I think a lot of this comes down to the difference in risk when visiting an independent or an agency. With an independent provider your biggest risks are probably doxing, harassment, extortion and identity theft. With an agency, the biggest risk is probably getting arrested. We've seen plenty of independent girls get pissed off at a client and they decide to retaliate by posting a guys personal info on twitter. Sometimes providers get into drugs which can cause erratic behavior. This type of risk is usually mitigated by an agency, since the records are going to be centrally managed. The problem with agencies is that they are much more likely to be investigated by the police. Their meticulous record keeping and safety/security measures are great until they end up in the hands of police.
.
I get a feeling that many of these agencies are going to come under increased scrutiny. Many jurisdictions have had a laissez-faire policy when it comes to sex work. It seems like the pendulum is starting to swing in the other direction. Also, many of these agencies use immigrants who probably don't have legal status. These agencies aren't exactly discreet, many can be found with simple google searches. I'd expect a few of them to get busted.
Greetings National Board - Curious as to what many of you are seeing with respect to verification. I live somewhere in which the local providers are moving towards a requirement of sharing a government or work ID, instead of references. I have never shared my information, especially over the internet. Seems to be sending an image of your driver's license is very risky. What are you seeing in other places? Thanks.
I have sent you multiple PMs on this. You make the call for YOU. You do what YOU are comfortable with sharing. And yes, you are now in the midwest and the majority of reputable providers require it. If the provider you want to see requires more than you are comfortable sharing find a different provider. You are beating a dead horse. Move on.
I've never had any issues with dealing reputable providers. I normally block out everything other than the picture and name and that seems to work just fine.
This is what I ask for. Some gals want to see the whole ID, I am OK with just the name and the pic.
It's my understanding that a lot of the gals who ask for that just want to run a quick background check to make sure the potential client isn't a sex offender/violent criminal. I've honestly had Hinge dates do more thorough verification before meeting, so I don't really sweat some light verification (I also got a P4 account which makes it even easier in a lot of cases).
...involved submitting an ID (most of it blacked out) and a photo holding up two fingers and I was told that I could not be verified because as it happens, I do not have a robust online presence. I ended up having to use two references (something I don't want to do).
I hope the providers in your area are prepared for those circumstances and also losing business due to clients wanting to provide ONLY references!
I am 45 years old and quite average. I will in no way stop you in your tracks if you see me on the street. I have to turn away clients daily because I will only see so many clients a day. And I am in the middle of no where WI. I have clients drive hours to see me. I have several clients who fly there own planes from other states to my little dinky airport to visit me. I am in no way bragging, there are just not that many in person providers anymore. We are in no way losing business, trust me. Quite the opposite. The OP is out of MN. I tour there a few times a year and am fully pre booked weeks before my tour dates. The industry is shifting for a multitude of reasons and anyway we want to slice it this is a seller's market right now. Will that change? I don't know. But I do not see it changing in the foreseeable future.
*their, not there. I am really not that dumb, I promise!!!
Women are increasingly asking for LinkedIn profiles, employer information, and other personal details. And yes, doing so absolutely increases your level of risk. I don’t think anyone would dispute that. The real question is...how do you personally feel about taking on that additional risk?
.
Everything in this lifestyle involves some degree of risk. Ultimately, each person has to decide on their own comfort level and develop a strategy that aligns with their risk tolerance.
While I didn't respond to your initial post, I find it interesting that you’ve taken this from the Minneapolis board to the National board. Bringing this same question, which has been belabored, to a new board won’t necessarily change the answers.
It’s also worth pointing out that the answers you’ll get on a board are very different from what you’d hear from men who don’t post. There are subsets of clients: active board users with strong negative opinions about ID and/or employment screening, active board users who screen with ID and/or employment and then the far larger group of lurkers who use boards quietly for provider legitimacy checks but have no issue verifying themselves through employment or government ID when it’s time to actually book. I’d argue the majority of my clientele are from that latter subset. Lest we not forget, boards can become echo chambers.
For me personally:
I allow multiple forms of verification. Government ID, employment verification, and/or P411, TER, provider references (within certain parameters).
• REFERENCES: must be verifiable. If they come from a provider I know or can easily verify (site, socials, professional ad), then yes. But if it’s just a name and number? That’s not screening. That’s guesswork. I’ve had clients “fail” because their references couldn’t remember them. I've even had a provider literally state, “Sorry girl, I’m high volume, I don’t remember anyone after a couple of weeks.” That doesn’t protect me or the client.
