[quote] From: [XXX]
Date: May 06, 2011 10:41 PM
Subject: RE: Hi [XXX], this is herfacechair from ECCIE... Hi [My real name],
I do out-calls only for well established clients after several meetings. I do not know my schedule towards the end of the month but I can tell you that in KC I am frequently booked in full by existing clientele. I have taken the opportunity to read some of your postings on ECCIE and your reviews. Your reviews most all mention DATO and/or other activities in that area that I do not find pleasurable. After careful consideration, I will kindly thank you for the compliment of wanting to see me professionally, however, I will politely decline. I would rather not have you disappointed and frankly, I don't feel we would be a good match professionally. I know myself and my preferences well enough to advise you to spend your hard earned dollars where they may bring you the greatest reward - and I do not beleive that would be with me in this particular instance.
Again, my deepest and sincere thanks for your consideration. I wish you all the best.
-- Dingbat [/quote]
Calling me by my first name? Really?
That's something reserved for fetish models who've actually done sessions with me. After a couple of decent sessions, I'd be comfortable with them calling me by my first name. If they did one real good session with me, they could call me by my real name after we're done.
Fetish models who've never done sessions with me, or who no longer intend to do sessions with me, must call me by my username name... just as I'm expected to call them by theirs.
A real woman, worth her salt, will do an outcall with a hobbyist that's established in the hobby. A woman that's not flexible enough to leave her comfort zone... for a proven hobbyist... sends a message that she thinks she's God's gift to mankind, and that her shit doesn't stink.
The above woman's reply is riddled with inconsistencies, and fallacies.
She claims that she's always booked when she goes to Kansas City. Her in-call location wasn't that far from there. One day, she planned on going on a tour, to include a city in Kansas. She called a woman in that location, to do some research.
Let's step back and look at this from a business person's standpoint.
If she's completely "booked" on her Kansas City trips, it'd make business sense for her to always cater to Kansas City. Why call someone, in another area, to find out what the market is? Why go for the unknown when you're right next to a tribute fountain that keeps on giving?
Better yet, why go to an area that traditionally won't compensate her at anywhere near the tribute rate she gets in Kansas City?
If she's constantly booked whenever she goes to Kansas City, she wouldn't be moving to different locations. She'd be going to Kansas City all the time. That's where the tributes are.
Why go to the other locations?
She'd do it to do what other models would do... to turn the tribute fountain up. After all, why even spend the money on gas, lodging and dining if she didn't expect to receive enough tribute? The time she spends going to Wichita or Lincoln could be spent on a "booked" schedule in Kansas City.
Sounds like someone is just pumping one excuse out after another.
"I have taken the opportunity to read some of your postings on ECCIE and your reviews. Your reviews most all mention DATO and/or other activities in that area that I do not find pleasurable." -- Ding Dong
I doubt that she read my reviews and postings. She probably skimmed over them, or she didn't read them at all. Why? As of the time she replied, I had 9 reviews. Only one mentioned DATO.
Since she said that my reviews all mention DATO or related activities, she obviously didn't read my reviews. The only other related activity to DATO is Greek. None of my reviews mention Greek, because I don't do that. It's a hard limit.
She also mentioned that she took the liberty to read my other posts on ECCIE. It's obvious that she's a liberal. I've consistently argued as a conservative, both in the regional and national forums. We've also taken different positions on the board after I replied to the above quote.
So here's the reality. She didn't refuse to see me for the reasons that she stated. She refused to see me for my conservative stance, and for my strong and powerful performance against the liberals... and against her friends.
This is the same woman that refused to see another strong conservative on that message board... surprise surprise!
I wouldn't be surprised if she had issues with me, as a conservative, standing up for myself instead of backing down. She may be the type that likes the doormat guys.
Either way, her excuses didn't fly.
Nope, there was no "careful consideration" on her part. As far as she was concerned, my proposal was dead on arrival.
There's no way that she could decline my invitation politely. Lying isn't polite.
Her actions speak volumes about her real intentions. She doesn't pay attention to detail. If she could fail to pay attention to detail on my reviews, where she can't see most the review; then she might fail to pay attention to detail when it came to where it really mattered... what I love to get accomplished during a session.
Her reply also suggests another thing. That this is all about her, rather than the client:
"...or other activities in that area that I do not find pleasurable." - Dingbat
So she's right, my time and resources were spent elsewhere... like on a REAL woman in the hobby. I'm glad that I found this out this way, rather than after I've spent my money. Her service would've probably been so bad that I would've broken her "no review" policy in one of the locker room forums.
Yup, this model knows her preferences all right... she knows that as a liberal, she won't see real conservatives... or... she'd rather see people that allow themselves to be treated like a doormat. As someone that's full of herself, she won't see someone that wouldn't kiss the ground she walked on at ECCIE.
For this Ding Dong, it's all about her, not her client.
Smart models don't try to sound pompous on a rejection note. They'd also own up to the fact that they're writing those responses... instead of blaming an alleged administrative assistant.
No comments:
Post a Comment