Awesome, cheers.

>>34185
How would you deal with a total novice? Or even a virgin?

>>34187
I actually went through a phase when I was younger of taking a few lads' virginity.
I have the benefit of actually being a very nice and caring person. I'd take it at their pace, try not to let them cum straight away but let them know that it's ok if they do. Teach them about what to do to a woman, show them how a few positions work, that sort of thing.

>>34187

Quickly.

How does one acquire a .gs discount?

Do I need to look on groupon?

>>34190
If you're considering it just send me a message and say so, and I'm sure we can figure something out!

This seems like a trap of some sort.

>>34192
Have you stopped taking your meds again?

Do you work for the police or any other government agencies?

Also; escorts scare me, well... Used to scare me. You are making me think that I should try it.

>>34192
If only, mate.

>>34193
I don't mean trap as in tranny, I mean a girl posting on .gs offering her services to us directly... seems suspect.

>>34191
Nah I'm just joking about. Don't take it personally I'm not one for paying for sex. It also extends to not paying for porn in any form whether directly or indirectly (within reason).

That and I'm unemployed student where I'd have to save up at least two months worth of surplus income just to get a half an hour appointment.

However I did see that this AW site hosts a swinger site. That's been something of a fetish of mine for a while, kind of difficult to participate in such a thing without a partner, especially when I'd have to find a partner who would be into that sort of thing.

>>34192
>>34193
>>34194

This is a good point actually. OP, you should look up things to avoid saying in case you get a visit off Inspector Plod of the Special Branch. If someone asks you to confirm that they are paying for sex, you need to have a repertoire of replies that don't incriminate you.

>>34194
I am a totally normal person. I know I can't prove it to you but I am. I've been hanging around here for years (not sure that really qualifies as normal but hey ho), I went to uni, bla bla bla.

I can't really speak for any of the other girls, but I'm in it for the money, and because I have always been a very sexed up person. I had a few tinder hookups (don't judge!), before realising I can get paid for doing the same thing.

>>34199
What a mercenary attitude. I'd still bang you when I'm next in Bristol.

Any .gs lads who take up her offer need to come back here and post reviews.

>>34198
I imagine cops have got better things to do than wait for escorts to slip up. They prefer to chase kerb-crawlers and other anti-social behaviour.

How much would you charge to put shoe on head?

I think we're all forgetting the most important question: would you let a client piss in your arse?

I need to show my extremely religious parents that I have a girlfriend, and that I'm not a homosexual. I don't know how it works. Say I took you over to them, and we ended up staying for hours, when would I pay? Before hand, or after? Also, I would need a back-story of how we met, and fake names. Is it possible to meet a couple of hours before the mission to set things straight?

In the words of AW: "Note: Any money paid to the adult escorts listed on this website is for their time and companionship only. Whatever else that may occur if and when contact is made is the choice of consenting adults."

>>34201
For the right money. i.e. A LOT.

>>34203
Are you asking me personally, or theoretically?
Payment is generally at the start. If you're not entirely sure of timings pay for an estimate and make up the difference, or arrange a set price beforehand.

A lot of details can be worked out via email or whatever, but hell, you're paying for the time, do what you want with it.

Why the fuck can't all escorts format their AW profiles in decent English without 2002-era MSN emotes and all caps? It's putting me off. OP's profile is a bit sparse but is orders of magnitude better than

>HOT ENGLISH BUBBLY LASS LOOKING FOR GENTELMEN [sic] ;D

etc etc.

>>34204
For someone who has only had two clients so far you seem rather confident in your business abilities.

>>34204
>you're paying for the time, do what you want with it.
Will you sit and watch my interpretive dance theatre which features a raw chicken in a fez playing the role of King Lear? I'll explain the symbolism to you after.

>>34192

I know I'm a very cynical old fart but this stinks so, so much of "bored lad who did too much speed and is idly working on trolling an imageboard full of semi-autists" that it almost hurts my nose.

If you're real, lass, I wish you all the luck in the world but a gem like "I had a few tinder hookups (don't judge!)", might have been just one step too far for credence (unless you are actually American and are visiting our fair shores).

