Many providers who independently book from different escort listings like Tryst, PDs, Eros, Slixta and many more;  or who have their own websites, often require screening by the client submitting his information.   I have encountered that most providers request government ID and selfies of me holding my ID.   How does a provider evaluate if the new client is legit based on this?    It seems this can easily be forged or cheated via fake IDs and AI enhancement in this day and age.   Or is it simply every provider knows there is always risk and must be willing to take that risk in order to do business?  
     
Of course I am also taking real risk by sending my info, so I don't want to do it if it cannot be trusted by providers in the first place.   Even If I redact and only show minimum info, it's still risky for me.  Other than research and evaluation, how else does a provider who now has my ID, turn around and make sure I am indeed the person i represent?

I have questions also about  Linked In being used to screen.  Why can't Facebook or Instant-Gram also be used?   This seems even more risky and prone to false verification than IDs alone.   How reliable is Linked in and how does that work for client screening??

Maybe providers references from other providers is ultimately the best method to screen and verify legit clients?  I really  think so now, but getting providers to vouch for each other consistently and reliably is extremely challenging !

-- Modified on 4/15/2025 1:50:34 PM

Every provider would acknowledge that, I am sure. But that has always been the case. Yes, screening methods have become more intrusive, to be sure, but there are still quite few women who rely on p411 and/or references.  
.
But what you are saying is true in that documents can be faked and forged. It has always been an issue, but AI will make it easier to deceive, no doubt. It's an interesting point as it not only applies to this lifestyle but to everyone outside it as well. The defenses against AI generated frauds will most likely always be one step behind the deceivers.  
.
I haven't thought about this before but maybe providers will go back to asking for references from other women. They may not only use that option, as clearly the best defense is a multi-layered approach, if we are all being honest about it. Kind of like a safety net beneath a safety net in case the first one fails.

I like to limit my risks by not screening via third party websites. P411 does not screen for our safety its encourages providers to their own safety measures. I have never relied on references from providers I do not know personally it holds no value. If you know my real life friend, or family member who will personally vouch for you… 🏆 you can by pass my vetting. 🎯  

There is no 100% full proof method. I like to think I am a pretty good judge of character. Someone sends their real ID & selfie 🤳 smiling, like I requested lets me know they care enough to read my entire website prior to reaching out, and a 50% deposit it’s a two way investment. I don’t use social media, or LinkedIn to verify potential new friends. To each their own.  
Deposit 💸 & Vetting = booking Queen Bia.

* Find the provider that fits your needs & lifestyle. No harm no foul. I’m am sure there are many providers that are sitting around hot & ready waiting on your cash. I require proper preparation. The vetting for me personal is a chemistry check.

Screening is one of those topics that’s difficult to speak about too forthrightly, because the more we publicly explain how we verify clients, the more we potentially undermine the safety those systems and allow bad actors to work around us. Many of our tools and methods are things we simply can’t spell out in public without also tipping off people with bad intentions.

 
That said, yes... IDs and selfies can be forged, and AI does add new layers to that challenge, but there are ways to spot fakes if you know what to look for. A lot of us have become very good at reading between the lines. It’s not just about “having” the info—it’s how you read the info and how it aligns.  

 
LinkedIn is used more often than platforms like Facebook or Instagram because it tends to reflect someone’s professional identity, which is harder to fake convincingly at scale. But again, just having a profile doesn’t guarantee someone is legit; there are data points we are looking at and for. None of it is foolproof. It’s a risk assessment/mitigation tool, not a guarantee.

 
Provider references used to be more reliable, but lately it’s been increasingly difficult. A lot of providers don’t respond, and when they do, some have even turned around and undercut the person they’re vouching to just to keep the client for themselves. I don’t know if that’s insecurity or a scarcity mindset due to the current economy, but it’s disappointing either way. Anecdotally, I allow provider references to be used for screening and since January 1st, 2025, one 1 person has used provider references and funny enough - all four of their references didn't reply. Which is also a bit of a red flag.  

