OK I just need to know where I should go on TER
To find information about agencies blocking (honest)
negative reviews on their providers?
Background: I had a terrible session last night with an
agency that I used several several times over the last 5 yrs.
I immediately wrote a review AND sent a courtesy email to the
manager of the agency telling him a negative review was coming and why
He emailed me back saying that the provider had been suspended,
all of her dates had been either pulled or reassigned to other providers.
I'm not sure if the provider was in fact suspended or they are just blowing
smoke up my ass. However, what concerns me the most is the 3rd line from his email:
"I wouldn't dream of asking you to alter your review.
Before I make any judgement, I do want to speak to her.
But we also have a policy that a bad review gets you dropped."
I can be dropped as a client for writing a honest, but "bad" review?
Isn't that contrary to the whole point of TER reviews?
Specific information as to what to do is appreciated. Thanks
Sounds like he is blowing smoke . First he told you the provider was suspended. My guess is her picture was most likely pulled so that you cannot post a review ( hence a link to the person needed to post one ) or it will get rejected by TER.
Secondly, he she tells you that he wants to speak to her before he makes any judgement. If he suspended her for any cause why would he go back to ask about anything? Sorry for your disappointment but the agent does sound a bit inept
and from what I am reading is running his outfit backwards because clients complaints are few and when they come in should be taken seriously . I guess he does not value his clients but yet puts on an air to care about the girl wanting to ask her before he places judgement which he already did . Wonder what the agent is smoking .
There is a portion on here ( at least last time I looked to rate agencies and websites. Go there and make note. You can add her info there I think.
Angela
I don't mean throwing Chinese stars or swinging swords and killing the owner, I literally mean taking good care of the owner until he or she reaches puberty, graduates from college, and becomes a more mature adult. That's the way of the ninja! 
Forward the agency owner's comment to TER. If the agency insists on interfering with TER's review process by threatening to ban you from seeing their providers, then TER might not look on this agency well and maybe that agency will be dropped from TER. You better have your ducks in a row before that bad review gets posted and you better have good justification for the bad review or you'll come out with egg on your face.
If your review is accurate and the agency owner drops you, let TER know this. This is still review manipulation by the agency, it's just being done in a different way.
It's valid and factual. I expect to take a lot of shit from the TERHOLES, Whiteknights, and the TER Trolls, but I sat down a wrote the review immediately after the session. I stuck to the facts and avoided opinion. I finished at 3 am and sent off a courtesy email to the agency manager informing him that I wrote a negative review. I was told the provider had only good reviews, which didn't surprise me since the agency "drops" any client who posts a "bad" review. How accurate can the agency's reviews be with a policy like that?
Where specifically should I write in TER to get some information? Thank all!
That's just the way it is, especially if your poor review goes against the grain. Best advice: Be a man and take it on the chin, dust yourself off, and keep moving forward.
You are advising that he simply cave into review fraud, and that makes your reviews completely suspect IMO.
To the OP,Robin gave good advice, contact admin, and if I were you, I would consider making a post on your regional board outing the agency, of course you won't ever be able to book with them again, but it looks like that ship has already sailed. Also be sure to back your allegation with facts, like copying them on the email from the agency with their 'good reviews only" policy
and CD, reread your post please. You are telling him to "be a man" but act like a pussy. Yours is the worst advice I have heard here in quite some time.
but on re-reading it I agree it's not what I'd do. First of all, I don't take kindly to bullying. It tends to make me want to push back. This is especially true when the bully is stupid enough to give me exactly what I need to make him pay for it.
and when the leading SPOTY candidate gives better advice, maybe the WORST isn't such hyperbole after all.
OK, CD's advice was by far the WORST of this thread, happy now? lol
I perceived a veiled threat in the response to the OP from the agency he was about to pan with a negative review. His best bet is to walk away under those circumstances, and STFU. Not all agencies are benign entities.
-- Modified on 11/17/2014 8:51:06 AM
I know I'm gonna get "blowback" the agency said she's been "suspended" and removed from their site, her p411 page was taken down, and her dates have all been cancelled. I initially thought, he's tough, but a provider friend said it was probably all BS. She's conveniently been pulled from the agency pages so TER won't approve the review because she's no longer named of their web page. She comes back in 4 weeks and I'm thinking I'll be told by TER that it's too late to submit a review, but some other client will be screwed by then. Meanwhile, I get dropped as a client (after 5 years) for writing an HONEST, but negative review. I appreciate a heads up from other hobbyists, but at times I wonder if TER reviews are nothing more than fluff and masturbation material.
