Approved List

[fairemily]

I was thinking maybe UG start a sort of "approved list" where the contributing advertisers add a member that they have either seen or met (with the member's permission). All the member has to do is write something on the advertisers thread to verify they member are the contacted them. I have been giving alot of referrals lately and maybe it would be easier and quicker if the member was pre-approved. It's one more reason to see a contributing advertiser and one more reason more providers should become contributing advertisers. I am not saying the providers should not screen or see all approved members but knowing they have seen someone else for definete alleviates alot of the weariness that goes into screening. Providers can always contact each other for further info if needed.

[Gavvy Cravath]

Although I don't see providers/call girls as most of my work is of the "street variety", this is a pretty good idea.

[fairemily]

Although I don't see providers/call girls as most of my work is of the "street variety", this is a pretty good idea.

Thanks gavy, I think someone like yourself would not need to be verified but there are many who do not partipate as much (or not at all) on the board that have seen myself or other advertisers and are having trouble seeing other ladies who require references. Sometimes I can't always respond fast enough to a provider needs one in time so a list would help. We could write simple the handle and our names so if more info is needed they know which lady to contact.

[Ozzy]

Great, maybe I can get into Julies now.

[10538]

I think that this is a great idea, but I wonder if you could get other providers to use it. TER has a white list, but I've now asked two girls, both of whom are heavily reviewed there, to rate me, but both of them said that (1) they never do that, and (2) they wouldn't accept the TER white list as a referral. FYI, you, Emily, have been great in replying to referral requests for me. I really appreciate it, and anything I could do to make it easier for you, I'd do.

[fairemily]

Great, maybe I can get into Julies now.

What is this world coming to when you can't get into a place.

[fairemily]

I think that this is a great idea, but I wonder if you could get other providers to use it. TER has a white list, but I've now asked two girls, both of whom are heavily reviewed there, to rate me, but both of them said that (1) they never do that, and (2) they wouldn't accept the TER white list as a referral. FYI, you, Emily, have been great in replying to referral requests for me. I really appreciate it, and anything I could do to make it easier for you, I'd do.

Thank you, I actually thought of you and something else I read on the board. I am not going to write where I read this but two guys I know were refused by a provider when they showed up. Not only were they both guys I would never need a reference for and would never turn away but I consider one a good friend, she lost out on two great clients. It would have benefited this provider if she was a UG advertiser and had access to a approved list.

The only way it would work is for the provider to be a contributing advertiser and then the member could write something on her thread (I got that from Alyssa). It could be a code word or number combination, just something only they would know. I understand that ladies need to be careful but to be honest having met you I can't see why you would need a reference. I have seen a sudden rise in providers who need references lately.

[wolf5958]

It does sound like a good idea but i would worry about it being on an open board like this. Than again I really don't have a need to be on a list or do I? Joking, the idea sounds good and it could be used as an insentive to get more advertisers here. I like the idea Emily just have a little apperhenction.

[fairemily]

It does sound like a good idea but i would worry about it being on an open board like this. Than again I really don't have a need to be on a list or do I? Joking, the idea sounds good and it could be used as an insentive to get more advertisers here. I like the idea Emily just have a little apperhenction.

I thought about privacy issues but if it was only members who requested to be on a list then it should not be a problem. It actually would preserve privacy to those who don't want to be be screened with thier real name and number. Basically instead of someone that I have seen writing me and asking me to contact another provider to vouch for them I would just add them to the list instead of the back and forth. Also it might be last minute and I cannot be reached to verify so it can be done in advance. I am shocked that I have to give references for some guys who I don't personally feel don't need it but I think ladies are being extra cautious these days. I also think some guys are shy about asking me to vouch for them to see another lady so this way I just do it once and whoever they choose to see after is thier buisness. All they have to do is write me and ask to be put on the list, I don't need to know who they want to see.

