Just found out that TER apparently has a policy - undocumented - that if you submit a review.....and then subsequently submit a rereview, you have to wait 3 months before submitting the second updated review. Even after questioning this, it is apparently unpublished policy.
This means that, good or bad, your initial review stands for 3 months.
This is equivalent to submitting a review of a restaurant on Yelp and on a second visit having a materially different experience, not being able to update your submission. I imagine folks will see the folly in that policy.
This message serves as a public service announcement and as a vent for me - I have fought and pleaded to get a revision, or at least my now erroneous review removed - to no avail.
Highly suspect that this post will be removed by TER mods as there seems to be highly subjective and unpublished policies now being enforced.
Happy thanksgiving all!!!
review.
Thanks for your 'idea' - ordinarily my mind is not easily subject to change, however in this case, the experience was the polar opposite of the previous visit.
and one that I agree with. If it were my call, it would be 6 months, not 90 days. There has already been abuse of this process by manipulating the current reviews to keep a provider on the top 100 lists and by shills replacing 10/10 reviews with another 10/10 once "his" falls to the second page.
If you want to warn the community if it is that important, you can always start a thread and link to your review as long as it is not a shill.
Not too difficult to determine if a review is a shill or a deliberate attempt to manipulate the rankings. The current rules stipulate that a rereview must add something material to the previous review. A 10/10 review re reviewed would - I assume - not add anything material in a second review. Going from a 5 to a 10 or vice a versa would provide a material difference.
In my case, I was downgrading a review based on a material change in experience - no shill, no manipulation
If you want to warn the community if it is that important, you can always start a thread and link to your review as long as it is not a shill.
I didn't mean to imply that you had any disingenuous intent, but my first paragraph was more in general commentary and my own observations. I have seen a 10/10 replaced with a 10/10 and more then once. The numbers become irrelevant but fucking from a swinging lampshade as opposed to a bed can qualify, if you get my drift.
Unfortunately you will have to mark your calendar, or like I said you can post a thread. There is no rule against that.
I hear what you say...and BTW love the swinging from the lampshade visual 
In this case, I posted a mini-review on this forum and within a few hours the mod took it down .
So it seems that whatever the mods say, they pretty much do their own thing. Not really the forum that most of us signed up for.....
...I've read it somewhere on here but can't fi d it now. It's not in review FAQ's.
and although volunteer mods were done away with long ago, I suspect that whoever took your mini review down was not the same person who approves the actual reviews here.
With as much posting and reviewing volume as there is on TER, the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing. I will confess though, some of the reasoning that goes into what stays and what goes on the discussion boards lately is beyond me, and I was a mod here for several years.
I've had postings removed for reasons that baffle me as well as reviews that are rejected which, when I query, all of a sudden are approved, recently I had one rejected for "not enough detail" and when I pointed out that the volume and detail were consistent with all other reviews that I posted....was approved.
No rhyme or reason apparently.
With as much posting and reviewing volume as there is on TER, the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing. I will confess though, some of the reasoning that goes into what stays and what goes on the discussion boards lately is beyond me, and I was a mod here for several years.
I was doing some reminiscing and reading my old reviews and came across an "unapproved" review from 10 years ago that fell under this rule