I really don't understand TER's logic. The provider HAS reviews posted already so it's not like she's an unknown provider.
It does sound like this agency is trying to game the system, and I firmly believe that you are doing the right thing by exposing them.
Now, assuming that you are certain that you didn't misread the email as Hotplants has suggested (a possibility that I seriously doubt, but possible), I would further suggest you go the extra step and start naming names. This is probably not the place to do it, but your regional board. It would not surprise me if they did this to you, they've done it to others and others make take courage from your post and come forward to back you up.
A "We only allow positive reviews" policy is review fraud IMO, and you will be doing your fellow mongers a huge solid by outing these guys.
No I didn't misread the email. In fact, it was a provider friend who caught it because it was buried after some other emails. She called my attention to it and cried "BULLSHIT!" on the suspension and convenient pulling of the provider's information from the agency page. Apparently I'm not the only one who thought 30 days was the maximum time to submit a review. I have no intention of ever using them again. It's just the BTW we drop you for writing negative reviews that has me pissed off and I WILL be posting on my local board, the Carolina board. Feel free to read, comment, and debate/demand answers as to what really happened that night, but I must warn all of you that I have zero f#@*s left after my experience and my replies may reflect that.
I get over to the Carolina board from time to time, this might be a good time to see what kind of White Knights come crawling out of the woodwork, or more optimistically how many fellow mongers have had similar experiences to yours and didn't have the balls to speak up.
Either way, I will stay tuned. good luck.
Frankly Scarlet .... I don't give a damn!
Or I could do it for you. Oh wait, I think I just did. lol
As I said earlier, the WORST advice that you've been given so far. I am waiting for him to tell you that it was YOUR fault that you got lousy service next.
Just in case anyone thinks I am not being clear about my opinion on this "HEY CD, grow a pair, or STFU!!!"
I think that should clear matters up, don't you? lol What a fucking pussy
Hi CD
I hate to say this but you are not correct. TER community of men rely on one another to tell the TRUTH
and there is always backlash when someone see's a girl and has the same outcome . Then posts it and
somebody comes along and posts they saw her too same situation. That furiates men because the money
wasted could have been spent on someone better. I think he is being a perfect member and taking care of the matter so that someone , maybe YOU would be spared the frustrations.
you're lucky the agency owner was stupid enough to reply as he did. Now at least you can do something about it. Had you not written him immediately, he'd have dropped you anyway and you'd only have found out the next time you tried to book there.
If they're involved in that kind of review manipulation, why would you want to continue to use them anyway? I'd say deuces and be on my merry way.
We are done, but I'm having a little trouble seeing myself saying, "Duces"
Maybe "Duces Bitches!" would sound better ....
And yes, I'm just messing with you.
TER has nothing to do with the agency policies. You will have to negotiate whatever you have to with the agency itself.
If you have connection with other agencies and agency dropping you is not going to cause problem with your hobbying, you can stand your ground and don’t capitulate under pressure.
If I were you, I would write the review and let it stand as is and would tell the agency owner that you are going to include, “dropping bad review policy” in the review also.
I don't think I said that I ever said that TER had anything to do with agency policy and I'm sure some of the others would have jumped all over that mistake. I've talked about TER's policy on publishing reviews and the agency's policy on bad reviews, but the policies are NOT the same, but I see how that might have been confusing to you and I should have said TER's policy and the Agency's policy to prevent reader confusion. Thank you for pointing that out. I'll be more diligent in the future. And thanks for the tip on mentioning the agency's policy on bad reviews in my review. That's an excellent point and I didn't think of including it. However, the Carolina community should know that there may be repercussions for writing a bad review of the agency or it's providers . Therefore, the "all great" reviews that they do have may, or may not be honest.
You won't be helping anyone if you cave in and write a false review. I don't think you would feel good about yourself if you did. Just post the honest review and find a different agency if they blacklist you. Why anyone would frequent a business that does this to its clients is beyond me.