• ID and/or EMPLOYMENT: are increasingly common. And with ID, you are normally allowed to redact information that we do not need to see.
The reality is this: every method carries risk. References can be falsified, numbers recycled, emails spoofed. Screening is about managing risk, not eliminating it. And each provider gets to decide what balance makes them comfortable. Clients get to decide if they want to move forward under those terms. That’s it.
And in my experience, the men with the most to lose, reputations like highly visible careers, families, etc., are often the least resistant to screening. They see it as a form of risk management, not a power struggle. Real power doesn’t need to posture. If anything, pushback tends to signal the opposite: that there’s not much at stake to protect. Screening, at its core, isn’t about ego. It’s about both of us walking in with our safety and discretion intact.
You provide the elegance and poise to this board, I provide the snark and snap. Hopefully both angles will eventually get through to some of the guys here.
The OP had me seeing red when he A: continued to post that he was WHITE and was looking for only WHITE providers and B: offered providers $$ in lieu of screening to make providers more "comfortable". And my favorite C: if all the clients band together and refuse to send their screening info the providers will have to see them then! No, we don't. The majority of us on here chose this job, it was not a last resort. I am not supporting a habit sucking dick, I am padding my investment portfolio.
All of his posts come off as greasy and self absorbed. For someone who says he is in his 50s he just comes off as immature and maladjusted. My guess is he is hiding something and knows that if providers find out they won't see him. Which is exactly why we do screening. So this one I am calling a win.
Speaking for myself and I'm sure at least a few others, it's not about ego or power...at least on our side of the discussion. It's now about risk vs reward and threading the needle and meeting known ladies that don't require it (or offer acceptable variations) but can still provide the experience we are seeking. You and the cheesehead likely see all of my commentary as pushback against screening but for me, it's really about how securely the info is kept but we don't need to hash that out again.
But, like the perpetual banter about rising rates, I still hang in the camp that gals can do whatever they choose and the clientele can seek elsewhere for more comfortable situation if that's a hurdle for them.
I've always been an advocate for safer hobbying for all but I'm taking your point that guys that have a lot to lose aren't concerned about contingent liabilities with a grain of salt, lol.
You are correct in that if the provider asks for more than the client wants to share they need to me on. From a personal perspective here are few situations I have run into when the gent was hesitant about sending his ID.
1. I was doing a tour in Green Bay 3 or 4 years ago and a guy contacted me several times but did not want to send me his ID. He then said for a "compromise" he would give it to me at the hotel the day I was to see him outside the. I told him I need to do a background check before I book with him he replied, I am 100% not joking, "if you do a check on me you will find some shit on me and then won't want to see me." Mmm...K. Dodged a bullet there!
2. Guy had been contacting me on twitter for years to see me. I told him I would not book with him unless I have his info. He does finally reluctantly send it and I find on his record first degree sexual assault. He was found guilty by a jury and spent time in prison. He referred to it as a "misunderstanding". Nope again!!
3. And my most recent one a guy contacted me to book and did send a selfie. When I asked for his ID he said "you think I am some kind of abusive asshole?" Now this guy sent his selfie from work with his name badge clearly visible. For shits and giggles I looked him up and he had FIVE domestic abuse charges plus multiple drug charges and other random nonsense. Also just got out of prison. So yes, #3, you are an abusive asshole.
In closing this is just the most recent big ones I have had but yes, from personal experience, if the guy tries to talk his way out of screening it is a giant red flag for the above reasons. I am not pointing a finger at you that you have shit on your file, this is just a reply to your post. But from the provider's end of personal experience please be aware this happens more often than not as to why clients do not want to send their screening info.
It's simple - if a guy is uncomfortable with what the lady requires he can decline and see someone else. This has been said many times.
I recently reached out to see a provider and she asked for my ID. While I have provided my ID to several providers in the past (including our own QB and you, Miss S.) this lady wasn't super well-known and I didn't feel comfortable with that.
I told her this and stressed that I fully support any lady doing whatever she wants to maintain her comfort level, but I felt uncomfortable providing what she required.
She replied and thanked me for being polite and honest and for not giving her a hard time. There is nothing complicated about this.
Holy shit!
I'm glad you checked out those guys. There are some truly fucked up people out there and I support your attempts to avoid as many of them as possible.