 
Also, provider references can only tell you so much. Because how a client behaves with one provider doesn’t always reflect how they’ll act with another. I had a recent situation where I vouched for someone I thought was solid, and he ended up giving the provider a hell of a time in more ways than one. When I asked him about it, because the provider circled back to me (yes clients - you are putting our reputations on the line with our colleagues), he admitted he behaved in a way with her that he wouldn't dare try with me. I digress.  

 
What always blows my mind, though, is when clients hesitate to screen with independents, but will hand over the exact same personal info (or more) to an agency, which is often more exposed, draws more attention once they start bringing multiple women across state lines & operating in multiple states, and more likely to be raided or compromised. There’s a strange trust gap there I don’t fully understand.

 
Ultimately, it comes down to mutual risk, mutual respect, and communication. Some of us are happy to work with someone and/or find ways that work for both parties, so long as the client understands why we ask for what we do. It’s not about control...it’s about safety, for everyone involved. Because the main reason I screen isn't just for my safety, it's for the safety of my clients/client list - I never want to be in a situation where I have to turn heel and disclose information.  

I know some gents here will not want to hear what you have to say, but its important that you say them, as it is vital to hear from "the other side" from time to time as to why a provider has policy X or policy Y. I wish both the guys, and the girls, used "the shoe on the other foot" test when judging the client or the provider. Far too often, it feels like an "us versus them" mentality when, at the end of the day, we all need each other, with this lifestyle being teh text book example of a beneficial (hopefully) symbiotic relationship.
.
This next point will be reminiscent of Huey Lewis's song "I Want a New Drug." lol. In that light, I wish someone much smarter than me could come along and invent a way that could protect clients anonymity, while at the same time, giving providers the protection they so desperately need to feel safe. But I guess if that magic elixir was out there, someone would have offered it up by now.  
.
Screening, at least in posts on these boards, and other similar sites, are often so filled with so much tension between the two sides, and while that may be human, it is sad bc we are all looking for the same thing; to meet up with someone who is sane, decent and kind. But even if 95% of all people in this lifestyle are essentially good, that still means there are quite a number of people, on both sides, with bad intent, mental illness, etc.  
.
I was surprised by one thing you said. Only one person chose to remain anonymous this year with you? I would have thought, that since you offered provider references as a means of verification, that that would be far and away the choice of clients. But apparently not? That is wild, imo.

Give the provider whatever she wants and be honest.  Your info is everywhere weather you know it or not.  Thee ladies take incredible risks.  Guys can get psycho at the drop of a hat (or one pill).  The high priced providers are especially at risk because the clients feel "entitled" to get whatever they want because they re paying top $.

@Paigesavage  Indeed,  my  mind  is  equally blown....

In light of all of the seemingly rampant discourse as it relates to some Hobbyists  
dissatisfied with Providers requiring   References and/or Deposits, why would  
anyone at this point use an  "Agency" to schedule?

 
TER  seems  like  a  very  clear  choice  to  safely,  confidently  book  by  all  involved
in  assisting  one's  research.

To reiterate:

 👀  Agencies  require  a  Booking  with   IRL  "Information  Real  Life":
 
A)  Your  "Government  Name"
B)  DOB
C)  Copy  of  Driver's  License  (Kept on-file)
D)  Credit  Card   (Kept on-file)
E)  Non-Refundable,  Substantial  Deposit  commiserate  with  number  of  hours  Booked  +
      a   "Cancellation  Fee"  atop  the  Deposit  should  you  Cancel,  &/or  a  "Time-Sensitive"
      Cancellation,  which  requires  Payment-In-Full.  (This  item  has  become   de rigueur  with
      most  Providers  currently,  and  I'm  totally  on-board  with  this  one)

F)  Agency  Rates  per  Provider  are  rarely  an  "All-Encompassing"  Fee-----   Upselling  is  the
     name  of  this  "Game"  and  everything  is  an  "Add-0n"  "Upcharge".
 

With regards to the original Poster's questioning of Provider's means of "Screening",  indeed  we  
cannot   entirely  divulge  our  "tools"  for deciphering  whom is a "fraudster"  or  an  "axe-murderer".