Thanks for the advice. I knew posting here would result in a lot of useful tips that I would have never thought of on my own. In fact, I've printed out your comment and tried to thumb tack it to my laptop just so I won't forget any of it. Unfortunately, the thumb tack didn't work but I have several hammers and a bunch of nails in my garage that should work better, but I can't decide if I should use a nail or screw? Then there is the whole machine screw or wood screw choice. I'm thinking machine screw because the laptop is sorta a machine and it's certainly not wood! Only an idiot would buy a wooden laptop, but I guess I shouldn't judge because I've never seen a wooden laptop and it would be a lot easier to attach your suggestions to wood than the stuff that my laptop is made of. Thanks again for your comment! I really don't know what I would have done if I didn't have all of this great advice.
...don't capitulate to the agency. If you can't use the agency again it's probably a blessing, but my guess is that no matter what the outcome, they'll be willing to do business with you in a few months.
If you give in and pull the review, the agency will exercise less and less oversight regarding the women they represent. Also, I would think the other ladies in their stable would feel a bad review on one individual gives more validity to their good reviews, and that they would voice a "let it stand" to the agent(s)).
It doesn’t look like you’ve shared the entire email. And, maybe something in the whole of it convinces you that the agency means to drop you as a client. But, reading only what you shared it seems equally possible (and makes more sense) that the agency has a policy of dropping providers who get a negative review.
Seems more likely that what he’s saying is :
You've told him your review is going to be negative and he wouldn’t dream of asking you to alter it. The provider has already been suspended. But since the agency has a policy of dropping a provider for getting a bad review he, at least, wants to talk to he first….
This made no sense until your astute comment HP. I went back and re-read and I agree with you based on the quote that was shared. Could this be one of those 'oops, never mind' deals?
-- Modified on 11/16/2014 11:33:40 AM
but if he's already posted a neg review---and if it included this bit about the agency 'telling him they would drop him for writing a bad review', it could also be a provider out of work and an agency owner publicly fighting a negative, incorrect assumption
No it's "you" as in me, the client that is dropped. That's pretty clear.
The email is long and contains information that would be foolish to post on a public board. So I posted the relevant parts as supporting material for my statement.
I expected the Monday morning quarterbacks of TER to demand proof, but I've shared what I felt was important and that's ALL.
s I said, there may be something in the whole of the communication that supports what you're saying. But, you have not posted the whole story, and are always at least two sides to every story. What you ACTUALLY POSTED here does NOT make sense, or support what you're saying.
So, no need to get a bee in yer bonnet because someone questions whether there is some 'possibility' that you're mistaken. You seem quite convinced so---go forth and burn down the village
This certainly isn't the first agency that tried to strongarm their clients into posting only positive reviews of their girls. It is one of the few where the owner was foolish enough to leave enough evidence to get himself kicked off of here.
I am curious, just what part of this do you find hard to believe? To me the OP makes perfect sense and he seems rather clear as to what happened. You can choose to either believe him or not, but there is nothing in his OP that gives me the impression that he is not telling the truth.
I do agree with your suggestion that he "go forth" whether outing a manipulative agency constitutes "burning down the village" is more a matter of opinion.
I asked a question as to whether he is certain that the comment about dropping 'someone' was actually directed at him as a client for writing a bad review---or if that was possibly a reference to the agency having a policy of dropping a provider who gets a bad review.
Because what he actually posted really doesn't make sense; not unless we assume that this agency owner is a complete moron, with absolutely NO interest in running a successful agency. Anyone agency owner with ¼ of a brain would know that an accusation like this will spread like wildfire. And, DREW says he has been using this agency for 5 yrs. It seems highly unlikely an agency would be in biz for 5 yrs with this kind of policy.
However, it makes MUCH MORE sense if read to mean the agency has a policy to drop a provider for a bad review. You (and others) are automatically assuming the worst based on a few lines of an email presented out of context (e.g---there *was* more to this communication---we just don't know what that was).
And, hey, you may be right and I may be completely wrong. But again, based on what he actually posted, there IS another completely plausible explanation
and yes I am right and you are wrong, neener neener. lol
So NOW that you know his real meaning, do you disagree with any of the good advice that he's been given? CrazyDiamond's limp wristed advice to suck it up and bend over like a man aside. Most of the rest of the advice was pretty universal in encouraging him to take action and not take this lying down.
once the op clarified the potential ambiguity in who 'you' referred to, if he has the inclination and energy to not take this lying down, that is without a doubt a great idea. Whatever happened to 'the customer's always right?'