I hear you on the risk/reward framing, but let’s be honest: you’ve raised this same concern about “how securely info is kept” several times now, even after multiple providers on the MN Board explained that the overwhelming majority of us don’t keep client data long-term. Most of us delete once screening is complete or after the first appointment, retaining only the bare minimum (usually first name or nickname + preferred contact method).
The reality is this: almost anything sent across the internet can be retrievable in theory. That’s true whether you’re sending an email, filling out a P411 Client application, or wiring funds from your bank. Almost anything sent over the internet is technically accessible, even after deletion, because of backups, caches, servers, or forensic recovery. That’s the distinction: no one can guarantee “perfect storage” or "perfect security" (not even banks, hospitals, or the government). The real protection is in limiting what is kept and for how long, re: mitigation. Minimize what’s collected, how long it’s kept, and where it’s kept. That’s what providers who care about discretion are already doing.
So if the concern isn’t really new, why keep circling back to it? At some point, it starts sounding less like risk management and more like resistance. Men who are truly established in their lives don’t tend to posture about screening. Their risk management looks like preparation, not repetition.
As you stated..."And in my experience, the men with the most to lose, reputations like highly visible careers, families, etc., are often the least resistant to screening. They see it as a form of risk management, not a power struggle. Real power doesn’t need to posture. If anything, pushback tends to signal the opposite: that there’s not much at stake to protect. Screening, at its core, isn’t about ego. It’s about both of us walking in with our safety and discretion intact."
I read your post and thought, sure, normal stuff until this paragraph. I wasn't pushing back against screening either, just a reminder of the...well, why repeat myself. I did add a suggestion of not needing to beat that horse but now you've decided to throw in a few kicks, I'll clear it up once again. Even though it has been explained numerous times, it's the way in which the answers changed as the goal posts moved, It literally went from nothing is kept after a client passed inspection to being needed in case of a health emergency during wham bam time and immediate family would have to be contacted to we only retain enough information to verify a repeating client BUT we have our ways of securing the info and we can't disclose that because blah, blah ... I think I may have forgotten a few other variants in there because I'm going from distant memory. I could go back and filter the many debates between you, another provider and I but I'd rather save myself the time and let it be with the; arguments lose credibility when it comes out of both sides of the mouth.
To the point you were trying to make that the high rolling successful men you have for clientele aren't concerned about leaving a paper trail connecting them to illegal activities that would cause career ending embarrassment to their companies, firms or agencies and if they're married, massive financial loss is honestly, beyond believable. I'm not calling you a liar but I will call them irresponsibly naive. Generally, people don't elevate to the executive level by leaving loose ends laying around that could come back 2 months or 5 years later and destroy all they have accomplished, especially when they're pushing into their senior years where it may be impossible to make that climb or build it all over again. But, maybe your time is worth trading the Mcmansion on 'Tonka and winter in Naples for living in a Bloomington apartment and selling cars for Rudy Luther and suddenly counting on the SS check they used to joke about. That said, Robert Kraft did walk into a massage parlor and got himself arrested so maybe!!!
The topper that really caught my eye is the point that you are able to turn this into a power struggle, lol. The fools calling for a boycott can't be taken seriously and the guys (waving my hand, here!) that have told others to move on don't seem to be much of a threat take away your power. You are free to roar without any hindrance from me, lol.
Anyhow, hoping your new friend is working out with his(?) training. If you want to capitulate and reply with not wanting to "read all of that" again, that's fine too.
-- Modified on 9/23/2025 7:37:04 PM
I don’t need to rehash the entire thread, because in my experience what MY practice is, is straightforward: I screen, I mitigate risk, I delete what isn’t needed. Period. You can call that “moving goalposts” if you want, but what you’re really describing with respect to other providers are variations of the same principle adapted to different situations. That’s not inconsistency, that’s risk management for their business.
As for whether high-level men are “naive” for choosing efficiency and discretion over endless back-and-forth? I’ll just say this: powerful men don’t posture online about what they would or wouldn’t risk. They weigh their options, they act, and they disappear. My client base reflects that. Your sarcasm with respect to them was unnecessary.
And frankly, powerful people usually have more to lose, not less. I’m not sure why clients assume that because they have money, they’ll be fine. And I’ve seen firsthand how being caught cheating can ruin a marriage. Whether you’re UHNW or an average Joe. Money doesn’t guarantee you land softer; sometimes it means you land harder. That’s why they screen with real-world info: the greater risk is in not screening properly. So why is it that Todd the Software Developer or John the Plumber thinks he’s sharper on risk management than the CEO whose empire could collapse with one mistake?