 
However,  we  can  all  work  together  to  keep  this  Hobby  safe,  by  answering  questions  without  
"giving  up  one's  first  born",  and  honor  requests  for  References  from  previously-seen  Providers,  
as  a  promising  start,  since  there's  plenty of  "business' to  go  around....  

 
X0  Angelina  Jones

I had reached out to a lady about seeing her and she told me that because YOU have seen me she knew I was safe to see lol.

With RWI a service like TruthFinder can be used although it may not be 100% accurate. In general it will show criminal convictions and the like.

If your real name is Bob Brown your information with your pic is all over the internet attached to Bob Brown. If you send your ID and selfie to a provider and use AI to change your name to John White your info is not going to jibe. Unless you are going to take the time to scrub every inch of the internet of your real name/photo and have it all changed to John White it is going to be pretty obvious. I also had a guy that sent me his friend's ID and selfie and for some reason thought I would not catch the difference when he showed up. Duh. No BJ for you!!! I check social media just to make sure the name/pics match, I am not doing a deep dive into the family pics you posted from your trip to Mexico 5 years ago. I am no longer chasing down providers to verify references anymore. Also some of them do not keep very accurate records or have good memories, so when I got a response of "yeah, I think he is fine" it is not very reassuring. I stopped accepting references several years ago. On top of that Bia posted a few months back about a provider that lost 2K from a client that gave her fake money. She saw the client from a reference only and the original gal had no info on him, so SOL. Not taking that chance. I am an open provider and do sessions out of my home. I am open and honest about my identity and expect the same from my clients. If you do not feel comfortable giving me your info then I do not feel comfortable inviting you into my home. Simple as that.

YES!!! Being a reference for a client and having it bite you in the ass.  Very piss poor behavior on the client's part and then it comes back to US for being a reference!! The provider then contacts us and wants to know why we vouched for a guy who sent a slew of unwanted dick pics and then NCNS for the appointment and then did not want to pay the fee. This is a true story! I patched things up with the provider but told the client I would not be seeing him again because of his behavior. And yes, completely agree about the agency contradiction. I don't recall the last time I have ever heard of a "bust" where a shit ton of client info was taken from some random independent's lap top, but you hear about them every month or two at the agencies. There are some excellent agencies out there but unfortunately there are a lot of them that are not. Please do your research before you hand over any of your information or money.

or perhaps I just missed it in the thread. One reason I've been asked for a copy of an ID (which, BTW was heavily redacted so you got my face, first name and year of birth)  was so the girl could compare the person claiming to verify with the person showing up at the door.

 
As for the references it's more than just consistency in the provider's doing things unless the providers collect images of the person and share that with each other faking who you are when "providing a reference" might not be any more challenging than the fake ID or AI generated/altered pics.

 
So, yes, it's a balancing act where the risks are not the same for the parties involve and mitigating risks on one side increase risks on the other. So, like most relationships you have to look around to find compatible partners.

There are two very recent high profile cases that demonstrate why providers screen. Joey the Player and Rex the Long Island Serial Killer. Rex used to offer to pay extra to avoid screening. Joey the Player was able to get references despite his dangerous reputation being fairly well known. Cops spent a lot of time just trying to figure out who these guys are. The whole point of the PI is to identify you if something goes wrong and to scare away potentially dangerous clients. Provider references do not provide that security. Sure a lot of this can be faked. However, a dangerous client is likely to just move on to an easier target and a more vulnerable victim. Nothing is guaranteed but when taken together they work well. Here is how different screening methods work to give providers some peace of mind.
.
Photographs: This one is obvious, if something goes wrong you have a picture of the person. Worst case scenario the cops are starting with a mugshot of a suspect. Also, photos taken from cell-phones have all sorts of data embedded in them (like geographical coordinates) that can identify you. Even if you're holding a fake ID, the photo will contain enough data to point someone in the right direction. If you fake the photo, providers may just turn you away when you show up.
.
LinkedIn: This is used over Facebook and Instagram because it has more real world information and is less likely to be faked. People use LinkedIn to find jobs so they tend to post accurate information about themselves. It is easier to create fake IG and Facebook pages. You can create a fake LinkedIn page but they are a bit easier to spot.
.
Deposits: Yes! deposits aren't just a way to guarantee a booking. They can also be used to identify a client if necessary. This depends on the service used but a lot of e-payment aps use the ACH (automated clearinghouse) to process transactions. Your bank account info can be embedded within the transaction.  
.
Typically providers these days just check if your information is legit. Then they check if you're a criminal. They'll check the sex offender registry and then they'll check other databases. There are blacklist sites that have been discussed but it appears most providers aren't really using them anymore.

