To reveal or not to Reveal

[Pompal 09.]

Is it ethical to reveal ones handle when booking an appointment? Gen, I and others would love to hear an experienced SP's POV on this.

I for one do not ever reveal my handle. I do not hobby that often and when I do it is mainly with the Asian Agencies but regardless my name is always Vince and that's it. Not really but you get the jist of it.

I think using your handle has underlying expectations. Some may not do it intentionally but others I am betting do.

Ok, I had my say, what do the rest of you think?

 

[U.S.Veteran]

I think it's a good idea to not reveal your handle although at times it's inevitable as a contest win, or a booking through PM.

 

[Pompal 09.]

I always use my handle.

When I hobby I always go with independants and so I use my handle and that way they get a small sense of who I am, rather than dealing with a complete stranger.

Also, in a way, I am fostering my reputation by knowing I will not do a "no show" and behaving with respect and civility.

 

[Martika39]

OK. Since I promise it, here are some of my thoughts on the issue.

First, I think there are many good reasons not to reveal your handles, and probably as many good reasons to reveal it: Jazzitup mentioned one.

In my experience, as someone who was quite active on the board for a while, particularly when I was working with agencies, a lot of guys revealed their handle to me as a way of introducing themselve, for the purpose of making conversation, or just as a way to connect with me through something we shared (a conversation on the board, a community, gossip about the latest drama on a board, etc.).

When I became independant, most people who revealed their handle did it (from my take on the situation of course) for the same reasons mentioned by jazzitup: as a form of reference, and to give me an opportunity to read their posting history before booking them/meeting them.

I have to say that in two years in this business, I can only remember once someone mentionning the boards and their handle in a way that I thought was innappropriate. But as it turned out, the guy was a perfectly decent gentleman, and simply a bit socially awkward and clueless about how to interact in this situation.

As for the "objectivity" issue that people always bring up regarding disclosing handle or not:

First, I think that anyone who believes that there is such a thing as an "objective" review of an intimate encounter between two (or more) people is either delusional, or confused about the meaning of the term "objective". By definition, a review of an SP encounter can only be subjective.

You should therefore always read a review as a unique recounting of a unique experience between two (or more) people, and look for patterns in a body of reviews on the same SP rather than assume that one review is the ultimate take on an SP. From there, whether or not someone got special favors because he shared his handle, or simply because they hit it off is irrelevant.

 

[Zeid]

Gen very good points as usual but do you not think that in knowing the clients handle on your very first encounter does add a little pressure on the SP to perform more so than if she thought he wasn't a possible reviewer? I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad thing because at the end of the day the client is hoping to have his socks knocked off and the SP is hoping to build a solid reputation.

 

[xxprincessxx]

I think its fine to reveal or not reveal as you see fit. As Gen states, there are good reasons for both.

Personally, when I was hobbying I tried, for the most part, to not reveal my handle. That became quite difficult at the peak of my hobbying and reviewing, as some agency owners would actually tell the girls who I was and some of my encounters were booked through PM or chat. I sometimes felt that they did this to let the girls know that a good session would result in a good review. Some of my reviews were also easily recognized by the SPs I visited.

There were quite a few girls, including Gen, who I shared PMs with and then booked anonymously. This avoids the appearance of trying to take advantage of your handle.

In hindsight, I think it's best to not reveal your handle. If I start hobbying again, it will be with complete anonymity.

 

[Mommy to be - May 16]

Whatever it takes to put a pooner at ease is fine with me. If they want to divulge their "handle" great, if not, that's okay too. Zero pressure from me.

 

[Alan]

This is a topic that can bring heated debate. The question becomes;

-how reliable is the info and the reviewer if the handle has been used,

-is the reviewer now obligated to only post the cup being half full version of the session,

-once the agency or indy knows the handle is theren not a underlying motivation to go the extra mile in pleasing the gentleman coming in with a handle, especially if he is a known reviewer?

I agree that in some instances it cannot be avoided, but I feel the question should be should revealing your handle be avoided when possible??

 

[JoHannes(2)]

Yup my posts are my initial references. Even from the negative POV, I would rather some refuse or cancel based on my posts rather than go through with the booking.:neutral:

 

[MummyToBe]

I tend to book anonymously and tend to see only positively reviewed ladies by veteran posters. I have not yet been laid astray.

 

[stillpeachy]

Gen is right on.
My handle is a way of introducing me. I never do this with the intention of reveiwing or not.
I want an adventure and I want some exploration. I do not want a scripted encounter with a robot.