And let me be clear, my bread and butter are still average Joes and mid–net worth men. To rely solely on ultra–high net worth clients would be idiotic; the top of that funnel is too small. Even if a person only expanded to high + ultra–high, it’s still too narrow. The reality is that a strong business model blends average, mid, high, and ultra... knowing full well that average to mid keeps the engine running, high and ultra refine the brand.
At the end of the day, screening isn’t a power struggle. It’s a filter. Those who understand it pass through. Those who don’t… stay here debating it. Considering you're "not even in the game anymore" I’m once again, left wondering why you’re still here circling the same arguments.
First, made an attempt NOT to rehash the previous debates when I literally said that in the post....."really about how securely the info is kept but we don't need to hash that out again.".....I wouldn't call that circling back to reopen the debate. BTW, regarding screening/verifying I've never questioned the why, just the how.
I'll be concise; my reply was about two things, you viewing this as some sort of power dynamic rather than a simple consideration of risk vs reward. That in itself is strange but I gave up trying to figure out how women think decades ago. That statement sounds like it's coming from Paige the feminist rather than Paige the escort, lol. From my perspective, It's about a threshold for both parties, your safety/our desire for anonymity. Not idealism, nor is speaking about it posturing, regardless of how many times you repeat it.
The second point was about your position that those with the most to lose are more open to sharing the very info that could destroy them, like it's some sort of scale where they both chart the same path. You can say it 100 times but it's still not going to land anywhere where that makes sense. When I say I'll take it with a grain of salt, I'm saying you can believe it all you want and preach it to the world but I'm not biting.
Your 3rd paragraph was kind of a mess so I'm going to assume you were distracted when those words spilled onto the screen. Whether I keep playing in a different pool or not won't dictate the time spent on here and I still like seeing who's around so I won't be going anywhere soon.
That's all...
I'm curious why the worry since there is something called the internet and open record laws. Most everything on a D.L. and an ID is so readily available. Most cities in my state require bars and night clubs to collect a copy of your D.L. or state issued ID to enter. Also to use health insurance were I live you must provide a copy of a D.L. or an ID to prevent insurance fraud as an adult. Car dealers in my state are required to obtain a copy of your D.L. to buy a car even if bought in cash. Most DL information is available to everyone due to open record laws or is already on the internet. I own to companies I've never once worried about my DL information in regards to investment properties, homes I own, stocks, credit and money since it is protected by the institutions I deal with or I would not be dealing with them. If all you needed was D.L. information, Hello let me introduce myself, I'm Mr. Musk from now on.
Yes, that's true but those records are not directly linked to this activity. THAT is what many here are worried about.
I think if you want to make the open internet + lots of PII present on that open internet argument I'd point to more about everyone's social media presence, a huge amount of data collected by modern cars (say anything with GPS and cameras and emergency functions), all the data analysis companies that have access to phone records at the tower connection level and ML/AI tools for analysis. But I don't think that is going to change anyone's mind that doesn't want to send a redacted or unredacted image of their DL/Work ID to be honest.
Nailed it in the first sentence. That info coming to light and a small fee to a forensic data nerd tracing your path to the door just because you took your cell phone with, any decent divorce attorney has all they need to hand your balls, equity and kids to your soon to be ex wife.
My employer on the other hand, would want contact info, lol.
I don't know if I'm up to date, but there is (1) the printed info on your DL (name, address, DoB, Height, ...) is only PART of what is encoded (or searchable) in the bar code (a 2D barcode on a MA DL). The info accessible from the barcode is MUCH more extensive.
.
I will allow Security to LOOK at my DL for two things ONLY: my picture and my DoB. I do not let them look at other info (DL NUMBER!!, address, height, glasses / contacts , etc.. I do not let ANYone SCAN the barcodes. With the right software, they can get ALL of your various ID numbers and other info the State database, including SSN.
