re board posts and reviews.
Rationale: those rules are hardly ever enforced as of late, so why not make things easier for everyone and simply get rid of the rules?
I agree that the rules, particularly related to reviews, are both poorly enforced AND rather difficult to enforce as currently defined.
I don't think that suggests we just throw them all out -- the baby is going out with that bath water.
I do think TER should spend some time in rethinking it's scoring, submission and approval process for reviews. The discussion boards are really not that bad and I think can be left as they are.
TER's revenue stream has been devastated by its decision to withdraw from the US market post FOSTA/SESTA and it has probably not recovered since it came back to the US market. So my assumption has been that they have much fewer employees to vet reviews so they are passing stuff that never would have made it in the old days. And unless their revenues increase so they can hire more folks, that's not going to change. Therefore, they have no incentive to changing the review system. Or anything else.
@insideinfo... what are the reputable alternatives to TER?
is that with social media, you can’t see when someone has their tongue planted firmly in their cheek.
I've seen multiple posts of yours where you seem to care about how fucked up TER's review processes are. You've even posted to my thread about the subject where I'm looking for and offering solutions.
Does anybody have any ideas about how we can get the community more involved in pushing TER to make changes?!
That link is dead. Here's the active one...
If anything, this site should have a rotating "review board".
I recall submitting a review years ago and having to consistently go back and re-edit it before it would be approved (not enough details, actions didn't warrant such a score, etc)
Nowadays, it appears that the TER administrators are allowing 3 sentence reviews.
If there were a rotating volunteer group, say regular reviewers that could help out and screen out the clearly, fake reviewers, it would benefit the whole site.
Many of you regs are good at typing in mile-long responses/retorts/bombs back at each other. How about something like this that would be of benefit? TER could randomly pick reviewers to check on, say a dozen reviews submitted in other areas of the country that they are not obviously regulars. The min required would be those that have regularly submitted reviews, and no one that is a newbie (under 1 year, or with only a couple of reviews?)
Flame away at my suggestion, guys! (and providers!)
A person had to have minimum of a five year board history to be considered to be a volunteer discussion board moderator.
That said, TER has NEVER employed volunteer review mods, it has always been done by paid staff and I don't see that changing any time soon. It's not that I disagree with your suggestion, it's just that I don't see it ever happening here.
Didn't realize that GG. Thanks for the info.
I've only been on and off since around 2008, when I first saw Juliette Monroe here in the DC area. Hard to believe someone like her actually was on Eros, but as we all know, it has devolved into a joke.
5 years would give it even more credibility, as opposed to what I suggested.
So, how about it TER gods?
I recall submitting a review years ago and having to consistently go back and re-edit it before it would be approved (not enough details, actions didn't warrant such a score, etc)
-snip
If there were a rotating volunteer group, say regular reviewers that could help out and screen out the clearly, fake reviewers, it would benefit the whole site.
Flame away at my suggestion, guys! (and providers!)
So, fellow members, what's it going to take to get to critical mass where we could make life miserable enough for TER that they concede to changing? Positive action, such as boycotting, takes a lot of buy-in. Right now, talking about the subject is just pissing in the wind, save for a few members who have really given it thought. We need to increase their numbers!