C
cristycurves
Guest
Before someone chimes in and says that it's all up to the mods, which threads are left open/closed, and which posts are deleted, etc, etc, I'm aware and understand this. But members should be able to voice their opinions about such actions, as I'm doing know.....
As the thread concerning reviews of a particular lady has demonstrated, when you allow stupid comments, and negative reviews that sound like they're attacks instead of actual clients being disappointed, you end up with a review thread that becomes drama filled and misses it's point.
I mean anyone that posts a review childishly stating "her calves or thighs were to big" or "she wasn't a good kisser" shouldn't be taken seriously....... Nor should those who chime in too support such comments. Negative comments along these lines can *only* be seen as retaliation for something. Grown men that truly want to help out other hobbyists or comment to identify misleads about someone, simply don't speak that way, or whine about such details. Intimate acts are known by serious hobbyists as being subjective at best. Perhaps she wasn't a good kisser with him, because he was terrible at kissing. It takes two
All intimate acts take two. If a provider was passionless, perhaps her partner was also.
If you truly want to help other hobbyists by reviewing, then you'd *add to* a review by letting others know whether or not the provider was safe, ontime, trustworthy, the person advertised, etc. Not babbling on as to how she responded to you physically, as that doesn't tell anyone anything, other than, physical things about *you*.
I orgasm with a *few guys*, these guys do things others don't and why, I can't say. It just works. So for me to say *the others* who don't make me orgasm are bad in bed, wouldn't be true....but saying that we didn't have the same chemistry, would be true. There is a difference.
So if I were a client and worded things as some boards seem to enjoy, I'd say the *few guys* were great in bed, they had passion, they were good kissers, they knew how to eat pussy, to fuck, etc, etc. *The others* sucked, they couldn't fuck, they didn't know how to eat pussy, or use their fingers, etc, etc.But that isn't the case. *The others* and I perhaps had no chemistry, perhaps many things caused this...... Again, it's all in the wording and the maturity of understanding that intimacy is subjective. But when someone makes comments to pick people apart by their parts....you are no longer a hobbyist, but a bully, and your comments shouldn't be allowed.
That thread imo, shouldn't have been closed, instead, I think some of the stupid comments should have been deleted. Leaving them, imo, stoops this board to the levels of that other board which thrives on perpetuated falsehoods and drama.
As the thread concerning reviews of a particular lady has demonstrated, when you allow stupid comments, and negative reviews that sound like they're attacks instead of actual clients being disappointed, you end up with a review thread that becomes drama filled and misses it's point.
I mean anyone that posts a review childishly stating "her calves or thighs were to big" or "she wasn't a good kisser" shouldn't be taken seriously....... Nor should those who chime in too support such comments. Negative comments along these lines can *only* be seen as retaliation for something. Grown men that truly want to help out other hobbyists or comment to identify misleads about someone, simply don't speak that way, or whine about such details. Intimate acts are known by serious hobbyists as being subjective at best. Perhaps she wasn't a good kisser with him, because he was terrible at kissing. It takes two
All intimate acts take two. If a provider was passionless, perhaps her partner was also.If you truly want to help other hobbyists by reviewing, then you'd *add to* a review by letting others know whether or not the provider was safe, ontime, trustworthy, the person advertised, etc. Not babbling on as to how she responded to you physically, as that doesn't tell anyone anything, other than, physical things about *you*.
I orgasm with a *few guys*, these guys do things others don't and why, I can't say. It just works. So for me to say *the others* who don't make me orgasm are bad in bed, wouldn't be true....but saying that we didn't have the same chemistry, would be true. There is a difference.
So if I were a client and worded things as some boards seem to enjoy, I'd say the *few guys* were great in bed, they had passion, they were good kissers, they knew how to eat pussy, to fuck, etc, etc. *The others* sucked, they couldn't fuck, they didn't know how to eat pussy, or use their fingers, etc, etc.But that isn't the case. *The others* and I perhaps had no chemistry, perhaps many things caused this...... Again, it's all in the wording and the maturity of understanding that intimacy is subjective. But when someone makes comments to pick people apart by their parts....you are no longer a hobbyist, but a bully, and your comments shouldn't be allowed.
That thread imo, shouldn't have been closed, instead, I think some of the stupid comments should have been deleted. Leaving them, imo, stoops this board to the levels of that other board which thrives on perpetuated falsehoods and drama.
Last edited:
