Los Angeles

Re: my opinion
Rodgerdaily 46 Reviews 275 reads
posted

Yeah henry's reporting seems real suspect considering he, as an avid hobbiist has seen her last year, but only has one review.

I think this is a review the ter screeners should flag.

Harpman60777 reads

Should I be surprised  by how someone with no previous  reviews or DB posts to his credit would suddenly start his account with a hatchet job . Giving  a previously highly regarded K-doll  who never scored less than 8/8 a 7/5. Something does not add up here.

I have seen this K-doll and I agree with the majority who had rated her positively . In his demolition act  of the K-doll the alleged Henrywolfe compares her performance now with an  alleged one by the same K-doll over a year ago.

The whole thing seems rather suspect and gives the impression of a bookers/ agency wars underway, or so I suspect or someone who is retaliating because the K-doll refused his pressure to go beyond her regular/posted menu.


Shinee Profile
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/show.asp?id=162993  

Henrywolfe review history
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/searchbyreviewerResults.asp?MemberName=HenryWolfe

Howardwolfe review of Shinee  
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1240847

Posted By: Harpman60
Should I be surprised  by how someone with no previous  reviews or DB posts to his credit would suddenly start his account with a hatchet job . Giving  a previously highly regarded K-doll  who never scored less than 8/8 a 7/5. Something does not add up here.

I have seen this K-doll and I agree with the majority who had rated her positively . In his demolition act  of the K-doll the alleged Henrywolfe compares her performance now with an  alleged one by the same K-doll over a year ago.

The whole thing seems rather suspect and gives the impression of a bookers/ agency wars underway, or so I suspect or someone who is retaliating because the K-doll refused his pressure to go beyond her regular/posted menu.


Shinee Profile
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/show.asp?id=162993  

Henrywolfe review history
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/searchbyreviewerResults.asp?MemberName=HenryWolfe

Howardwolfe review of Shinee  
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1240847
I would say it's a dis-gruntled past customer. Like you said didn't give him additional menu items.

I've seen Shinee several months ago but haven't wrote a review yet. I would give her 8's acorss the board for me.

I don't believe it's a k-booker turf war. Cause all the bookers know one another from SD to The OC tp LA.

I have seen some of the kgirls in SD that use the same bookers her in LA. And, vice versa.

My own opinion, is he's probably trying to get back at her cause he was too harsh/rough and she face palm'd him.

Yeah henry's reporting seems real suspect considering he, as an avid hobbiist has seen her last year, but only has one review.

I think this is a review the ter screeners should flag.

Sounds like it could be someone either new and expected an unrealistic amount of service or more likely was pissed about something else and posted under a new account.  Every provider has an off day, but without a clear history of the reviewer it does tend to make it suspect.


-- Modified on 5/21/2012 12:43:33 AM

I haven't posted a review yet but she gets an A+_ for attitude and enthusiasm and I got no whiff of smoking from a girl that DFKs just about non stop from the time one arrives.
I can't speak to that reviewer's experience but if you like an inviting tall curvy girl she's it.

The exact same thing happened to me not long ago where I saw a kgirl I reviewed highly, but when I saw her again - a year later - she looked a bit haggard and her service was shit.  She went from an 8/9 to a 7/5.  

I didn't re-review her, however, the change in her was remarkable.  That experience leads me to believe Henrywolfe is telling the truth.

I would tend to agree if it were not for that being the only review under the handle.  But being a one review handle is a bit suspicious.  Proof no, but a bit suspicious.  I usually ignore those without any history if they are a lot different that the others.  This goes the other way also with one glowing review that could have been a friend of the provider.

Harpman60323 reads

of the long hours and unrelenting long hours and daily number of daily clients. I have seen all the top dolls on occasion in a state that a shadow of the how they looked and  performed when they are rested and relaxed. They admit that they suffer from job related stress. I can name a list of K-dolls who cracked up in the last year. All these realities are fact of life to them. However,, in this case having see the K-doll I did not sense fatigued or being jaded.

In this case I feel the  problem lies at the feet of the alleged reviewer , no previous reviews , posts or history. i  see a review where the author is trying to do a hatchet job , perhaps it is  a reaction of a potential predator to  being rebuffed. There is a mean spirited tone throughout the review . It is this kind of attitude and the unreasonable demand guys make to our K-dolls that is giving LA a bad name and motivating K-dolls to work elsewhere.  

   

Posted By: General Colon Bowel
The exact same thing happened to me not long ago where I saw a kgirl I reviewed highly, but when I saw her again - a year later - she looked a bit haggard and her service was shit.  She went from an 8/9 to a 7/5.  

I didn't re-review her, however, the change in her was remarkable.  That experience leads me to believe Henrywolfe is telling the truth.
-- Modified on 5/21/2012 5:35:09 PM

JimmyHenson213 reads

What's mean spirited about the description of the first encounter?  And as far as attitude and unreasonable demand, would suggesting some of the recent crop of K's represent bottom of the barrel scrapping be indicative of such an LA guy attitude?

Harpman60212 reads

a response from me. You can respond to yourself the way fidcuof exchanged posts with his alias. Me I  am going to reserve the right to ignore and reject dealing with those who use a alias for no apparent reason than be disagreeable. Sorry babe, no cocoa or biscuits.  

Posted By: JimmyHenson
What's mean spirited about the description of the first encounter?  And as far as attitude and unreasonable demand, would suggesting some of the recent crop of K's represent bottom of the barrel scrapping be indicative of such an LA guy attitude?

Harpman60210 reads

Through reading my posts, I just hope you would not resort to stalking.

Posted By: JimmyHenson
And in case you hadn't noticed, you did reply.

Seems like him and the other guy do that. Except the other guy can't get it right and his posts are always getting pulled.





Posted By: Harpman60
Through reading my posts, I just hope you would not resort to stalking.
Posted By: JimmyHenson
And in case you hadn't noticed, you did reply.

I'm with Harpman to where I dont like to reply to aliases because we have no history of who you are.   Granted, we are all fairly anonymoys through our user handles, but when I can see 10 to 30+ rviews, or a solid history of posts and a pm system like with Harp, I am more trusting and willing to spend my time with that brother.

I suspect agency wars.  Some funny stuff happened when I tried to book with an old booker friend.

Harpman60332 reads




What a surprise and what a coincendence less than 24 hrs after posting about  a reviewer with no history on TER posted a hatchet job review of Shinee another Henry , this time a veteran reviewer ,but another one with. Henry handle no less post a thoroughly complimentary review. Needless to say he has also seen her during previous tours of duty.  

http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1241919

Think about it as you please but it seems to me that  some people somewhere are working over time.

Posted By: Harpman60
Should I be surprised  by how someone with no previous  reviews or DB posts to his credit would suddenly start his account with a hatchet job . Giving  a previously highly regarded K-doll  who never scored less than 8/8 a 7/5. Something does not add up here.

I have seen this K-doll and I agree with the majority who had rated her positively . In his demolition act  of the K-doll the alleged Henrywolfe compares her performance now with an  alleged one by the same K-doll over a year ago.

The whole thing seems rather suspect and gives the impression of a bookers/ agency wars underway, or so I suspect or someone who is retaliating because the K-doll refused his pressure to go beyond her regular/posted menu.


Shinee Profile
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/show.asp?id=162993  

Henrywolfe review history
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/searchbyreviewerResults.asp?MemberName=HenryWolfe

Howardwolfe review of Shinee  
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1240847

Register Now!