I see a top rated provider that only accepts p411 clients with +2 okays. She won’t even interact with clients who are not. Works for her I guess. Run your business his you want.

I think it's grossly inaccurate to say "references provide no safety." That is almost as bad as saying "references provide total safety." No single verification method is perfect. They are ALL flawed to some degree. You can do a background check with someone's RW info and still have a gap. Because no one has been convicted of a crime, that doesn't mean they don't commit crimes. But does that fact mean women shouldn't use it if they require it and it is offered up? Of course not.  
.
And not all references are equal either. If a girl knows the guys reference very well, that will carry more weight than getting a reference from a girl she never, ever heard of. The frequency of visits with the one providing the reference is relevant as well. If a girl I know, and have seen 20 times, gives me a reference, the girl receiving the info is most likely better informed about my character than if I had seen the girl who gave me the reference just once. Again, is any of this perfect? Rhetorical question.
.
It's also not only safety that girls would like to know about. References can comment on a guys personality, his demeanor, his hygiene etc and none of that comes through with RW info only. I said it earlier but, imo, the best method of verification for a woman is using an all of the above approach. Background checks, with employment info, viewing his reviews/board posts (if applicable) along with references would seem to provide the most comprehensive way to screen someone and be most accurate.  
.
I understand why most women don't require all of those as that can drive the client away. But saying "references provide no safety" is a bridge too far, but I understand fully why some women don't rely just on them or take them at all. They have to do what makes them feel comfortable as it's their safety on the line, no one else's.  
.
I am not picking on you as the rest of your post was spot on and very well thought out as usual.

I didn't say references are worthless, I said they provide no safety and I stand by that. References provide limited information and give a provider no recourse against bad clients. As you point out they can help a provider get information on a guys personality, demeanor or hygiene. These mostly seem to be "vibe check" items that a provider will use to determine if a client is pleasant enough to be around. What it doesn't provide is insurance, or the means to retaliate/punish bad and dangerous clients. Lets say something goes wrong with a bad client. With references, the providers only recourse is to contact the references and try to warn others. With PI, LinkedIn, Photos and deposits, you have information that can be used to retaliate. For example, you can dox the client or go to the police. It gives the provider power that references didn't. Providers no longer rely on clients to be on their best behavior. Clients are FORCED to be on their best behavior. This is a critical difference. Stuff like this isn't necessary for someone who is a good client like yourself, but there are worse clients out there and I understand why fewer providers take references these days. They don't want to take the chance.

Power to leverage that info if client does something she or he may not like.

For example, dox him if he criticizes her or writes a review not to the providers liking.

 
Now, who or what is ensuring the provider is on her (or his) best behavior? Rhetorical question really.

As is your want. I just strongly disagree. According to that logic, speaking only on safety issues now, a girl who only verifies by references is exactly the same as her not doing any verification whatsoever. That seems to fail the logic test to me.  
.
There are a number of women, albeit self admittedly a very small group, who will tell the provider asking about the client that the guy is not safe to see. So just based on that specific case, there is certainly a potential value re: verification by references. That info alone could possibly save the girls life or protect her from other deplorable acts.  
.
Btw, I have no issue with your assertion that RW info is better than references for the safety of the provider, as I wholeheartedly agree, but that is a separate issue.

Wow we agree.

 
References definitely provide some filtering, albeit the degree to which they do can be argued.

 
It also depends on whose references. A providers close friend who is also a provider giving a reference will hold more weight and make the provider feel safer than a random inter-agency reference.

