Too little too late. Has to be one of the newer contributors looking to curry favor.
Often wondered how exactly this plays out.
Scenario 1.
Provider: I want to verify you. Do you post on any boards?
Monger: well, I am vad on UG.
P: see ya. (Or ok, I'll see you)
Well, how does the provider actually KNOW I'm vad?
Scenario 2.
P: hi, I'm Ms. Pretty butt. Don't do this often.
M: oh yea, bitch, I'll show you. See, you are everywhere, that's how I got your #. Now, I want you to do what you did with vad.
(How does this end well?)
Scenario 3.
P: hi babe, thanks for keeping the appointment.
M: hi, have you heard of UG? Here. Let me show you what they're saying about you.
(Now what?)
Scenario 4.
P: short stay is 15 min.
M: ok, but have you heard of UG?
(And maybe, gets to stay longer?)
Scenario ...
Out of ideas. Can't think of a SINGLE scenario where it makes sense.
Even makes less sense how this "curries favor".
UG doesn't stand for "underground". Don't even need a password. So, after the first introduction of this site to the provider, then what? "Hey, I'm vad, remember how I was the guy who showed you UG? Well, I want $10 off our appointment next time."
Or, "see what a great reviewer I am, blow my socks off and I'll write a review that will have your burner burning!" (Won't work with someone wanting to be a UTR - or a lurker, using a "popular" UG name.)
Or, "see these nasty guys on UG, talking crap about you and the dirty stuff they did to you? Well, I'm not like that. (I just want the dirty stuff, but I'll write a sweet reviews) .
And that won't work after the first time, as the UG secret is out.
Or, and here is where things May have outright malicious intent: Monger 1 writes, in all truth, a less than glowing review. Or a review that's full of ALL the details. Sneaky monger/lurker 2 shows these to provider. Provider says "oh wow, I thought what went down between us was private. Now I'm never going to see Monger 1 again".
Or:
"Monger 1 barebacks every one. And you think he does this only with you? You thought you were the only one?"
I say "malicious" because monger 2 didn't curry ANY favor for himself; just, maybe, stopped provider from seeing monger 1.
See, this whole thing (showing UG to provider) makes NO sense to me. None.
From reading here, I believe that it IS done. And, apart from sheer malice, I don't know WHY?
V