>>34206
I have had a lot of requests, more than I can accommodate (wheeeey). I'm not at all confident though, just answering the questions given.

>>34207
Can we play Scrabble after?

>>34208
Are you suggesting Tinder hasn't penetrated the British Isles? You'd be wrong.

I have been thinking about emailing this fine lady on an escort website. Basically, I want to practice poker with her. How do escorts feel about odd requests like that?

>>34210
>>34211

No, merely that the phrase "I had a few tinder hookups (don't judge!)" is so generically and mediocrely American-bimbo that it sounds as though it could have been lifted verbatim from one of Cat Marnell's XO Jane columns.

>>34209
Alright

Go into great detail about your encounters so far in a journal style or something so I can masturbate read your adventures with great pleasure. Maybe it might get you some extra customers. Of course protecting the identity of those involved.

I'm going to need to peruse more evidence before I come to any solid conclusions.

So post more pics (of your tits).

>>34216

If this is real I'm fairly sure there will be a fair few lads wanting to increment their "lasses I've shagged as a direct result of being on britfa" counts.

>>34217
If she was in London I would genuinely consider it, but I'm not heading out to the West Country just for the novelty of shagging someone on .gs

>>34218

What about Mansfield? Maroon will fuck you with a strap on for free*.

*Strap on not included - Bring your own strap on, is what I'm saying.

>>34185

I recognise those bedsheets... Expect a phonecall.

For those doubting toms, this isn't the other chan, for the sake of originality can we give the lass the benefit of the doubt and not start egging her into posting timestamps and the like.

>>34221

I don't think anyone can doubt she is legit after being naive enough to post an email that could be easily used to personally identify her in a thread about her exploits as a prostitute.

Anyway, you were the only one who mentioned timestamps, etc. Stop projecting.

Where are you Op?

fuck it, vIrgin, royally fucked off and the minute of reportaire with a.. gs user, may as well fuck it.

>>34222
I don't know what projecting means but I was carrying the posts to their logical conclusion.

>>34222
>being naive enough to post an email that could be easily used to personally identify
Yeah, I doxxed her too.

>>34223
Near Bath.

A blog, as requested. Apologies for the awful quality, past my bedtime. https://www.tumblr.com/blog/missrosiethings

>>34222
>>34225
Thanks boys.

>>34224

>Logic

Thinking yourself to outcomes that confirm your perspective bias is not logic, but I digress.

HOOKERS!

>>34226
Too far away for me, anyway good luck on your commercial sexual travels and your tit/armpit looks a bit odd in that picture.

I would very much like to fuck you

But then that applies to a quarter of a million people within fifteen miles of here


Weird when you think about it eh

>>34226
>Thanks boys.
You should be thanking us, for helping you to wise up
You don't understand what you're getting into. You've only had two clients.

Do you even use a separate name for your whoring? You are going to end up with some obsessed john stalking you.* If you really are going to continue with this, for fuck's sake get an email address that doesn't make it easy to find out everything about you. We're nice, others may not be.

*source: Known a few ladies of the night over the years (in a strictly non professional manner I might add) and they all stressed the importance of having another identity. And they had all had bad experiences, and heard about even worse ones from people who found out the girls real identity and started stalking her.

>>34185

I'm don't know if purps will make an exception for this, but anytime someone has been doxxed on /x/ the thread has been deleted. The fact that you made the thread and you more or less doxxed yourself might give you a by, but for future reference personally identifying information isn't allowed on /x/, incase we get sued.

>>34225
I remember long ago on the other chan someone had accidentally revealed their email in a MSN convo. I can barely remember what the story was about but the climax of it, turned out to be revenge. They constructed this whole story and they wanted people to take advantage of the "accidental" dox.

For all we know we aren't even talking to Miss Rosie. Could be an act of revenge that makes revengelad look like child's play. They want to reveal lovely Miss Rosie is a whore and has directed half of .gs towards her fanny.

Or Miss Rosie is very naive by posting her email where you can simply google it and find out her identity very easily.

>bannanaman
Is this some irc shit

If it is it can fuck right off my britfa.