It would defienetely give more incentive for providers to join, not only will be a part of UG increase thier buisness but they can have an easier time screening new clients. We could even be more extensive like having number ratings like 1- seen only once, safe but still ask questions if you feel necessary 2- seen only once but really got a great vibe 3-seen several times, book without prejudice 4-never was my client but met at an event and is not LE or lunatic as far as I can tell.

[10538]

I understand that ladies need to be careful but to be honest having met you I can't see why you would need a reference. I have seen a sudden rise in providers who need references lately.
Two words: Elliot Spitzer. :)

[10538]

Actually, there is a way that this could be made to work in a really fantastic way if you could get both the providers and the clients to sign on. Em, you may recall that I sent you a off-board message about a provider who insisted on having a phone reference. The reason that the provider wanted to actually talk to the reference is because she wanted to be sure that she was actually talking to someone who had seen me, and not someone pretending to be her. You weren't available at the time, so she spoke to another provider I'd seen. In their conversation, the referring girl said some very nice things about how our session went and what I like (more romance than hot sex) and the new girl added DFK to her menu (she said) just for me (I kind of believe that because her TER reviews say no kissing). It turned out to be one of the best sessions I've ever had. So in a way, what I'm suggesting is almost a situation where the providers review the clients rather than the reverse. I can see some real drawbacks to this, however. I don't think that I'd want this public, but available only to providers only, and I'd want to be able to decide who got to see my reviews.

[fairemily]

Actually, there is a way that this could be made to work in a really fantastic way if you could get both the providers and the clients to sign on. Em, you may recall that I sent you a off-board message about a provider who insisted on having a phone reference. The reason that the provider wanted to actually talk to the reference is because she wanted to be sure that she was actually talking to someone who had seen me, and not someone pretending to be her. You weren't available at the time, so she spoke to another provider I'd seen. In their conversation, the referring girl said some very nice things about how our session went and what I like (more romance than hot sex) and the new girl added DFK to her menu (she said) just for me (I kind of believe that because her TER reviews say no kissing). It turned out to be one of the best sessions I've ever had. So in a way, what I'm suggesting is almost a situation where the providers review the clients rather than the reverse. I can see some real drawbacks to this, however. I don't think that I'd want this public, but available only to providers only, and I'd want to be able to decide who got to see my reviews.


I just did not want my number given out because I don't sleep well sometimes and when I give my number out I have disclaimer that nobody ever follow. I once told this provider do not call me before 2pm so she calls me at 11am, it pisses me off. She should have given me her number but if she is that paranoid she should learn how to screen. I saw you without a reference with no hesitations.

I don't think clients should be reviewed, only if something strange happened and that has to be known. I once was asked for a reference for a guy who I found to be incredibly difficult but he was okay to see. I had to warn her so I just told her I had seen him but I rate the experience a 5 out of 10 (don't worry, it's not you). A reference should be just to okay the guy and if someone was somebody I would never see again and I don't think anyone should either I just would tell him I cannot vouch for him (this is rare).

There is a private site for providers that you must be verified to join but it is nation wide and just too vast for me to deal with. I read a few horror stories and I get the creeps, it's too difficult to searches through. I am suggesting something simple with just a rating how well you know the person, it does not give a green light for all guys and it is still the providers ultimate decision whether they want to see or not. A example of that if a F/S provider vouched for someone I would know he is fine but still ask if he is sure he wants the service I provider. A list would be a tremendous help for guys who might have difficulties (ex: they look like LE, have a heavy NY accent, very young, are just plain nervous, ect) who are absolutely fine. I am a good at screening but there were times my antenna were up even though everything looked good on paper and a verification from someone I trust would have helped.

[fumpton]

It sounds like a good idea. But how many providers would accept a UG appoved list as a reference. It's been mentioned on another thread that some providers hate UG so it would be likely they would not have much use for an approved list. Then there are those who don't hate UG, but rather not be a part of UG--would they still use the approved list.

Maybe staff could offer the approved list as another benefit of advertising here. They could create a provider-only area, where only the approved list would be posted where only they could view it. As to whether they would add a discussion area, would be staff's judement call. Another option would be to send it out as a newsletter to paid advertisers. As long as a lady has an ad here, they would get weekly/bi-monthly/or monthly update.

