How do I review this?

[+ deej]

Had an exceptional experience tonite, but I don't know how to review it. Suggestions from you guys would be appreciated.

 

I set up a 3-way with one of my favorite local boys and one of the top 4 of 2000 who happened to be in town. Yes, I broke all the rules of 3-ways and hired guys that hadn't worked together before but I was pretty sure it would work.

 

It worked. Big time!

 

Both guys were great, and they were really into it. So much so that during our parting conversations they were both talking about reviewing each other! LOL (And they'll probably do it if escorts are actually allowed to post reviews of other escorts.)

 

I just don't know how *I* should review it. Separate reviews for each? One for the event? They don't normally work as a team, but I won't be surprised if they do in the future.

 

What do you guys think?

[Justice]

I've seen a couple of reviews where two guys were reviewed together. In some cases, i.e., Rick Munroe and Derek Ross, the escorts are partners in real life as well as in business, in other cases the escorts work together every once in a while. I think that you should review the two of them as a "team", you should indicate that this was the first time that they had worked together and (I assume that this is true) that this was the first time that they had ever met. You can then go on to describe the experience. It sounds hot. I can't wait to read the review and to find out who the two escorts are.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

deej,

 

I think if they normally work as a team or even occasionally, then review them together. If this was likely a one time shot, then it is probably better for them if you review them separately. If so, then mention in the review that it was a three way and a some about the combined effort . Then reference the more complete review of the second guy under his own name and x-reference the first review in the second. This is what I did anyway when faced with the same question.

 

My reasoning -- reviews are consulted ususally to determine 'who to engage' . If the team is not normally available then they cannot be engaged together and this instance is no guarantee that either guy's performance would transfer to another 3-way situation, which depends heavily on chemistry . Review each guy primarily for what he brought to the party. That in a practical sense is what prospective clients will be interested in IMHO.

 

Now, if we are interested in some salacious reading... well, that is a different matter ;-)

[Michael]

I don't think it really matters whether you review them individually or together - either way people will be able to figure out from the description what went on.

 

Now ... why don't you tell us who they were ... or do we have to wait for that as well?

[+ deej]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-01 AT 03:10AM (EST)[p]>Now, if we are interested in

>some salacious reading... well, that

>is a different matter ;-)

 

You'll get your share of that, Tampa, and thanks for your input. Your thinking was pretty much what I was thinking but I was SO CONFUSED! (had a blonde moment!)

 

They don't work as a team. They live thousands of miles away from each other. The only reason they were a team this evening was because I asked them to be, on a hunch that they'd work well together. (And boy was I right!)

 

I just want to live up to "Honest In Our Judgments & Truthful In Our Reporting" -- and I'd like to do it without counting chads or involving the supreme court. :-)

 

The reporting part is the difficult part. Honesty is easy. They were fabulous.

[Guest curious2000]

Deej, what a pleasant problelm to have! I think you sould review them seperately since they live in different regions and this is an "escort" review and not an "event" review-although I can't wait to read about your "event" of the "escorts" seperately even though they were together. Wait, now I am confused. ;-)

[+ deej]

>I can't wait to read

>about your "event" of the

>"escorts" seperately even though they

>were together. Wait, now I

>am confused. ;-)

 

It got a little confusing during the encounter too. ;-)

 

Matt tells me he's already reviewed Joshua. And Joshua fully intends to review Matt. I'm not sure where I'll fall in there or how HooBoy will handle it or when it will be posted or if I should write anything at all but it will be a hoot to read about! :-) We all had a really outstanding time.

[HooBoy]

For the Benefit of Mr. Kite and those who may be in this dilemma,

 

The standard I usually use is the one that Tampa Yankee pointed out.

 

If a couple typically is available as a couple (or multiple) then I will create an entirely new file for THEM.

 

However, if it is a one-time fling, then submit your review using the main person's ID and we'll just lump the rest of them in the mix - as I'm sure you did - and let the salaciousness begin! :-)

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[+ deej]

Thanks HooBoy,

 

I suspect it's a one-time encounter. I'll send in something about each guy. (They earned it.)