I'm curious why the worry since there is something called the internet and open record laws. Most everything on a D.L. and an ID is so readily available. Most cities in my state require bars and night clubs to collect a copy of your D.L. or state issued ID to enter. Also to use health insurance were I live you must provide a copy of a D.L. or an ID to prevent insurance fraud as an adult. Car dealers in my state are required to obtain a copy of your D.L. to buy a car even if bought in cash. Most DL information is available to everyone due to open record laws or is already on the internet. I own to companies I've never once worried about my DL information in regards to investment properties, homes I own, stocks, credit and money since it is protected by the institutions I deal with or I would not be dealing with them. If all you needed was D.L. information, Hello let me introduce myself, I'm Mr. Musk from now on.
I need it get on a plane, ✈️ to book a hotel, and yes you need it book a professional woman of leisure.
Put on your BIG boy pants 👖 and play the game, or sit on the bench and wish you lived life.
Many, many providers still accept references, P411 "OKs," and/or whitelists (aka "verified" reviews on other platforms) in lieu of ID. I don't think those methods of verification are going anywhere, anytime soon.
.
I understand you choose not to accept references, which is entirely your prerogative, of course. Your body, your rules. ALWAYS. However, providers who choose to verify without an ID should not be seen as any less professional than those that do.
I don’t understand how anyone can rely on a reference from time they do not know personally. P411 okays hold no merit. The majority of providers have no idea p411 does not screen for our safety. I am no longer on p411 because of the entitlement members feel they have with their list of okays. After being on that site forever I realize it’s a joke. I’ve reached out to providers who don’t remember, but ya I okayed them. My last client from that site shot and killed his brother. I highly doubt p411 posted his criminal background even now that he was on the news. Why pay for a site that does not screen, but says they do? It not a verification site it’s an advertisement site we providers pay to be on and share information about clients for free. 🤔
I’ve been around for over twenty years. I have integrity. The fact is there is no trustworthy person who I have never met and do not know personally, so why would I rely on a reference from a provider who could be mentally unstable, bat shit crazy, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol? It’s the dumbest thing ever. I don’t care who your references are. If you think I’m going to share your personal information this late in the game you are on the wrong playing field.
I’m a single mom raising two young men in training. I have 100% sole and legal custody. I fought the non-custodial parent and his attorney in court. I represented myself in trial & won. We all have something to loose. By being in this board it’s risky. Life requires taking risks. Why continue to whine? Move on it’s that simple. Same with deposits. I’ve required them since 2010. Get over it. Find a provider who fits your needs.
You do you. Full stop. My only point was that many other women choose not to use ID, or any RW info, and can still be just as professional as you. I would hope you would agree with that.
I have never seen such hate for the only company that makes an effort to keep providers safe ( P-411 ) . Not sure what happened to the Queen , but it must have been bad. Is p-411 trying to make a profit ? Yes, but whos not ? Plus its free for providers.
They tried to make her follow the same rules as anyone else. According to her, she's really special.
A paper trail proving that one boarded a plane or purchased a bottle of scotch will likely never be used as indisputable evidence against a client. As some horny dudes in Boston and a few other places have recently found out, a copy of their DL's or personal info in the database proved to be quite problematic and most difficult to explain.
It wasn't quite the copies of the license but rather the matching to the surveillance footage showing the person coming and going from the location at the times the phone text records indicated. No doubt that made things easier but unless the claim is that only those 30 odd people (those that were already charge and the claimed additional to be charged but given the outcome I suspect none will be) provided images of their license and used a traceable phone number I think the conclusion is that many others were just not as interesting to LE or to the local politicians.
I think a lot of this comes down to the difference in risk when visiting an independent or an agency. With an independent provider your biggest risks are probably doxing, harassment, extortion and identity theft. With an agency, the biggest risk is probably getting arrested. We've seen plenty of independent girls get pissed off at a client and they decide to retaliate by posting a guys personal info on twitter. Sometimes providers get into drugs which can cause erratic behavior. This type of risk is usually mitigated by an agency, since the records are going to be centrally managed. The problem with agencies is that they are much more likely to be investigated by the police. Their meticulous record keeping and safety/security measures are great until they end up in the hands of police.
.
I get a feeling that many of these agencies are going to come under increased scrutiny. Many jurisdictions have had a laissez-faire policy when it comes to sex work. It seems like the pendulum is starting to swing in the other direction. Also, many of these agencies use immigrants who probably don't have legal status. These agencies aren't exactly discreet, many can be found with simple google searches. I'd expect a few of them to get busted.
