hobby" is to be discreet. It's something everyone who writes reviews, everyone who posts here, and everyone who communicates with others in any way about this p4p world needs to keep in mind at all times.
Hardly a lack of discretion. The agency CLEARLY advertised Steffany (or whoever) knowing she was not available. The review stated nothing other than she was no longer here. Seems almost bait-n-switch to me. This is not really personal information, is it? A Russian girl going back to Russia? (A California girl here who's gone back to CA? See that frequently.)
I think it's important to know such information. How many other guys have arrived to see "X" only to be presented "Y?" Merely mentioning a name is hardly outing anyone. It's not like disparaging comments were made or any other info given. That's hardly breaking discretion protocol. Her pic is posted. She's hardly working UTR. But I think the bait-n-switch is noteworthy, and mentioning the names, especially when an agency is involved, is an important factor. What if another guy wanted to see that Steffany and was given the same switcharoo? That OK with you? When girls are advertised as being from Russia or elsewhere, it's hardly a stretch to think they might go back. It's not as if he wrote she went to Disney World or some such thing. If he mentioned private things such as family or a personal situation, I'd agree. But merely stating she went home is hardly being indiscreet. In fact, it's a PSA for other guys who might want to see her.
All of this is speculation, but to say a provider was "not happy with her career choice" could have been the tipping point. That is personal, and goes beyond a provider simply not being available. Unfortunately, he mentioned more than just that she was going home and that might have made all the difference.
You've got to be kidding me. Good grief!! Hardly a major indiscretion. Especially one to ban someone. But at least the comments posted here show readers where people align and place their allegiance. If you consider that a faux pas, you must walk on egg shells.
Oh, and it is speculation, as you wrote, so it is the OP's opinion. I.e., he was not stating a fact, so how can something that is clearly his opinion be inferred to be personal information? Not really much different than half the stuff I read in many reviews.
We don't know what the interaction between him and the Agency was.
He could have said some nasty things to the agency for all we know. That could have gotten him banned. Or it could have been as simple as he stated about the review. We dont know all the facts.
But my experience with this agency has all been good and positive. I had one visit and didn't click with the provider and chalked it up to just that. Other times it was a knock out of the ball park. to each their own.
Dude, did you even look at the other reviews? Or are you the kind of banger that sees a pretty picture and can't think straight? And are you familiar with the term "Russian attitude?" Your experience could have easily been predicted. Even just her numeric scores tell the story: attractive but performance is going to be YMMV. Next time, read the reviews.
And if you're looking for GFE, a Russian agency girl is a very poor choice.
Nailed it...couldn't agree more!
You said in the review it was your first time??? And you have multiple reviews?? Am I missing something???
Anyways....
I have worked with XO a number of times. girls are always hot or cold. Some are good and others not so much. I think it all has to do with connection. Just like with anything else. Some people just connect or some people have the ability to connect with anyone. others not so much.
Like others have stated with her past reviews are for sure YMMV... and some Russians are very passionate and others not so much.
Hope u have better luck out there.
... He said it was his first time with an escort. Since TER uses that term to (usually) refer to providers who offer FS, vs. massage-type providers, I figured that's what he meant since all of his prior reviews were with massage providers.
Restaurant review: the food was awful, and such small portions.
You've been banned from bad service.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/detail/catherine-review-by-viper2-2032592
-- Modified on 5/18/2017 6:18:11 PM
Yep, they banned me too just for being honest in my review.
To add, for all the White Knights that want to make excuses for XO, go read my review, the session was a hot mess and when I refused their discount BRIBE to not post my bad review, they banned me.
Which is too bad because if all the lower score reviews are from alias reviewers it might tend to lessen their cred.