[HooBoy]

Actually, Don't do it as ONE review, not 3.

 

>Thanks HooBoy,

>

>I suspect it's a one-time encounter.

>I'll send in something about

>each guy. (They earned it.)

>

 

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[Guest Wildcats]

DeeJ: Tell Joshua to respond to his e-mails be it to agree or not to agree to go with a client -- for communication is an important aspect of being a good "escort". Matt could very well have much more e-mails than Joshua, yet he responds very promptly.

[Guest Stephan-Lacoste]

Well if you could understand the position of a good escort, you will understand why some of them can't get back to you as fast as you do.

Communication? Yes I agree with that and Again I always repeat myself but if somebody send me an email trying to hire me and there is not a simple word of kindness, I usually don't respond.

And I'm sure Joshua has a good reason.

But you can't tell how much email does Joshua get when you are not front of his computer and that you do not know his real life..... So don't say something like that. There is no sense especially for that post of Deej

 

 

Stephan Lacoste

1-702-206-7603

http://www.stephanlacoste.com

http://www.eboysvideo.com

[Matt_Vancouver]

Well put Steph: )

I might also point out that I am an escort full time, therefore I devote a lot more time to answering emails, and way too much time (some would say) on this board.

That said someone who is, like Joshua, a student, or has other employment, may not have the same amount of time to answer all emails in a timely fashion.

Personally I get a LOT of email, and it's a somewhat daunting endeavor to answer all of them. Joshua, I'm sure gets an equal if not greater amount of messages, after meeting him, I assure you, he is worth the wait. So be patient, he's doing the best he can.

Matt(has a crush on a cute boy from Chicago)(Does this mean I'm a chicken hawk? )

http://go.to/mattsplace

matt_escort@yahoo.com

[Matt_Vancouver]

Understatement: )

 

http://go.to/mattsplace

matt_escort@yahoo.com

[Guest Wildcats]

With regards the contents of my original message to Joshua - I couldn't have put it in the nicest words I know - and I meant it - based on the reviews he's gotten. My first communication was on 12/26 and he responded on 1/3 asking for my physical description and with a pic. I responded on 1/5, and then 1/9 -- with no response. It is now 1/23. Maybe the seasoned escorts here may give an advice to him on how to properly say nay to a client he's not interested in (could plain ignoring messages the more proper way? - i don't know). Alright he's a full-time student, though I wonder how prompt he responded to deej, Chi-guy and BoyBuyer after their initial communication. Or maybe the seasoned clients could tell me if I am over-reacting over nothing (i.e. move on -- there are other choices here in Chicago, including a most pleasant guy <to say the least about Matt> who visited Chicago in the midst of winter).

What the heck - I guess I'll just move on, although I really like Joshua's pic.

[+ deej]

>Actually, Don't do it as ONE

>review, not 3.

 

Huh? :-)

 

Don't do it as one but not the other either?

 

LOL

 

Love ya, HooBoy, but you rushed through this one a little too quick. ;-)

[+ deej]

>Matt(has a crush on a cute

>boy from Chicago)(Does this mean

>I'm a chicken hawk? )

 

This message doesn't make you a chicken hawk, but I saw that look on your face when Josh walked away to the shower. You were a chicken hawk that night.

 

You've got it bad baby. And I loved you more because you do.

[+ deej]

>DeeJ: Tell Joshua to respond

 

I can stop replying right there.

 

I do not own Joshua and do not "tell" him to do anything. (Even when I'm paying he seems to know what to do. :-))

 

My impression is that he has limited access to a computer and answers e-mail when it's possible. (That's my impression, we haven't talked about it.)

 

If you want someone who is on-call 24/7 at the drop of a pin try someone else. Several agencies advertise here in Chicago.

[+ deej]

Something tells me you'll be back in Chicago.

 

We have good architecture, good museums, good art, good culture, and still...

 

You're going to come back to Chicago because of a hottie you met. ;-)