It sounds like we are getting to where every punter will have to offer proof of a visit to an escort and I have never read anything to say that is obligatory or necessary. If we have to start doing that all of the time then I'm "out" as I'd find it difficult to upload things I might have to prove my authenticity on AW covering any correspondence - "I don't know how to do it & have nobody I could ask to help" .The guy who has posted numerous reviews wants to preserve his anonymity and thats as it should be. When he posted his review he detailed the meet and how he felt it went; we learn later that he had to cancel a meeting several months ago & has explained why; that of itself shouldn't cast doubt on what he says; cancellations do happens often. Would he really harbour a grievance for such a length of time to undermine Amelia - I fail to see why he would do so!
The WG didn't like the review and comes on to say it didn't happen - she has a history of fabricating reviews which are favourable & we know she has dobbed a colleague for her own reasons. Whether you are also employed professionally is neither here nor there - people lie to protect themselves . I'm not attempting to destroy her reputation or vent any anger towards her but she will obviously come on here to try and discredit the review posted. She has a lot more to lose "she believes" because it might hurt her financially. I don't necessarily believe that to be true because she obviously has guys who enjoy her company. Accept criticism if merited and remedy any problem then move on. On this occasion I happen to believe Bobdavid from the limited evidence - this is a punters forum and the benefit of doubt in circumstances like this where it is merely "she said; he said" should be with with him. Is the review that inflammatory? not as far as I see; he didn't enjoy himself and it happens to us all even with well respected girls - shit happens!
Nobody wants people to be malicious to a WG and prepare reviews which are false and harmful as it undermines the forum but I'm not seeing anything to discredit his views of this particular meeting. He has provided limited evidence perhaps but he doesn't have to prove himself and has offered an explanation;
I posted previously that I thought Admin should arbitrate but others want the thread to continue. Its no problem as far as I'm concerned but is anything new coming out with further posts; I'm not reading anything to give any more credence to this being a false review. If escorts complain about every single Negative then the threads will become clogged and more and more "evidence" will need to be given to prove a review. That simply isn't on to me
As it is with what we know I believe the review is an accurate representation; obviously others don't
This is not a court of law where reviews are put on trial. Questioning OK, not having to provide evidence that compromises discretion.
Breaking the review down there are 3 negative points which are
1. Smokers smell. Her profile says that she is a smoker and offers smoking fetish. Reviewer should have been aware. No idea why Amelia denying what she has written on her profile.
2. She is on the large side. Size 14 and 5foot1 supports this. Not to the reviewers liking, but was known beforehand.
3. Intimate hygiene. Possibly a one off or reviewer a hygiene freak. He did not say about any smell.
The reviewer had an idea what he was going into minus the possibly hygiene issue. Relevant to a review but cannot do the escort for 1. and 2. as they are on her profile.
Her only reason to scream fake is the hygiene comment. The review included positives also.
If he wanted out as soon as possible and she was all over him it makes sense that he'd not have had chance to take in many details. And if he did not fancy her he will not be inspecting her tattoos.