>>34232

It was a joke from the /emo/ thread (I think). Untwist your knickers.

I can't find her. Why are you lot acting like you found her? Cunts.

>>34234
I'm pretty confident they haven't.

>>34229

This could be a new breed of UberRevengeLad scheming and we could be getting played like fiddles.

OP don't post you e-mail on here ever again. If you want to delete it click anonymous in the corner of the post.

On topic, how much would you charge to re-inact this scene for scene, with vocals, while naked for an audience of about 50 people?

https://www.youtube.com/v/cirhQ8iLdbw

>>34234
On closer inspection, it looks like a case of mistaken identity.

>>34236
She did say slutmail, I'm inclined to.think she did take that into account.

But all the same, be careful lass.

>>34237

I take it you thought it was that instagram with the pouty lass with 3 sprogs?

>>34236
We just have to wait for some clients with a history of their own to leave her some feedback.
http://www.adultwork.com/2600094

BUUUUUUSTED!

http://instagram.com/rosiejnixon

Who'd have thought, a well respected journalist and magazine editor. How very dare she!

>>34241
Delete it you childish prick.

>>34242
Do you really think OP is the editor of Hello! magazine?

>>34243
I don't know, I didn't look at it. What suggests to you that she isn't?

>>34241
Londoner? Explain why you think it's her, because that profile alone is seriously unconvincing.

>>34244
She seems essentially decent, for a start.

>>34245
Isn't it obvious that >>34241 is joking?

This is actually a genuine question now, since I thought it was but you're the second one to assume he's being serious.

You seem like a good girl.

This makes my ever present doigoonAW/doijuststickwithit conundrum evennharder.

>>34247
Why would you necessarily think otherwise?

>>34249
Otherwise than what? That >>3421 is joking, or that OP is genuinely the editor of Hello magazine?

>>34250
I don't know. I'm not familiar with hello! magazine. I've heard odder things than journalists posting on the Internet.

>>34252
If you weren't a cunt, you would post a link.

>>34251
I've heard odder things than journalists posting on the internet too, but few dafter than the idea that the editor of Hello magazine a) lurks and posts here; and b) would need the kind of money OP is making. I have no idea what Rosie Nixon gets paid, but I'm damn sure it's enough that she wouldn't think £150 would be worth getting out of, never mind into, bed for.

I also tend to assume good faith and a sense of humour from most people on here, and thus it seems much more likely that >>34241 found someone called Rosie that he thought it would be funny to misidentify as OP (especially given the common sense likelihood of it being a correct identification) than to assume he's maliciously outed a semi-public figure.

This is why we can't have nice things.

>>34253

I did post a link, though...

>>34253
I think you forgot a "n't" there.

>>34256
And I for one think you're a cunt for it.

I thought you twats wee better than this. Whether it's correct or not is immaterial. Shame on you.

>>34252
No outing lad.

>>34259
Don't worry, the cavalry are now here.

>>34259

She posted her details on the internet. There is more people than me and you browse .gs and I would wager the majority of them can out google me before breakfast.

I wanted to show her the folly of posting details on the internet, that is all. It could seriously affect her life and that is something I wouldn't wish on anyone so if I'm cunt for that then so be it.

>>34259

She baited here >>34235 and I was seeking to prove her wrong in the only way I knew that would allow her to see why this is a bad idea. The thread in of itself isn't the problem, but with a distinctive name (barring the possibility for pseudonym) and a location, provided by the AW profile in the /emo/ thread a man with barely any computer experience may have found out her real identity.

I don't want to see anyone get their life ruined so we can have our jollies.

>>34262>>34263
And your lesson is a useful and valuable one for escort-lass to learn - but given the propensity of Google to index this site, let's not make it easy for anyone. I'm certainly not going to ban you, but we will delete anything which obviously outs her. Seems fair.

>>34264

I always feel weird when you swoop in and arbitrate, but I appreciate the level headed calm with which you approached it. Sorry if anyone woke you.

Do I have to cancel the taxi to Bristol then?