Again, it's a good idea Emily and I'm not knocking it. Just trying to figure out the best way to do this without invading on too much of the client's privacy and maintaining it's integrity and usefulness.

[fairemily]

It sounds like a good idea. But how many providers would accept a UG appoved list as a reference. It's been mentioned on another thread that some providers hate UG so it would be likely they would not have much use for an approved list. Then there are those who don't hate UG, but rather not be a part of UG--would they still use the approved list.

Maybe staff could offer the approved list as another benefit of advertising here. They could create a provider-only area, where only the approved list would be posted where only they could view it. As to whether they would add a discussion area, would be staff's judement call. Another option would be to send it out as a newsletter to paid advertisers. As long as a lady has an ad here, they would get weekly/bi-monthly/or monthly update.

Again, it's a good idea Emily and I'm not knocking it. Just trying to figure out the best way to do this without invading on too much of the client's privacy and maintaining it's integrity and usefulness.


I know ther are so many personalities to take into consideration. I think in theory it sounds good but actively it will have some snags. It would only be useful if the provider was a UG advertiser, it is the only way to confirm the inquiry is not just using someone else handle. I think it would be interesting plus for a provider to join.

[Ozzy]

What is this world coming to when you can't get into a place.

I can't get into any place. A few years back I had to call Bender to vouch for me cause I called three agencies (Julies and KamaSutra being two) known to this board at the time and as a last resort I dropped "Ozzy" and all three said "this isn't Ozzy" and hung up. It eventually took Bender litterally walking me into KS and intro-ing me to whoever was running it back then so I could meet the then super star who was working there. Sorry can't recall her name.

Even in Fla I had to have Val from AATR vouch for me just so I could first meet a certain girl down here.

[desilove]

I think that it is a good idea..many do not feel comf with giving personal info for a screening process, so a prov ref can be helpful in avoiding that..i myself will not bypass screening in place of a ref from anyone but you, malissa or kelly but do get many requests for ref's from out of state and in state girls....our method between us deff helps limit trying to contact each other for refs and me and malissa do it now as well but this would deff be something i think would benefit many...i have used the white list on some occasion for added security so i think this would work here as well...sometimes giving a ref is hard, especially for someone i saw a long time ago..i do not save any info once someone is screened and i have seen them but adding ug handles (w/ permission) to this list as I go will limit me from having to fess up to a crap memory...xox

[fairemily]

I can't get into any place. A few years back I had to call Bender to vouch for me cause I called three agencies (Julies and KamaSutra being two) known to this board at the time and as a last resort I dropped "Ozzy" and all three said "this isn't Ozzy" and hung up. It eventually took Bender litterally walking me into KS and intro-ing me to whoever was running it back then so I could meet the then super star who was working there. Sorry can't recall her name.

Even in Fla I had to have Val from AATR vouch for me just so I could first meet a certain girl down here.

The only problem I can think of is that some guys are using you name for themselves. I was even told something about you that turned out to be the opposite once meeting you. An approved list would work just to weed out the frauds claiming they are you. When you are vouched for you should get a special code only you and the verifier and the place you want to visit know. I just can't believe you would be turned away, I certainly would not.

[fairemily]

I think that it is a good idea..many do not feel comf with giving personal info for a screening process, so a prov ref can be helpful in avoiding that..i myself will not bypass screening in place of a ref from anyone but you, malissa or kelly but do get many requests for ref's from out of state and in state girls....our method between us deff helps limit trying to contact each other for refs and me and malissa do it now as well but this would deff be something i think would benefit many...i have used the white list on some occasion for added security so i think this would work here as well...sometimes giving a ref is hard, especially for someone i saw a long time ago..i do not save any info once someone is screened and i have seen them but adding ug handles (w/ permission) to this list as I go will limit me from having to fess up to a crap memory...xox

Many girls don't remember so to add a handle immediately after the session (with the members permission) would be great. If I saw a member was approved by a provide that offered more than it's my job to speak with him prior but I could speak more frankly with an approved member than not. Being approved doesn't always mean we will mesh but it does alleviate some stress that happens while screening.