MY thought is that before going off all half-cocked and making accusations that may, or may not be true, simply ASK the agency owner if he has a policy to drop clients for writing negative reviews.
It's a simple question. Since the OP has already assumed that this is what the owner meant, then we can reasonably conclude that the agency owner would have no qualm clarifying this (exeedingly stupid) policy, again, in writing.
If that is the policy, sure, say something.
So... the quote from Drew's op is "I wouldn't dream of asking you to alter your review. Before I make any judgement, I do want to speak to her. But we also have a policy that a bad review gets you dropped."
I believe reasonable people can read this quote as ambiguous and question in a quasi-Clintonian way, who is 'you'? Drew followed with a more complete description of the note saying 'you' was 'him' - fine, case closed. But I think it was a reasonable question for those of us, me included, who didn't know how utterly stupid an agency could be to banish a 5 year customer and risk bad publicity such as that coming from this thread. HP simply asked the what I too thought was a fair question, and I don't get the sense that she is refuting Drew's answer - just questioning the business acumen/sanity of the agency owner.
Because what he actually posted really doesn't make sense; not unless we assume that this agency owner is a complete moron, with absolutely NO interest in running a successful agency. Anyone agency owner with ¼ of a brain would know that an accusation like this will spread like wildfire. And, DREW says he has been using this agency for 5 yrs. It seems highly unlikely an agency would be in biz for 5 yrs with this kind of policy.
However, it makes MUCH MORE sense if read to mean the agency has a policy to drop a provider for a bad review. You (and others) are automatically assuming the worst based on a few lines of an email presented out of context (e.g---there *was* more to this communication---we just don't know what that was).
And, hey, you may be right and I may be completely wrong. But again, based on what he actually posted, there IS another completely plausible explanation.
There is a possibility that the email he sent to the owner said something like "Bla bla bla I had a terrible date with Suzy Hooker. I've already posted a bad review and I'll be flipping shit on the regional boards unless you give me a refund or a free session with another chick and bla bla bla..." And perhaps the owner retorted with something like "Well if that's true then she's fired but if you're going to post a shitty review AND put my business on blast if you don't get a freebie then you can go fuck yourself and bla bla bla..." It's also possible that the OP's email just said "Hey man, I just wanted to drop you a courtesy email to let you know that the review I just submitted of my date with Suzy Hooker is not particularly flattering. You run a great agency and I've had great experiences with your girls so I just wanted to give you a heads up about what went down so you aren't blindsided by the negative review. Love you, love your show, xoxo" while the owner's response may have been "MOTHERFUCKER BAD REVIEWS EQUAL DNS LISTS YOU STUPID ASSHOLE FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON."
I think what 'plants is saying is that there are three sides to every story (as we all know), so without us knowing exactly what transpired, it's hard to objectively assess the situation. The biggest problem with the review system is manipulation on both sides. I think it's important to note that while there are BSC hookers out there threatening dudes over 10/10s, there are also guys who hold the threat of a bad review over girls' heads in order to manipulate them into giving discounts, freebies, and services that a particular lady doesn't offer. Shit, I read a review just recently of a girl whose average is in the high 8 range, yet this dude gave her a 5/5 because she insisted upon CBJ (he admits in the review that he has to wear diapers because of incontinence issues, so basically he tried to fuck with her livelihood because she didn't want piss in her mouth). Hotplants wasn't accusing the OP of doing anything like that, she was just suggesting that MAYBE there's more to the story.
So while I still stand by my original statement that the OP should send any threats to TER and find a new agency, we all gotta start taking what's said on these boards with a grain of salt a little more. And let's face it, the dudes' versions are generally much more widely accepted than the chicks' around here.
But just as a side note to reiterate that I'm actually inclined to believe the OP in this particular case, he's a very good regular of one of my dearest friends in the biz, so chances are he's on the up-and-up.
I am curious, just what part of this do you find hard to believe? To me the OP makes perfect sense and he seems rather clear as to what happened. You can choose to either believe him or not, but there is nothing in his OP that gives me the impression that he is not telling the truth.