Agencies are not likely to misuse or be careless with your information, and even less likely to dox you. Doxxing would quickly be picked up on this board and made public. Agencies thrive on trustworthiness and will not risk their business over ONE customer they may have a beef with unless it involves physical abuse to their ladies, which they can justify to their other customers.
However, with higher volume comes more scrutiny by LE, which MAY put an agency owner in a position to have to cooperate in exchange for mitigation of the penalties they may face if busted. Printing out the customer list only takes a few minutes.
I generally agree with your points about agency versus independents. But I would note that I think people over state the information the agencies are keeping. I certainly don't know for a fact but as I recall from some of the details from the Boston cases seemed that agency did not really keep much. I want to say that no copies of drivers licenses were collected from the agency phones or computers -- just some limited info: phone number, race, age and probably some made up name associated with phone contact list. I think that was a bit different from the older King County bust where I think LE did collect pics of work IDs and DLs -- so perhaps things changed or just different groups function differently.
I'm also much less sure about the situation of ICE going after agencies because they support non-US citizens. ICE is much more interested in numbers and collection 1 to a few girls at a location or even several locations just is not going to be worth it from a resource and meeting the quota counts perspective. Doesn't change the observation that an agency will more likely of interest to LE than chasing after individuals -- hard to make a trafficking claim about some independent working for herself -- Hey Scarlet, you trafficking yourself????
It's been several months but I may have visited a Kgirl type agency in MPLS (just to drop off some cookies, of course) and I was vetted solely by being a long term TER member. My burner # is in their database and they know me as Snafu929 only. I sport a baseball cap pulled low and sunglasses when coming/going and walk with a slight limp but sometimes I forget which leg/foot should hurt, but not as bad as Keyser Soze from the Usual Suspects and I always park a block away and leave the phone in the car.
Why does this matter? This agency now has managers and escorts booked on a variety of charges after getting busted.
So, dependent on how good their facial recognition software would determine the only chance of putting me at the scene. I'm good with that but I wouldn't be very good if at one time sent them a pic of my license.
If you are seeing providers right now that are here illegally this is going to keep happening. ICE is going nuts right now and the AMP are sitting ducks. There was one just a few towns over from me that was shut down. The local PDs used to just shut them down for not having a massage license and give out prostitution tickets. Now with ICE involved, which is federal, it is a whole different ball game. I am not sure how many case files the Hennepin County DA has on their desk, that is really going to be the determining factor if they try to add cases against the clients in these AMP busts. I highly doubt any of these sketchy AMPs have facial recognition software in their security cameras, but who knows.
I’m not even in the game anymore, more than enough to keep me busy once a whole new world opened up.
Over in NYC you pretty much need to either provide your ID, work information, or a reference to see any reputable lady. To me, just requiring an ID and not anything else is actually pretty minimal; many will want a reference and your LinkedIn page to go along with it.
I don’t love sending my information out, but I do some research and try my best to ensure I’m working with a professional. With that in mind I don’t think twice about it.
If you’re unable to do this it just limits your options a bit, but less so with agencies (at least near me).
That providing real ID in order to engage in an illegal activity is NEVER a problem for them . . . . until it is. There are hundreds of threads on this board started by desperate mongers who were being squeezed in some way by a provider they gave their real-life information to. Once they have your real ID, they can turn this information into cash, lest you find your personal information on social media from a provider who will recount in detail the times she saw you as you paid for sex. This is a life-changing disaster for most men who have families, yet time and again, they are willing to compromise their privacy for pussy. Do a search of this board and read about those whose lives were turned upside down by being doxed by a provider. Think about what you have to lose. I have seen over 1100 providers and have never given my personal information to a provider for screening. I will negotiate another way to do it, usually with provider references.
LE in NYC has officially taken the position that it will not prosecute for prostitution. Therefore, the risk of DLs or other info showing up publicly in a bust is nonexistent.
But even elsewhere, it seems the risk with reputable independents is nil. An individual escort is too small potatoes for LE to go after. A brothel or AMP? Maybe.
pb
NYPD (or any law enforcement agency operating in NYC) has no say in prosecutions or DPs after arrest and booking.
Those are decisions made solely by the county District Attorney's offices.
(DP = decline to prosecute)
Scarlette is correct in her reply . Comply or go elsewhere. There are other choices and one or many of the following adjectives will appply- older ,younger Cheaper More expensive, Dp’s, no Dp’s, thin, fat need PI , does not need , accepts references doesnot.