Ok, just messing. Yes we tend to be on opposite sides of an issue, but that's ok. This place would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything. lol.

Just had a shiver when you mentioned Joey the Player. He tried to book me when I was touring in Manhattan years back - red flagged because he wanted to pay me over my regular rate for an overnight plus return transportation if I came to his residence.  It just seemed a little fishy and when I said no he tried to offer even more money which made me even more suspicious. Wasn’t until much later I heard about him attacking and raping an escort and holding her hostage in his home.   Thank goodness for instincts and common sense.

Yes-and Rex the serial killer was offering providers 1K if they would forgo any screening. Whenever a guy I have never seen offers me extra money for a service I do not offer, giant red flag and instant no go. Unfortunately this can prove too tempting for providers that really need the cash. So thankful you listened to your gut in regards to Joey.

Not all agencies require personal info. I've known a few that accepted P411.

"I wish someone much smarter than me could come along and invent a way that could protect clients anonymity, while at the same time, giving providers the protection they so desperately need to feel safe. "
.
In the security theory field this is labeled "Trusted Third Party" or TTP services.  There have been several attempts to offer this service for sex work.  Some of them seemed well-built, to my thinking, but none of them caught on.  I think the reason is that none of them became trusted by enough providers and clients to sustain a business.  
.
There are serious design issues around just what information providers and clients will require to be verified or vouched for.  Will the service do the crime database searches and blacklist checks mentioned here?   Will the service symmetrically vouch for providers as well as for clients?  
.
i believe that such a service is feasible, with careful design and implementation.  The threat models are clear enough -- bad clients, bad providers, wannabe blackmailers, governments.  Modern cryptography provides sufficient methods to build with.  The hard part is establishing that the service itself can be trusted.  This is a meta-level of trust and vouching entangled with marketing ... .

Are you referring to me? Wow! 🤯 I’m flattered. I would still need to do my own vetting. I’m glad someone thinks highly of me. I’m hanks for sharing.
I miss you friend!💋😁🥰

I think that's about as close as we got to an industry-wide standard/protocol...

Thanks for the compliment. And thank you for the kind reply in return! It's quite refreshing to see this kind of mutual understanding. You’re absolutely right: it shouldn’t be “us vs. them.” At the end of the day, we’re all trying to connect with someone who’s safe, sane, and respectful. There is no full proof method as someone could screen easily and turn sour in the room but it's all a mitigation tool.  

 
I totally get the wish for that “magic elixir” that protects client anonymity and provider safety. If it existed, we’d all be using it. But the truth is, anonymity is never truly possible. Someone/entity will always have your information—whether it’s an individual provider, a screening platform like P411 or RS2K, or an agency with a database. At some point a first time client is going to have to screen somewhere. And if something terrible were to happen such as sexual assault, robbery, or worse, murder, we need a way to identify the person responsible and platforms like P411 and RS2K need to honor that as well. As morbid as it is, many of us have safety plans in place: friends or family who are capable of taking action if we go dark after a booking (re: starting the missing persons process, etc.)

 
As for the "only 1 client using references"; I was surprised too, but I also get it. This is conjecture, but I'm getting a sense that once you’re established, have a strong social proof (reviews, large following, etc), and can make the process personable (re: handle as much admin yourself as possible), people tend to feel more comfortable screening directly. Plus, references have become tricky. I recently had a client ask me to contact only one of his references (so now up to 2, lol) because the other was still upset he was seeing someone else after their year of exclusivity. So even that route comes with complications.

 
This realm is not risk-free. We ALL knew that BEFORE diving in. So, I'll end this the way every screening thread is ended: every client should RESEARCH a provider's screening method prior to reaching out IF possible to see who's playing to their comfort level and who isn't.

