If you have been truthful about the above scenario then she will identify you now anyway
If you haven't then this thread is a (partial) lie the degree of which none of the rest of us can know, so how can we be confident in giving it any credibility.
The mistake is to give in to the EAS underlying your anger/frustration and start a thread like this rather than write a circumspect review without context so NO-ONE would've been the wiser.
A review is meant to be about a single meet so pick the one where the least unusual and unique to you happened.
A review is not a "Dear diary..."
Given you saw her several times and the first was clearly encouraging just review that one. There's no need to tell us about improving or degrading mileage in subsequent reviews as YMMV rules for all punters; Sadly that may mean that some punters have more successful "relationships" with her. Little violins...
A review need only mention:
- Name of SP
- Ease of comms and a general sense of location and premises
- How she does or doesn't match photos
- Her attitude to the client in punt - broad strokes, no details about your specific interactions that identify you, no personal conversation details of what she said about anything or you said to her (no quoting of either party), we don't need to know how you complimented or wooed her nor exactly how she marvelled at your clothes, aftershave, looks, size/shape of cock or prowess
- Describe as many of her services as you can that aren't kinks unique to your visit - no need for events to be recounted in order
- Whether or not you got the time and services you paid for. Here you may need to tell a white lie to avoid outing yourself e.g. if she refused a service during you could say it was advised in comms or at start, no need to state a reason, after all you still went back.
I don't get why punters who want or have reason to be (extra) cautious insist on including personal details in a review or other associated discussion or claiming they can't/won't review because they will out themselves.
Those claiming they need significant time to elapse to be forgotten or lost in their presumption of a train of punters that came after them only run the risk of recognition if they include details that are potentially memorable and unique about their visit. Very few punters actually have such encounters where the details of services taken are that unique, Hendrix you legend! Thanks to the other Epic Fuckers too.
Punters who review threesomes or moresomes they've specifically convened clearly have thrown caution to the wind (thanks for that
) whilst party-goers and those who engage established double (or multi) acts can still try to maintain anonymity.
Just because some of us reviewers include detail that might constitute identifying evidence does not obligate anyone else to be so foolish or foolhardy.
You are not recounting a date with a civvy who may have had only a few sexual partners, you're only "required" to let the rest of us know how a sex worker stacks up to her advertising and performing her job.