I do agree with your suggestion that he "go forth" whether outing a manipulative agency constitutes "burning down the village" is more a matter of opinion.
That way the other side gets to air their side of the story and we the readers get to decide who sounds more credible after hearing both (or all three) sides of the story.
-- Modified on 11/16/2014 2:40:55 PM
Occam’s razor says that: among competing hypotheses, the one with the FEWEST assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
So. If we assume the OP is correct, at minimum, we have to assume:
(1) That when the agency owner said “you” will get dropped, he meant the OP, and not the provider.
(2) That the agency owner is stupid enough to volunteer, in writing no less, that this agency has a policy of dropping clients who write negative reviews.
(3) That any clients of this agency, that may have felt compelled to write a negative review in the past, have chosen not to.
(4) Or, alternatively, they wrote a negative review and were dropped as clients but have not said anything.
(5) The agency has been able to get away with this nefarious practice, with no one saying anything, (or maybe not saying anything loud enough to be heard), for at least 5 yrs.
OTOH. If the OP is NOT correct all we have to assume is that :
(1) The OP misinterpreted a comment made in a (possibly heated) email exchange, after the OP left a session he found disappointing
So. If we assume the OP is correct, at minimum, we have to assume:
(1) That when the agency owner said “you” will get dropped, he meant the OP, and not the provider.
(2) That the agency owner is stupid enough to volunteer, in writing no less, that this agency has a policy of dropping clients who write negative reviews.
(3) That any clients of this agency, that may have felt compelled to write a negative review in the past, have chosen not to.
(4) Or, alternatively, they wrote a negative review and were dropped as clients but have not said anything.
(5) The agency has been able to get away with this nefarious practice, with no one saying anything, (or maybe not saying anything loud enough to be heard), for at least 5 yrs.
OTOH. If the OP is NOT correct all we have to assume is that :
(1) The OP misinterpreted a comment made in a (possibly heated) email exchange, after the OP left a session he found disappointing.
The OP has not provided enough information to draw a factual conclusion, one way or the other.
So...in the absence of certainty.......
]
Hell, you may be correct and that your more complicated theory has more explanatory power than the simpler one. But, arguing that everyone misspoke and misunderstood is silly. Especially when the document is plain on its face.
is your (incorrect) use of Occam's Razor---which you're still getting backwards BTW. Hey, you brought it up. And, frankly, had you not brought it up in your typically snarky, one-liner, kind of way.......
I've not argued that "everyone misspoke and misunderstood". In fact, I have not said anything even remotely close to that
The other way of looking at it is the "universal you" like, "if you jaywalk you will get hit by a car." Maybe some of the guys who wrote bad reviews were deemed more trouble to the agency than their business was worth. Others might write a bad review and the agency shrugs it off. Maybe they don't act on principle but simly react to situations as they arise.
So. If we assume the OP is correct, at minimum, we have to assume:
(1) That when the agency owner said “you” will get dropped, he meant the OP, and not the provider.
(2) That the agency owner is stupid enough to volunteer, in writing no less, that this agency has a policy of dropping clients who write negative reviews.
(3) That any clients of this agency, that may have felt compelled to write a negative review in the past, have chosen not to.
(4) Or, alternatively, they wrote a negative review and were dropped as clients but have not said anything.
(5) The agency has been able to get away with this nefarious practice, with no one saying anything, (or maybe not saying anything loud enough to be heard), for at least 5 yrs.
OTOH. If the OP is NOT correct all we have to assume is that :
(1) The OP misinterpreted a comment made in a (possibly heated) email exchange, after the OP left a session he found disappointing.
You were presented with two hypotheses that fully explained a given phenomenon and wanted to choose between the two. Occam's Razor is a principle/heuristic (not the only one) that provides a method for deciding which to accept as "true". It says that the hypothesis/theory with the fewest assumptions ("simplest") is to be preferred. The underlying assumption being that nature is elegant or "parsimonious" and has instituted the cosmos in the most simple manner.... What did I miss?
I completely believe that HE believes the agency has threatened to drop him as a client if he writes a bad review. This would not only be a policy that deserves to be shared *if* it's true----it's a strategy that seems suicidal from a biz perspective; especially given the OP says he's been a client for 5 yrs. Who does something like this if they have any desire to stay in business?
