Interesting thread.
It reminds me of another thread some time ago concerning a review of a HOD SP.
The SP in question didn't list OWO on her HOD profile, which, of course is a deal breaker for many punters.
However a punter posted a review, and in it, he said he got "oral" from her.
So, naturally, some members wanted the OP to confirm that it was OW.
The OP then danced around the question, so the question was asked again and again. He still wouldn't state if he got OW or OWO, but it was obvious he had got OWO.
So members filled in the blanks and concluded that the SP didn't want to list OWO, but would choose to offer it if she liked the cut of a punter's jib.
So you can bet she a ton of punters asking for it on the basis that OP had enjoyed OWO with her.
All the OP had to do was lie and say in his review that he got OW, or not bother to review that punt at all.
It might go against the ethos of this forum, but sometimes punters need to keep their trap shut, if they find they are onto a good thing, that others might not be getting.
If you give hints about getting something "under the counter" or are ambiguous in your replies to other posters, you will only frustrate them, and it won't end well, and may result in no one getting the extra bit of icing on the cake!