Post no longer relevant.
Post no longer relevant.
Bro Fkdoll2398, the following points are the crystal balls to clear your confusion:
1. I put my review here, not because I want to attack other people's post. It's just because I, MYSELF, had an extremely bad session with Barbie and it is the worst from my punting experience. You love interpreting other people's comment word by word, can you give me an extract of the word or phrase I imply a false post from you or other people? Actually, I even said "Good On You" when other bros showed their acknowledgement to this lady, and most importantly, I mean it.
2. You had a good session with Barbie. It by NO mean implies I SHOULD/MUST have a similar one with her.
3. I am the first one to make negative comment on this lady, that by NO means implies other brother should have good or bad sessions with her. I don't guess or make any assumption about the reason of no bad review on this lady. I disregarded what other people experienced or perceived, and why should I? I posted this AR, and of course, I talked about MY OWN experience. As mentioned so many time, my respect of other people's view on her always stands.
4.I want to raise alarm for the bad service from this lady. because I believe I am a respectful and caring customer to the lady, and I didn't behavior rude to Barbie before she made terrible comment to me. Being respectful and caring does not guarantee any connection or chemistry, but the customer should never receive comment like what Barbie had made. We don't pay money for comment like "YOU PUT SHIT IN ME". So I want all bros in this forum to know this. There is a risk of similar experience to me if you have not seen this lady and choose her.
I visited Carlton shop today and stayed for 2.30 hr. From time of first arrival and final departure from the shop, all the rooms were filled with waiting customers. Perhaps, Bro Puntexp has drawn more punters to visit Carlton shop, which has about 12 parking spaces within the premises and all spots were filled this afternoon. Without actually seeing, it was hard to believe in today's cold windy day, this shop business was still so good. I think the shop Manager, Dennis, should invite Puntexp back to thank him for his " negative promotions".
Up to now, I still could not work out why the incident between Puntexp and the girl inside the room deserved an "ALARM WARNING" and so much of Puntexp's valuable time to write and reply ARs (hasn't he got better use of his time??). Arguments between customers and working girls happened all the time inside the rooms. My belief is that punters would like to look at bad reports for fun, but never stop visiting that shop if there are a lot of previous good reports (and later verified by other punters).
Punters will always go for the girls whom they know and have received good services. Trying new girls always involve risks (no one knows if the chemistry between two persons clicked). Big risks if a guy had already come and used up his energy and then had a weak dick in the second punt.
I know Mona well (from past encounters) and perhaps I should ask her in my next visit for more details of Puntexp's punting with her that day (hope she could still remember) to understand why Puntexp got the " REALLY NICE CONVERSATIONS WITH BARBIE AFTERWARDS". So far, the story was all one-sided from Puntexp and it would be fair if some more juicy information could be obtained to make a more balanced story to satisfy reading punters' curiosity.
All along, I felt it was very unfair to Barbie, who used her hands to make Puntexp come and let his dick inside her pussy. "Plus a nice and interesting conversation" . What more can a punter expect?
This shop is super busy on rainy Sundays with the undercover carpark full early and the overflow parking at capacity by 10am.
It's a great way to meet fellow bros!
I think it is quite clear that if a WL in a popular shop gets a bad review, lots of people will come to her defense! Unless she had given a few poor sessions then more dissatisfied punters may come out to have a go at her - which seems to be Not the case here!
I think the fact that the OP didn't complain about the first session then went soft during the second was not gaining him too many sympathy votes! The WL gave him a HJ anyway , so at the worst, the WL shouldn't be taking all the blame for a seemingly performance issue !
Just my two cents
Lets all move on
Cheers