Though the years have gotten to know quite well some providers and can tell you that when a website says she needs this or that that there are many sending it. Have sat in a living room and seen them overwhelmed with requests . Many are novices and accept then get as written but Definitley out number those that refuse
Therefore guess who get first second and third chance at date?
Then again if they have not done their research are the ones who are arrested or robbed.
I'm not doing it. I don't give ID to any of the people I engage in illegal activity with. I wonder if my drug dealer is going to start asking for ID.
Years ago I had a hooker ask me for a selfie. She said she liked to make sure she didn't know the person IRL. I told her to send me a selfie, and I'd tell her if I knew her. She said it didn't work that way, so I blew her off.
If providers want to share their personal info with me, we can chat about me handing over my ID. Otherwise, it's a showstopper, especially if I already have vetting like P411, etc.
I'm fine accepting that there will be hookers I'll never get to stick my pecker in because they think they're entitled to my professional or real world info just for the privilege of paying them to fuck.
Relating a Service Provider to a Drug Dealer is a pretty false equivalency. Only one of those people is getting naked and letting you inside of them, which warrants a fair bit more caution than passing a baggie.
I'm also sure that your casual misogyny is a real hit with the ladies.
In both instances you're paying someone for an illegal activity. In both instances, someone has information about you that can damage your reputation or get you in trouble with the law. In both instances you should exercise caution when dealing with them.
The guy posting above clearly knows less about drug dealers than hookers. You REALLY need to trust your drug dealer these days. lol
pass a baggie? jesus.
And I do trust my drug dealer. But I also have never had my dealer naked and folded like a pretzel with my cock inside of them. Sure, there is inherent risk with both transactions, but one of them is a bit more delicate than the other. If you can't see the difference, you're either gaslighting, or fucking stupid.
I know which one my money is on...
I'm sure you make a great lapdog when you aren't trying to white knight at every opportunity.
I'm sorry you take offense to me not being a misogynist piece of shit.
from a guy who has been here 10 minutes, relatively speaking, has 10 reviews and thinks he is an expert on this business. It's typical of those who will be back here starting a new thread on how they got doxed and asking what they can do about it. Once you are fucked with your real ID, there is little you can do to make it better. In this respect, as others have said, drugs and pussy are not much different. Illegal is illegal. Giving your real ID to do something illegal makes you the low-hanging fruit for prosecution.
Then don't waste a provider's time that require certain information to see them. If the provider you contacted said they require a selfie and you did not want to send one, why contact her in the first place? Trying to negotiate screening is dirt ball behavior. If the screening/rates are not what you are willing to send or spend, MOVE ON and find another provider. My ad as well as most other reputable providers clearly states everything that we require to book. Don't waste my time or another provider's time with your nonsense. This is not entitlement, we are running a business. If you don't like the rules of one business find another one. Bitchin and trying to negotiate gets you no where but looking like a fool.
I've never hit up a provider that asked for things I'm not willing to provide. In the case I mentioned, she asked for the selfie with no indication on her site it was a requirement.
I agree about the entitlement. You aren't entitled to my business if you ask for onerous bullshit. Your privacy is no more precious than mine, and there's no pussy in the world worth handing your real world info over for.
You know, As much time as some of you women spend on this board, business must not be booming.
That's quite an accomplishment. Did you go to school for that unique skill set or was it innate? How about you worry about your post per minute average and let the women do the same? 
I have an appointment to suck another dick in 2 hours. And no, it will not be yours. LOL
I am also an open sex worker and I do sessions out of my home. Feel free to peddle your precious "entitlement" and "privacy" bullshit elsewhere, you are barking up the wrong tree with those allegations towards me.
xoxo
I have an appointment to suck another dick in 2 hours. And no, it will not be yours. LOL
xoxo
And yet you are still on here posting. Odd.
xoxo
chicks in a dive bar with NSA is an attractive proposition. You just have to remember that beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
no need for long winded discussions... i am happy to exchange my real name and DL license for her license and real name. if she won't .. i move on.
No need for long winded discussions....screening is not negotiable. Attempting to negotiate a provider's screening is dirt ball behavior, and that is exactly what you are doing. MOVE ON to another provider. It is that simple.
Have you actually met a provider before? Because that's not how it works at alll.
"Several years" ago in Atlanta------it was kinda normal to have to show your drivers license and airline ticket to the gal unless you all have seen her previously....but on the first visit...Yep....that was the routine....