-- Modified on 4/17/2025 11:05:46 PM

END OF MESSAGE

....refusing to pay extortion demands or a client allowing a pro to get emotionally attached and turn into a crazy stalker who feels scorned when he's seeing other women.  Likely rare but there are a lot of unstable women playing in this game.   What is more likely is that the provider may become reckless with your PII and let it fall into the hands of their pimp, roommate, "security/driver" etc.
The one that would concern me the most would be the boyfriend/pimp that has been living off of her efforts and when she quits or somehow leaves the business, he needs the gravy to keep coming in.  And then, there's the hacker community....
And yes, of course, no reputable pro would ever allow herself and her database to be hacked or turn on her clientele.  Nobody in the service industry that takes pride in their work and reputation would...until circumstances or unforeseen events change their lives and now they have to play that card to put food on the table.  Drugs, gambling or simply not being able to do the job anymore.
A very good friend of mine is in the hobby and the hospitality industry and his superpower is to go into an operation and find the shrinkage (waste/theft).  The employees that can usually be seen as less likely to be stealing you blind are new hires and those considered to be poor to mediocre staff.  Will these people steal?  Sure they will, but their access is minimal compared to someone who has figured out a system and fucks you for years.  His usual suspects are those that are considered some of the better staff and most trusted and he sniffs it out like a fucking bloodhound.  He's a cold mf and loves a clean kill...nothing more satisfying than a offboarding by confession, followed by handcuffs.  He's seen owners and managers crying harder than the thief many times.

This reads as so deeply jaded, and I say that with no sarcasm. I really mean it. I’ve seen your posts over the years, and they've gotten ingcreasinlyg... cynical. I can’t help but wonder what you’ve experienced (or seen others go through) that’s shaped that view. Because at this point, it doesn’t seem like you believe trust is ever a reasonable thing to offer anyone in this space. Not clients, and most definitely not providers. And if that’s where you’re at, it’s worth asking why you’re still engaging at all.

 
I'm not saying there aren't bad actors because of course there are. Have some providers done too much, crossed lines, or acted out of pocked. Sure. I'd never deny that. But more often than not, it's clients who end up compromising themselves by their own hand. Burner phones, emails, VPNs, etc., may feel secure but they're not full-proof. People slip up when they get comfortable: they leave passwords lying around their home, forget to delete a number or hide X or IG on their phone, and then we receive a call, text, DM, or email from the wife or girlfriend.  

 
And let's be real: when we look at the major security breaches in this space, they overwhelmingly come from agencies being busted, client groups being infiltrated, or platforms like Date-Check (throwback!) and P411 being used in stings. That's not a provider with a sketchy roommate, boyfriend, or pimp... that's systemic exposure.  
.

The narrative of the reckless, unstable provider who ruins lives is a dramatic one and a tired one. Bad actors exist in every profession. But in this one? The vast majority of us want peace, privacy, and safety just as much as clients do because we know the consequences will hit everyone hard.  

 
That’s not to say bad things never happen. But there’s a difference between being cautious and being cynical. If you’re viewing everyone as a potential thief or blackmailer, that's not caution, that's burnout from participating here as a client. That might be something worth thinking about. And I say that gently.

You are much more kind with your words than I am. There are bad actors in every aspect of our lives, not just this industry. I am not sure if I would categorize burnout from his comments just from being a client, but burnout with just life in general. I do not have a secret agenda, and I strongly believe the majority of people out there do not either. I also strongly believe that the more open and honest I am as a provider and human being, the more I will get that in return from clients and from the world. I refuse to live my life assuming there is a snake under every rock and I also am not going to go around accusing every rock of having ulterior motives and harboring a snake. What a wildly depressing existence to assume every human that you encounter is out to get you. Yikes.

As long as we're talking about rocks, lol. I generally stay away from rocks as I've learned from lessons long ago what it is like to get bit by the snake underneath.   Why the snake is under the rock is important as either of them will bite but the one simply lying underneath for shelter is reacting based on instinct so it's hard to really blame the snake (or the rock) when the rock turner must accept the consequences from it.  The snake in waiting is simply hunting.    

