what is the probability that two unrelated hobbyists would see the same provider - Julia of San Francisco - in the same month, June 2006 - and both describe her breasts as "natural papayas"?  My guess is ZERO and that these are not real reviews at all.

I just checked her profile, and it is still open to receive a problem report (only one PR can be submitted at a time on a provider). The two reviews are new, so there probably has not been a PR submitted.

If you're a VIP member, and your PR is approved, you get two days free VIP membership added to your account.

I see duplicate words and phrasing all the time. Some guys are shameless rip-offs when it comes to descriptions of sessions, body parts, and things that take place in sessions etc. You'd hope there was honor among thieves, but alas, there is not much honesty on these pages. You can complain, but in the final analysis, you have to go with your gut and not see women whose reviews are suspect or you believe are downright false. Plagerism even in this hot bed of journalistic integrity is disdained and unwelcomed.

-- Modified on 6/19/2006 4:42:42 PM

which helps keep TER a reliable, dynamic resource. TER staff and support WANT to hear from you when you see something amiss in a review, so that they can correct it. Thanks!

I'd guess it was b.s. but there might be an outside possibility that the last one was a dumbass and decided to rip off the 1st reviewer's description of her breasts because he couldn't articulate anything on his own.

Or maybe she advertises them as looking like ripe natural papayas and they were agreeing with her. (I'm guessing fat chance on that one.)