Cunt may have been too strong, but I still think you could have made the same point without the link merely by mentioning a facebook page for her business. That said, I also think it doesn't matter hugely since OP seems bright enough to be using a pseudonym, but on principle it bugged me - people earlier in thread had the sense not to post links when they thought they'd identified her, and Rosie Nixon seemed so obviously absurd it was clearly intended as a joke, but you were quite happy to out her. The fact that you thought you were doing it for her own good or to teach her a lesson still seems a feeble excuse to me, but I'm clearly far surlier than his purpleness, so I'll shut up now.

>>34265
Thanks - nobody woke me, but I'm always here.

Escort-lass, I wish you the best of luck in your new venture, it seems like you're doing it willingly and with your eyes open, but babe, use a different/disposable email address when posting on this site please; for your own safety.

>>34267

I was one of the lads in the thread earlier, I doxxed it as soon as she posted the email and I was going to just email it to her directly. In hindsight, I probably should have, but I waited and when people started playing around with it I knew it was only a matter of time before someone retraced my steps, so to speak.

I thought it was a lesson the board needed to learn as well, because even though we are all mostly nice here I have posted barely identifying information on here in the past and ended up getting an email from a guy asking if he could piss in my arse.

That was obviously fine and a laugh, we knew each other outside of .gs, but this is of a more serious nature and shouldn't be underestimated because some of us might get a shag out of it.

Anyway, enough about this. The thread will speak for itself.

>>34270
>ended up getting an email from a guy asking if he could piss in my arse

This shouldn't make me laugh, but it does.

>>34270
>Anyway, enough about this. The thread will speak for itself.

This I want to have our mascot prozzie tell us adventures of her shagging strange men. I told .gs about much worse things in my time here so some whore lore would be nice.

>>34270
Damn it, between this post and purple being all reasonable and decent I feel thoroughly ashamed of myself for calling you a cunt now. For whatever it's worth I also think she's being naive about entering escort work (apparently even more naive than I thought if Rosie is her real name), but the link seemed a step too far. Anyway, I'm sorry I called you a cunt.

>>34273

Not a problem, lad. I'm a cunt about other things, like not flushing the toilet after me in public toilets.

Yes, I am that guy.

>>34274
You may not be a cunt, but you're clearly a monster.

Oh my goodness, I wake up and find all this has been going on.

Rosie isn't my real name. The link to the lass with the kids is unfortunate, but just a glance at our skin tones should be enough to tell you that we're not the same person.

>>34276
So that means we can have more pictures of your tits then? Or your bare back and ass?

>>34277
I second this pervert's call for pictures of tits and arse.

>>34276

That was a joke, the offending article was deleted because it was pretty convincing. No one actually thinks you're the Editor of Hello magazine.

>>34276

Rosie is an unfortunate psuedonym, because it appears there is a lass who runs a petsitting business in Bath called Rosie who fits your description on AW almost exactly.

If what you say is true, then no harm done, but I find it a facisinating coinicedence.

>>34274

That's very inconsiderate, I hope for your sake I never catch you doing it.

>>34282
*forth and then you*

>>34276
I'm shocked at the state of the thread too, there I was moaning about timestamping when everyone else was in fact 'doxxing'. Very poor show .gs.

>>34284

There were no 'doxx' to be found, anyone who thinks they found something (with the possible exception of >>34280, who is a rather clever chappy) is a chump of the highest order who thinks that non-linked pages and accounts brought back by a simple Google search of an email address are automatically 'doxx'.

Sage for hating all you young people who can't internet properly with all my tiny little black fucking heart.

>>34285
There was actually a deleted post that linked to a Facebook page that had contact info on it, and it was this that people were getting worked up about from >>34253 onwards.

>>34286

Uh, yeah he knows. He deleted it.

Good grief.

>>34287
Really? Then why is he saying >>34280 is rather clever when the link was to a page that contained phone number etc ('doxx' as I understand the term) for exactly the same person/business linked to in the deleted post? Not trying to be snide, just genuinely didn't read it that way (and as to whether he deleted the post, I have no way of identifying anyone on here unless they identify themselves, so I can hardly be blamed for not knowing that).