[JXM]

I just think it overcomplicates things. Guys that want to see someone bad enough will figure out a way in. If a girl loses out on business because she is extra careful so be it.

I applaud your efforts but I don't think there is a big enough need for something like this.

[justlooking]

One step closer to RICO liability.

[fairemily]

One step closer to RICO liability.

Then what about the white list in TER? (which I can't figure out how to add someone). I am suggesting a no names but verifying handles, I think it's is more discrete since we are going to need less real identification. Do you really think that this is even in the same category as anything that qualifies in violating RICO?

[justlooking]

I think that people who participate in that are idiots.

[justlooking]

It's unbelievable to me that people open themselves up to that kind of exposure to criminal liability. This is gonna break sometime, and then they'll wonder if it was worth it.

[RuffToy]

It's unbelievable to me that people open themselves up to that kind of exposure to criminal liability. This is gonna break sometime, and then they'll wonder if it was worth it.

I concur counselor. Kind of takes an opposite approach to operating under the radar.

[fairemily]

It's unbelievable to me that people open themselves up to that kind of exposure to criminal liability. This is gonna break sometime, and then they'll wonder if it was worth it.

What about all the reviews then? they like confessionals for that particular member that they participated in this buisness, that is why we have handles not real names. If what you are writing is the case then we are all liable, ever single member on the board including yourself (well maybe not you since you don't review but I doubt that the authorities will care). Maybe I am stupid but what you are writing makes not sense to me. Will the feds go around every office in NYC and vicinity asking who Just Looking is? I don't see how a list of approved handles would be any different then anything else on this board.

[fairemily]

This is just an idea I had, I don't need it at all for myself. I know how to and like to screen my potential clients from scratch and never rely on references. I am on the opposite end where I am the one verifying clients to other providers and I just thought it might be easier to pre approve them once instead of going back and forth with every provider who needs a reference.

[wolf5958]

What about all the reviews then? they like confessionals for that particular member that they participated in this buisness, that is why we have handles not real names. If what you are writing is the case then we are all liable, ever single member on the board including yourself (well maybe not you since you don't review but I doubt that the authorities will care). Maybe I am stupid but what you are writing makes not sense to me. Will the feds go around every office in NYC and vicinity asking who Just Looking is? I don't see how a list of approved handles would be any different then anything else on this board.

You know there is always pros and cons to everything. In this business/hobby or whatever you wish to call it we all take a certian amount of risk. Yes a list like this might reduce some of the risk to the providers that advertise on this board. I do see the argument for the hobbist but I can say I fully agree with the risk assement. If we are talking on handles and some way of cross refeancing them in a place only assecible to advertisers than i thin the risk is minum to the hobbist and the benefit to the provider is increased. It may also help this board by attracting more advertisers. Again I guess it would be voluntary from the members to allow a lady to add you. But also keep in mind guys and gals all of our IP addresses are recorded in cyberspace and can always be traced back if someone really wanted to find out who all of us are....

[fairemily]

You know there is always pros and cons to everything. In this business/hobby or whatever you wish to call it we all take a certian amount of risk. Yes a list like this might reduce some of the risk to the providers that advertise on this board. I do see the argument for the hobbist but I can say I fully agree with the risk assement. If we are talking on handles and some way of cross refeancing them in a place only assecible to advertisers than i thin the risk is minum to the hobbist and the benefit to the provider is increased. It may also help this board by attracting more advertisers. Again I guess it would be voluntary from the members to allow a lady to add you. But also keep in mind guys and gals all of our IP addresses are recorded in cyberspace and can always be traced back if someone really wanted to find out who all of us are....


Exactly, how badly do they want us? Are they going to go door to door in the vicinity of some members IP address asking hey do you happen to be wolf? we are not participating in kiddie porn or treason here. Writing about an experience that may or may not be factual with a consenting adult is not a crime. Vouching for someone I may or may not have met is also not a crime, I believe I have but unless there are witness to this alleged meeting who knows? There is not usable evidence unless we are caught at the scene of the crime.

