I'm sure perfectstorm could give us more specific info on all this.
Hi all -- I posted a review a while back that wasn't approved because the link was for backpage. I changed it to another site, but it still wasn't accepted because I referenced "BP" in the general details. I removed the info and my review was finally accepted.
That's all fine, as I understand TER wouldn't want to promote a competitor, but I still see some reviews -- even new reviews -- with links to backpage. So I just want to know if it is actually a banned site or if there are exceptions. Also, is there a list of banned sites that someone could direct me to?
...It's now OK to use BP links and discuss BP on the boards. Whatever the reason was is no longer an issue so it's no longer a banned site. That's why you now see BP links in reviews posted after you went through having to remove the BP references. There isn't a list of banned sites but if the site has reviews of providers then it's a competitor of TER and therefore not allowed. This wasn't the reason BP was banned.
... because I have reason to believe that use of BP links in profiles is "ok" only in one very specific scenario, and not in general.
Do you have approximate time frames for this stuff? As far as when it was "banned" and when it was "unbanned"?
I ask because I went through the same thing as the OP, within the last two months. I wrote a review and in the general details said something like she looks just like the pics in the bp ad. They wouldn't post it until I removed the reference to bp, specifically saying the reason was it is a competing site. I removed it and like the OP, didn't really care but I was pretty confused because in my mind no way is it a competing site. That's a mall. This is reviews. I might see someone over there, but no way do I call her without checking her out here first.
Anyway, I wonder if sometimes TER changes a policy and not all the admins get the memo. Literally a day after I had to remove the bp reference a brand new review popped up that said exactly what I had to change, and I've seen several others. Not that it matters. If they don't want me to mention bp, fine. I don't have anything invested there lol. It is a bit confusing though.
NYE: I have been told by admin, in response to a problem report, that they only put bp links in a profile if no other online presence can be found for the provider. I've also seen it said in the boards (not by admin) that they don't like them because the links expire and then they have to give out vip days when people submit new links.
...of the boards. They explained it was BP. The credit card thing and LE attention caused them to want some separation. BP wasn't allowed to be mentioned. We referred to it as the site with the same initials as British Petroleum. I don't know when but shortly thereafter it was OK to mention them and the BP links came back. I do remember the only if there is no other on line source "rule" coming up but since I don't use ad malls/sites I didn't know details and didn't know it was still an issue.
There is a discussion about BP on one of the boards right now.
It was Eros that tried having reviews. They became a banned site and couldn't be mentioned because of it. They gave it up so now it's OK to mention them and to use links to Eros ads on provider's profiles. I don't remember exactly when this was but it was around the same time as the BP issue.
I'm sure perfectstorm could give us more specific info on all this.
Okay. Thanks for the info. Under those circumstances, it makes some sense for TER to want to distance themselves. Also makes more sense it was Eros considering reviews. I had started a list in my head of reasons it would be stupid for bp to do so. Obviously, you can talk about bp on the boards. Whether you can in a review seems to be inconsistent, but who cares. I was surprised when they asked me to remove the comment I mentioned, but I also asked myself why the hell I said it like that in the first place lol. As to whether the "only when it's the only option" rule for links is still an issue, it seems to be. At least sometimes. The only reason I care is because when bp went out of favor, the replacement for links seemed to become this skippy bullshit.
I can only say that recently I found a profile with skippy as the only link, and this one was even worse than most. Literally nothing there but her name and phone number. I already had that from her profile here for pete's sake! Just wanted a pic or two. I sent in a problem report with three or four better options. One was bp. The report was rejected without explanation. I usually get a reasonable, sensible explanation. Also, it was the fastest response to a problem report I personally have ever seen. So is it a preference against bp or a preference for skippy? I dunno, but I do think it's interesting that I've never seen a skippy page that didn't link to TER. I don't even open those anymore.
This must all be clear as mud to the OP.
Kerri, what you're saying is kinda scary. If it makes you feel any better, I think a lot of people here know skippy's is worthless and never click on them. For websites, no clicks = no income. I think?
I'm sure perfectstorm could give us more specific info on all this.
And I guess that Eros learned rather quickly that they get enough traffic from TER links that being banned was too costly to them
I'm sure in a few months this will all be mixed up in my mind too, lol.
Interesting info about skippy's roots.
Yeah, I'm sure you're right that a ban here would cost Eros, et al a lot of traffic.
Didn't BP try to add some kind of review feature before the CC companies stopped processing BP payments?
I thought that was why TER placed the ban on mentioning BP. And those other "ad" websites popped up to provide alternative URLs that were NOT BP. There was some site with a "ter" in it that some of us thought was launched by TER itself: the listings pretty much looked like robot harvested Profile info with pics copied from their existing (sometimes BP) ads. The URLs for those ads actually ended with the TER Profile ID.
That non-ter adsite them transformed into skipsweb which looks pretty similar and uses the similar Profile-ID containing URLs and pics scraped from other ads.
BP dropped the review idea and BP was no longer banned.
Does that sound right
If that's why they seemingly are OK with that site, they need to discontinue the free 2 days for expired BP URLs. Otherwise, TER is supporting a guy who is a known baddie: he has double reviewed a lady by using different TER IDs in clear violation of rules (and yes I have proof of that - it was not a replacement review but both reviews exist in the TER database), he has a history of threatening ladies with revenge fake reviews, and some of his reviews are reputed to be fake positives. There is no telling how many of his reviews are fake under his various TER handles. By allowing his site to be listed and allowing him to be an affiliate partner, TER is turning a blind eye, but it seems that a simple policy change would eliminate the need for a bogus-scraped site that is ripe for a big lawsuit (if a few ladies who were "out" sued for copyright violations, that guy would be in big trouble). Yes, I did my research on the guy since he harassed me (and continues to harass me; I've had to take cease and desist action).