 

[Stupendous315]

True.

If someone is an asshole revealing his handle will not get him a good time anyway. I don't see any harm about revealing your handle. At the end, ladies will figure out our handle anyway. It is not a rocket science.

 

[ardi]

Yes, of course there's that possibility. And of course, it can be abused.

But there's a difference to me between using your handle to pressure a girl into doing something she wouldn't do otherwise for fear of getting a bad rep if she doesn't, and a girl giving you her best (within her limits) because she knows or suspect that you might review. The former is clearly wrong. I'm not sure I see a problem with the later.

When I used to work at McDonald, you bet that I was performing at my top when the boss was around, and taking some liberties when the managers were busy in the back doing paper work. When we knew that a food and health inspector was coming, we would follow all the food handling procedures to the letter, and the place was spotless clean. But we also knew that one may be showing up anytime, unnanounced, and therefore we kept decent standards at all (most) time. And then, there are those of us who actually cared for reason beyond the possibility of a bad review, and who would follow proper procedure nonetheless, simply because that's how it should be done.

It's not the best analogy, but I think it works to illustrate my point. I don't think that there's something fondamentally wrong with an SP giving her best because she suspect that she may be reviewed (again, that's different to me than being pressured into doing something you wouldn't otherwise do). If she cares enough about her job and giving people a good experience, she'll do it anyway, review or no review.

Also, and as a few people have mentioned already, revealing your handle or talking explicitely about the boards is not the only way to give the girl a hint that you may be reviewing. For instance, a lot of guys use board jargon when booking or during a date, which is one of the easiest way to find out if someone knows about review boards: calling position switch by their acronyms, or asking me if I offer MSOG and DATY is a dead giveaway.

 

[black keys x]

I use Winston for anyone that I have met at a party or have been introduced to already. If a SP asks for references, I will tell them to check the boards and look for Winston.

Otherwise, I use my first name, and never mention the boards.

I"ve heard many stories of guys pressuring girls into activities they are not comfortable with using "but on XXX you were reviewed by Y and you did it for him..." or "I'm on xyz, if you don't do Z for me, I will give you a bad review and then you will be ruined in this industry".

 

[Taylor S]

When we meet the sp sometimes I say who I am. It a way to introduce myself. Well the sp seem more relax. I remember one wanted me to write up an review on her even thought the session was horrible. Only saw her once never wrote about her, kind of felt used actually.

I also like to see the response of the women as I say it.::Either good, or shocked or unsure which is all fine with me as long as they have a great time with us.:666:

 

[syco2236]

I suggest that any SP who has been in the biz more than a few months as an indy or with an agency is going to assume that ANY client might end up writing a review.
:neutral:

In other words, Gen's good analogy to McDonalds, in the case when an inspector can show up at ANY time.

 

[anuja]

SPs frequently ask me why I decided to book them particularly, and since I don't make a habit of lying to SPs, I frequently end up telling them that I read something on a review board that made them seem appealing. On the other hand, I don't recall ever being asked what my handle was, and rarely see a reason to bring that up myself, so usually they only know that if we'd communicated by PM or the chat on a review board before our appointment. I do try to remember to ask if they mind being reviewed, as unless I have a really horrible experience I don't post reviews of SPs who tell me they don't want to be reviewed.

I really do think objectivity is a red herring, as the only way to know if reviews are trustworthy is to look for patterns over multiple reviews. Obviously somebody who is in the habit of saying who he is and trying to use threats or promises of reviews to get better treatment is not an especially trustworthy person. Likely such a person would also insist in his posts on the review boards that he always makes sure he's anonymous, so that the reviews he's trying to use to get favors from SPs will be more credible.

Of women I've reviewed here, Grace@cupids almost certainly didn't know my online identity before the second or third time I saw her, Khloe@DM might have known who I was before I saw her (DM might have recognized me, on the basis of my previous bookings with them, and might have told her) but I certainly didn't tell her at the session, and Candyce and Jayda@splendid certainly did know me as Doc Odd due to communications prior to our first appointments. I'd be impressed if anybody could make any sort of pattern out of those.

Actually, on the subject of really horrible experiences, since bringing up Khloe@DM reminded me of that subject, I think it's better for reviews of those not to be anonymous. There are a lot of BS negative reviews intended to damage people, so I find negative reviews more credible if it's at least possible for the person reviewed to try to respond to them. Sure, SPs can make things up in their responses, but usually there are also ways to judge the credibility of the responses.