How bad do they want me for that matter? I have no children, no property, rent in a crappy 5th floor walk up, no possesions worth anything and can barely keep my head above water. I am not some woman who made millions using credit cards for fraudulent reasons, crossing women over state lines, dealing with powerful men, ect. If I am that important and they want me that bad they can have me.

[fairemily]

JL has taken what was a simple idea that only a few would care about into a federal case. To be honest I don't even care to know how a list of handles on a PMB could be more incriminating than everything else. I might not be a lawyer but know enough about the law and this buisness to speculate that it will be laughed out of court (if it even got that far).

[justlooking]

What about all the reviews then? they like confessionals for that particular member that they participated in this buisness, that is why we have handles not real names. If what you are writing is the case then we are all liable, ever single member on the board including yourself (well maybe not you since you don't review but I doubt that the authorities will care). Maybe I am stupid but what you are writing makes not sense to me. Will the feds go around every office in NYC and vicinity asking who Just Looking is? I don't see how a list of approved handles would be any different then anything else on this board.

Reviews are just writing, speech. Of no legal consequence whatsoever.

What you're proposing is not speech but action: a full-scale consipracy to commit prostitution, which if pressed could be said to encompass ALL board participants, even those who don't participate in it.

[justlooking]

JL has taken what was a simple idea that only a few would care about into a federal case. To be honest I don't even care to know how a list of handles on a PMB could be more incriminating than everything else. I might not be a lawyer but know enough about the law and this buisness to speculate that it will be laughed out of court (if it even got that far).

Ask *** and his friends about that.

[justlooking]

The point is, when the board becomes not a just a place to discuss and advertise prostitution services, but something that actively participates in their purchase and provision, its legal status changes bigtime.

Frankly, I worry a lot about the parties.

[fairemily]

Reviews are just writing, speech. Of no legal consequence whatsoever.

What you're proposing is not speech but action: a full-scale consipracy to commit prostitution, which if pressed could be said to encompass ALL board participants, even those who don't participate in it.

That about TER white list then? It was just an idea but I guess if what you write is true then it would not work.

[fairemily]

The point is, when the board becomes not a just a place to discuss and advertise prostitution services, but something that actively participates in their purchase and provision, its legal status changes bigtime.

Frankly, I worry a lot about the parties.

Aren't you then worried with over 22,000 posts?

[justlooking]

If you mean because of the parties, I almost stopped posting when they started having them.

The posts themselves are just speech. They don't mean much (if anything) legally.

[justlooking]

(The point I'm trying to make is that it would be an awful lot of work to try to use posts as a means of identifying an individual lawbreaker. But if the board itself becomes a criminal enterprise, then it becomes an easy way to kill a whole lot of birds with a very few stones.)

[justlooking]

And just to be even more boring than I've been already, add the implicit point that neither you nor a john can be (or at least is ever likely to be) convicted on the basis of reviews. They've got to catch us in the act. Whereas once the board becomes a criminal conspiracy, just participating in the board could possibly lead to potential problems.

[fairemily]

And just to be even more boring than I've been already, add the implicit point that neither you nor a john can be (or at least is ever likely to be) convicted on the basis of reviews. They've got to catch us in the act. Whereas once the board becomes a criminal conspiracy, just participating in the board could possibly lead to potential problems.

If that is the case I think I have more to worry about since I am more than a handle, I can be easily found in the flesh. I always thought of the authorities as if they want me bad enough they can have me, I have enough to worry about working in this buisness then to speculate and obsess on what if scenarios

[justlooking]

I agree that you have little more to worry about. OTOH, I'm sure there are many *** participants who now wish they had thought a bit harder about the nature of their board participation.

[Ozzy]

Didn't the whole *** thing come down to there wasn't enough of a case? People were exposed and humiliated, but I don't recall anyone other than the prostitutes who were hit with prostitution charges ever getting convicted. They didn't even get formerly charged did they?