Why the airline ticket? She didn't want to deal with the greyhound or Amtrak riff raff?
You figure it out Scarlet......only offering some background on the way it once was......I can only surmise.....and I will keep my "Surmise" to myself.....!
This was way BITOD. I think they just wanted to see a match in the name on your ID and plane ticket. Maybe also proof that you flew in from some place and were therefore not local LE.
...and I speak from experience on this as it has happened to me more than once...many providers use the government ID to see if they can compare it to something online that proves you are who you say you are. If you are the CEO or CFO of a company and have a LinkedIn or a company website with your smiling mug, then great.
But many people, like me, do not have an online presence because we work "regular" jobs and are not active on social media, including LinkedIn. So I've had providers ghost me even after sending them my information and one telling me she cannot confirm my identify. That leaves only references provided by gals who have light screening, which can be cumbersome and I am noticing more and more providers saying they will not provide them and I have seen one say flat out that she charged $100, due upfront before using her.
Also, your information is not as private as you think. Everything on your license is public record except maybe your ID number and your height/eye color if a photo is not online in full color. And I've personally only sent a redacted ID.
You don't have to actually be in business to get a profile on Linkedin ffs. I just deleted a paragraph of telling you what to do because you'd probably just fuck it up.
i have a profile from college which is useless for verification
have not accessed it in a decade
time for a name change to hopeless loser. You won't even try to help yourself. I'm done trying to help, you're pathetic.
i’ll consider it
but it still doesn’t solve my dilemma
I've seen providers in D.C., Northern VA, and Baltimore/MD. It's completely normal for them to ask for LinkedIn or ID. I always do my due diligence and check out their reviews and social media/OF to make sure they're legit. I've never been scammed or had any issues. They're just looking out for their safety and I respect that...
Is that I can confirm you are the person you say you are and that I can see a current selfie.
sure i want a paper trail for something illegal or at best something that could cause damage to reputation and marriage ... remember what got Charlie Sheen is trouble is he used checks with his name on them !
about 8 years ago a girl i had met 5 or 6 times already and all was great .... got to know my real name etc and suddenly sent my wife's facebook page to me and asked for $5K not to send photos she had discreetly taken of me ... fortunately i know "people" and she never bothered me again. true story,,
zero rational to provide gov ID or linkedin etc etc .. like i and others have said sure as soon as the lady does as well ..
old expression about affairs, you want to have them with someone who has as much to lose.
How many times must we go over this with you??? *YOU* do what is best for you. Trying to negotiate screening is bottom of the barrel behavior. If a provider requires info that you do not feel comfortable sending MOVE ON. Find another provider. I am not sure why you feel the need to keep posting your rationale. Providers have their reasons for requiring it. You have a reason for not wanting to send it. I am NEVER going to attempt to talk any client into sending anything they do not feel comfortable sending, just like you should NEVER try to attempt to negotiate what they are asking for. When you keep saying "I will show my ID when she shows me hers" does not make you look clever, it makes you look like a creep. MOVE ON.
How many times do you want to jump on and give someone shit for sharing why they aren't going to provide their ID to entitled prostitutes that think their feelings are more important that the safety of the men paying. NO one has said they want to change the minds of these deluded chicks, but that they will simply not cooperate.
He also provided a solid example of how it can go badly if a guy relents on this.
Your tenacity in going back and forth with everyone that disagrees while not comprehending their point is is probably why you wound up looking so ridiculous on a podcast.
Imagine "hiding" behind an alias account and liking your own post. Everyone knows who you are bud.
The entertainment value of site never ends. LOL
I was attracted to a provider on P411 and, through the app, requested an appointment. She responded with a lengthy questionnaire. I called BS on this, and complained to P411. The response was that it's the providers' prerogative.
So be it, but I was disappointed she wouldn't accept my stellar P411 profile with 10+ recent OKs from known providers.
If a provider requests TMI, like driver's license or work email l politely refuse. Occasionally, they drop the requirements.
Just my $0.02!!
Professional curiosity, what do you think of my policy? That is to say, I generally require LinkedIn and ID, but if I am provided with two weeks notice and a $500 fee, I will consider references only.
Respectfully asking! 🙏
Ms. DuPont,
After careful review of your qualifications, I think you can ask for whatever you want. Frankly, you're stunning.
To answer your question: LinkedIn and ID are within the realm of common practice and reasonable.
ATTB