So why don't you guys that were offered bareback name the girls who offered that so that guys like us can stay away....

On 2018-09-22 09:55:00 PDENZEN said:
So why don't you guys that were offered bareback name the girls who offered that so that guys like us can stay away....

Why should they be named? Just for them to vehemently deny it and we just get banned?.

They should be named then we can all be aware. Surely if you telling the truth why would you be banned.

Honesty is the best policy.

On 2018-09-22 09:55:00 PDENZEN said:
can stay away....

Lets be honest. If there was ever such a "list" those ladies will see a 100 increase in inquiries. And what better way to "get back" at a lady for whatever reason....just say she does bareback (even though its a kak storie) and sit back and relax.

No...such a list will not work.

I do not agree with naming at all...It is the punters choice to dare to go bare or not..We are all adults and should be able to make our own choices.If we are using protection,who cares about those that don't.

On 2018-09-22 10:27:05 jotopper said:
I do not agree with naming at all...It is the punters choice to dare to go bare or not..We are all adults and should be able to make our own choices.If we are using protection,who cares about those that don't.

Exactly boss. And one cant prove it that it was offered openly or just in the heat of the moment.

When I look at ladies reviews and I see a bad review, I first look at the person who reviewed the lady and how long he's been an ESA member and look at other girls he's reviewed to see if his a reliable punter... my point is if we can't either name and shame the barebacks then we depriving our fellow good punters a choice to decide if his willing to take a risk and see the bareback riders. N.B feel free to pm me the bareback ladies and I will certainly not see them if I see ur a reliable punter. Some ladies discuss punters when they in a group .. the good ones and the bad ones so we as punters should discuss the barebacks and warn each other if putting their names up becomes a problem in terms of getting an ESA ban

On some earlier posts - since it is something that I do know about

1) As stated the HIV vaccine trial has a control arm i.e. half of the people on the trial in fact get a saline solution rather than an injection

2) So far there has only ever been one partially successful HIV vaccine trial - i.e. the vaccine gave limited protection rather than full protection

3) As stated by others the vaccine offers no protection against STIs

In fact all volunteers are counselled to still use protection

Recently a WG told me proudly that she had recently had a negative HIV test and that she always used protection - made me feel very comfortable about seeing her again

So my advice is never even think of bareback - whether you are a pounter or a WG

On 2018-09-22 11:35:17 PDENZEN said:
When I look at ladies reviews and I see a bad review, I first look at the person who reviewed the lady and how long he's been an ESA member and look at other girls he's reviewed to see if his a reliable punter... my point is if we can't either name and shame the barebacks then we depriving our fellow good punters a choice to decide if his willing to take a risk and see the bareback riders. N.B feel free to pm me the bareback ladies and I will certainly not see them if I see ur a reliable punter. Some ladies discuss punters when they in a group .. the good ones and the bad ones so we as punters should discuss the barebacks and warn each other if putting their names up becomes a problem in terms of getting an ESA ban

Point taken, though this will end up just like BOOBS53s thread about punters gossiping to ladies about other punters and next will be punters against punters. The cycle never ends it just becomes more vicious.

This is simple just say NO, even if you have to sound like a resounding gong. NO, NO, NO NO NO NO and NO!