Then again... that was bumblefuck Florida and NY is a different matter.

[justlooking]

That's a TREMENDOUS comfort (if true).

[fortydog]

Two quick issues (I may have more):

-Someone could share their UG login with someone else. It's against the rules here, but possible none the less.

-Someone could 'press' a provider to approve them, then they could get access to other providers more easily.

[fairemily]

Two quick issues (I may have more):

-Someone could share their UG login with someone else. It's against the rules here, but possible none the less.

-Someone could 'press' a provider to approve them, then they could get access to other providers more easily.

This is why I wanted to add a number rating scale how well you know your referal. I did not state it was was not corruptible and the provider should always use her instincts and ask questions but it could aid in alleviating some of the weariness especially with clients who might seem to have red flags but are harmless. I say no to many guys who use ladies I know as references just because I don't think they are the kind of guys I should see or they might not be telling the truth, having a approval doesn't mean a green light.

The pressing issue actually happened to me. A girl I knew was persuaded to okay me for a guy I blacklisted. I no longer talk to that girl anymore.

[Monk]

How would this differ from, say, Room Service and some of the other paid screening services?

[Monk]

Reviews are just writing, speech. Of no legal consequence whatsoever.

What you're proposing is not speech but action: a full-scale consipracy to commit prostitution, which if pressed could be said to encompass ALL board participants, even those who don't participate in it.

Oh great! I'm already having a lousy day. Now I'm part of a "criminal conspiracy." Wonderful!

(When you said this, I immediately thought about the parties, too. In fact, this always worried me.)

[wolf5958]

How would this differ from, say, Room Service and some of the other paid screening services?

I believe these services merely are a form of identifing yourself. Being a member there doesn't have a conection to anything illegal. Those services can be used by websites and other forms of entertainment. If a provider uses it to check you out there is no connection from you to the provider. That is how those work. And since these services are in business stricky for the processing of this kind of information it is all above board and is legal.

[Monk]

Wolf, thanks for answering but, it was -- more or less -- a rhetorical question, with a healthy dose of cynicism thrown in for good measure.

[10538]

Then what about the white list in TER? (which I can't figure out how to add someone).
What you do is do a white list search on the client's TER handle (mine is the same as the part of my ****** address before the @ if you want to test) and if you're registered with TER as a provider, you'll see a "submit referral" button. Just click it, and you're done. If you don't see the button, then, according to TER, you need to contact them (through a form on the site) and "ask for your username to be linked with your reviews. Make sure to include your username and the ****** address or phone number on your reviews to make it easier for TER to link them."

[10538]

This screening process is just getting more and more ridiculous. I just tried to register with a particular agancy, a UG advertiser by the way, and have met with total failure. First, I gave them the name of of a FBMS agency that I've used a number of times, but for some reason that didn't work. Then I asked Emily to contact them. That was pretty much a hassle for her because the agency wouldn't call her and wouldn't accept an ****** reference -- she had to call. Em was gracious enough to make the call, but even after that, the agency wants to have my real name, business name and work phone number.

Now I am 100% sympathetic to the fact that a single slip can ruin a very lucrative business for these agencies, and the need for safety on their part isn't lost on me. They obviously don't want any stalkers, perverts or LE booking dates. But surely they must realize that the need for security cuts both ways and for the john a big part of that is maintaining some sense of of anonymity. Am I wrong? Have any of the more experienced mongers here given out their real names, and business contact info? Doing that just seems nuts to me.

[JXM]

I've done it a number of times. But always felt bad about doing it. And now that I don't really see agency girls anymore it isn't an issue but I don't think I'd give that data out anymore. I'd just go somewhere else. If the agency has enough business with strict protocol then so be it. No reason for them to open it up.

[justlooking]

Exact same here.

That said, I wouldn't expect an agency or independent not to ask for such info.

[justlooking]

Oddly, I feel better about giving them my personal information than putting them in contact with some other prostitute I've seen. I'd never do that. I guess I'm weird.