Following thru with your analogy, when making choices in the game I choose to stay out of the rock field completely and therefor, I'm much less susceptible to being bitten.  Yes, it does limit my options to a certain point but there's still plenty of fun to be had in the lane that I choose to play.  I've met many wonderful and beautiful women with the only limitation being the finite amount of money I can spend on local sweeties and those I get to meet when traveling.    In my view, the rocks are found walking the streets, eros, twitter or any of the other hundreds of sites where they advertise their services.  No history, no way to determine if this is a voluntary activity or if they have the skillset or attitude and demeanor that I might be looking for...which is often a little more important that overall appearance.  

Now, the assuming part...which appears to be your superpower.  I have often spoken about the ability for any provider that retains PII also retains the ability to destroy lives as long as she retains the PII.  I have referred to PII as potential annuities to put it in perspective for the dudes thinking with their dicks.  What I've NEVER done is accuse anyone of doing this as you seem to be referring too above.  Also, sorry  to disappoint you, but I actually try to look for the good in people which has burned me more times than I can count but that's life in general.  What I have learned in my 50+ years on earth is to limit my exposure to avoidable issues and calamity as much as possible and to be in constant assessment of risk vs reward whether it's this hobby or where I might choose to invest or anything in between.

You seem pretty confidant and engaged and that creates the impression that you've got complete control of your life.  Congrats to you for that.  There are a handful of other gals locally that would seem to fit that as well.  That said, just as there are millions of well intentioned and honest people living check to check and doing ok, too many are just a healthcare event or even a major car repair away from  financial stress or disaster.  Some have family safety nets and some find help from the churches or government.  Without any help, many who would never resort to theft or other illegal activity often find it's the easiest path to right their ship.  To lecture us that "reputable" (your term) providers sit on some moral high ground that would prevent them from serving their own interests first in a major crisis is pretty insane.  A man or woman providing for their family can't dye their hair, pick a new name and rebrand themselves to hop back in the marketplace.  I will fully acknowledge there are providers out there that have invested large amounts of money in their brand and reputation where this isn't just a trip to the stylist to fix.

You do you, I'm sure as hell not going to change your opinion or even get you to consider that you might have the inability to see something from a viewpoint not of your own.    

Many believe P411 is a good introduction and quite a few have taken my profile at face value, but it is always their  prerogative and mine to seek out more information to ensure one's safety. It's a two-way street.

You still seem quite salty because I turned you down the last time I was in MN because you didn't want to cough up your screening info. Maybe time to move on?

Sorry sweetheart, I've NEVER requested a date with you nor have I ever have even broached the subject of alternative screening info to get past your requirements so we could play.  I've never once expressed an interest in seeing you.

I am *shocked* you would respond this way.  LOL  Anywho, hope all is still going well for you at the airport. Take care and best of luck to you!!  

xoxo
Scarlet

not at all, just following quertys rhetorical question with another example of why a provider may "leverage" PII against a client.  There were 2 key words in there as well..likely rare.  

The last paragraph was written to use the hospitality industry as a prime example where good people, or people believed to be of the most trustworthy and righteous sometimes are the ones that not just hit you, but hit you the hardest and create the most damage or destruction.  

When you speak of the "vast majority" of you wanting peace, are you really trying to represent the industry as a whole and trying to give us the impression that for the most part, providers are operating as independent business folks who actually have a plan beyond next months rent?  I believe you and many you would associate yourself with do but I really question what that percentile is.  Is it the simple difference comparing ambiguous labels of provider vs prostitute?  What is the difference?  Having a website?  Listing your Pro name, contact and OF info on a reputable site rather than a questionable one?  Is it just as easy to say the vast majority of prostitutes are very stable and simply want peace, privacy and safety?  The latter part of that could certainly be true.   The requirement for PII is more prevalent with the higher fee Pros but it's become pretty standard and goes across the spectrum.

I'll close with this.  I don't think everyone is a thief, nor do I think any thief started on that life path intentionally.  I don't ask Pros to allow me to bypass their rules but I'll offer other very reasonable ways to satisfy their concerns and if that doesn't work then so be it, I move on.  I'm not cynical, I just don't go out of my way to take on any contingent liabilities in this hobby and in general life and business I operate with proven guard rails to help honest people remain honest.