So it raises a question——what’s actually happened here? meaning and intent get crossed in emails convos all the time.
The only people who know everything that was said are the OP and the agency owner. And, the OP has redacted the majority of that convo, posted it here, and asked for advice about what to do—-based on what he believes has happened. But how can anyone advise what to do, other than in a theoretical way, without having the whole story?
OP says the agency owner threatened him. But the OP has not shown anyone HERE any threats. (even though I believe that he believes he has)
What he's shared, HERE, is a small part of part of an email exchange that includes a comment that is ambiguous 'enough' that, (without the rest of the info) can easily be read to have a different meaning than he believes it does.
jeepers peeps……ya’ll’s a ‘hang-‘em-high jury….lol
I have to agree about not knowing the whole story, but don't we then have to respond taking what the OP says at face value? The phrase, "If what you say is true," is an understood given in ANY response. Likewise, "IMO," is and understood given no matter how firmly a poster words his response.
When we question that things might not be going down exactly as stated, we are second guessing and as such everybody is responding to their private version of the situation or understanding of the events.
For example, I picture a girl showing up drunk and trying to leave as quickly as possible after a bunch of "I don't do that" responses. But that might not be anywhere close to what happened.
As for the agency, I go on the assumption that it said what the OP presented, knowing he might be misinterpreting or even fabricating.
So it raises a question——what’s actually happened here? meaning and intent get crossed in emails convos all the time.
The only people who know everything that was said are the OP and the agency owner. And, the OP has redacted the majority of that convo, posted it here, and asked for advice about what to do—-based on what he believes has happened. But how can anyone advise what to do, other than in a theoretical way, without having the whole story?
OP says the agency owner threatened him. But the OP has not shown anyone HERE any threats. (even though I believe that he believes he has)
What he's shared, HERE, is a small part of part of an email exchange that includes a comment that is ambiguous 'enough' that, (without the rest of the info) can easily be read to have a different meaning than he believes it does.
jeepers peeps……ya’ll’s a ‘hang-‘em-high jury….lol…
Freebie? WTF really? Um no you are wrong, but it was your "dearest friend" who pointed out the facts of the email AND called BULLSHT on the agency tactics. I went to her for a qualified opinion because being fair and accurate are important to me even though I was pretty pissed off at the time. She said the community has a "right to know" about this and I agreed. She also told me that some people would get pissed off and I should be ready for that I posted here seeking information not to debate the facts. At one point it was suggested that the best way to deal with an unprofessional provider would be to,Have Tobi come down and let her know what time it is. I'll apologize for my, "Release the Krackin!" Comment at the time. I said it with the utmost respect and admiration. And it was pretty damn funny at the time ;(
Seems more likely that what he’s saying is :
You've told him your review is going to be negative and he wouldn’t dream of asking you to alter it. The provider has already been suspended. But since the agency has a policy of dropping a provider for getting a bad review he, at least, wants to talk to he first….”
Does this mean a gal is capable of critical thinking?... or am I a putz for weighing in on another thread which I really have no interest? I'll go with putz.
The bad news? You're a putz.
Where if you handled this privately with the agency owner, and not immediately gone defense con 5 with the bad review bomb, he probably would have made some accomodation in your favor. Now you are likely on their DNS list for sure. So much for a 5 year business relationship going up in smoke over one bad date. D'oh!
I didn't read ALL the replies, TLDNR, so if this has been covered already, then I guess you just wasted 30 seconds... Sorry about that Cheif.
Actually, I said I did go privately at first saying that a bad review was forthcoming. I think it's more important to inform the community of bad behavior than it is to continue a relationship with a business that delivers poor service. I don't use this, or any other, agency exclusively. I prefer independent ladies because I feel they provide better service and act as business owners rather than an employee. So the fact that I can't use this agency anymore is of little concern to me.
I think this post since the use of the word "dropped" has been used. Constitutes the I've been dumped by an agency thread, therefore being dumped by agency would mean that you first had to fall for the agency.
Huh? dropped, dumped, falling for first? I'm at a total loss as to what you are trying to saw here. It's possible that the big words are confusing me, but I can't be the only one.
He's mentally challenged to a degree that can be stupefying. Here's a picture of him pondering his next post