[js181]

Anonymity would have saved Eliot S and many others a lot of trouble.
Throw away phones and no names.
Only way to go

[10538]

Oddly, I feel better about giving them my personal information than putting them in contact with some other prostitute I've seen. I'd never do that. I guess I'm weird.See my problem is that most people are somewhat anonymous at their jobs. Sure their co-workers know who they are, but they have a bit of separation between home and work. At my business, I'm the boss and my wife and sister work here too. I can't have an agency call as it is possible that one of them could answer the phone!

[justlooking]

Oh Jesus.

[misterxyz]

I was thinking maybe UG start a sort of "approved list" where the contributing advertisers add a member that they have either seen or met (with the member's permission).
My parole officer thinks that you have a good idea.

[JXM]

Ouch. That would be problematic.

How do you find free time to see hookers when your wife and sis are around all day?

I'm not anonymous either but at least my wife isn't within 50 miles of nyc and has no idea where I am once I leave for work.

[10538]

How do you find free time to see hookers when your wife and sis are around all day?
That's easy: my doctor said that because I'm overweight, I have to do 45 minutes of exercise every day, so everyone knows that I go to the gym every day, and come back after having taken a shower. So it is pretty simple for me to skip the gym sometimes and go for a different sort of workout.

[KatherineCharms]

Emily, I think it's an amazing idea. You could also start a private community with just the girls and have them enter in "White Listed" men. That way it wouldn't be out in the open and communication between the ladies would be easier. Like a Yahoo Group or something. I am a member of DZ411, I think we have a white list section on there too.

[Monk]

Since I don't tend to repeat with the same girl too often, personal references have always been a problem. On the other hand, you'd be surprised how many providers post all of these screening requirements, but if you contact them directly by phone and strike up a conversation often most of the screening gets thrown by the wayside. Not always the case, but it's happened several times — enough that I don't always cross them off my list without even trying to make contact the way I used to.

[fortydog]

.....
The pressing issue actually happened to me. A girl I knew was persuaded to okay me for a guy I blacklisted. I no longer talk to that girl anymore.

Was it LE or something else doing the pressing?

[fairemily]

Emily, I think it's an amazing idea. You could also start a private community with just the girls and have them enter in "White Listed" men. That way it wouldn't be out in the open and communication between the ladies would be easier. Like a Yahoo Group or something. I am a member of DZ411, I think we have a white list section on there too.

Thank you, I think DZ is a great site but I become too overwhemed with the information. I was hoping to create an exclusive go list separated from a stay away list. Whenever I read horror stories I start to become paroniod so it's best for me to avoid it and use my instincts.

[fairemily]

Was it LE or something else doing the pressing?

I will never be sure what pressed her to accommodate, maybe jealousy, maybe she had some hidden anger towards me, maybe she just has no common sense. He was just someone who no showed once and I blacklisted him and then he found a way to get me to see him again. The second time he called at the time of our schedule saying he was leaving work in NJ. I was livid and found him on my personal blacklist. I look really distinctive and there is no way he did not know I was the same person that said never call me again. I confronted her and she defended him, I knew then she was aware I had refused to see him and vouched for him anyway. I am a non competitive person and only wish for success for everyone but not all providers are like that.

[fortydog]

Perhaps she had an OK experience with the guy and she didnt know about your issue?

[fairemily]

Perhaps she had an OK experience with the guy and she didnt know about your issue?

I don't think so because after she defended him she brought up something that she thinks I did to her years before like it was some sort of weird pay back. She acted totally guilty, I could actually envision the conversation they had "Oh you know Emily, she will not see me, could you drop a good word..........." . She knew he was jerk and proabably did the same thing to her but she also did see him (maybe) and knew he wasn't going to hurt me but just mess up my schedule. After some research I found out he is know as a chronic no show guy not only with me but other ladies, a real jerk. If she had no knowledge she would apologize not defend, I never even asked for it for the referal. It was a one time incident but it does show it could happen.