http://i.imgur.com/8cdjMrN_d.webp?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium

This kind of behavior is obviously against EVERYONE"s interest here, so I would hope at least that it would be universally condemned, but there are all kind of people on this board, lets just see if anyone here tries to defend the indefensible.

This isn't a difficult question. If the agency has a profile on TER it goes; just like if any individual provider was shown to be doing this.

If you go to their page, they have two phone numbers

Well the best you can do is:
1) report it to TER with the information you have and see if they will do something based on that.
2) Let the NY board know as they probably have some people who perhaps can produce some evidence TER could act on.

I didn't contact TER. Yeah I wanted to see what people think and how much of a case I have with just this screenshot, which is not a lot of evidence in itself. You know me, I want discussion.  

Regardless of what mongers think of this behavior, TER will do NOTHING about it.  You wanna know why?
Because as I've said before, K-mongers don't give a shit about TER.  Their loyalties are first and foremost to the K-girls, the bookers and the orgs.

I'm not entirely sure that this is a kgirl agency. What you say about GaG is surprising, but I don't think it has much to do with this topic.

because he doesn't know the back story, so I'll answer your question.  I don't think the screen shot is enough, because TER's remedy is to remove the review(s), and they can't do that without knowing which individual girls were involved.  A link that takes them to this incriminating page and then lets the mods go on to see which girls are involved in this would probably be enough.  

-- Modified on 6/23/2021 12:49:10 PM

I'd say that any agency that practices this technique is opening themselves to customers asking for more for their reviews.  Also, requires much more work on the agency's part to monitor, if they decide to pay.  More disgruntled customers and girls.  I don't think this will work.  

-- Modified on 6/23/2021 11:07:45 AM

...when he says: "...competing agencies would have no power to remove reviews that are the property of TER, only TER can remove them..."  What a simplistic, misleading load of bullshit!

this one, and I already regret it, but you are once again giving an example that is not in the context of what is happening in the Kgirl scene.  You  are just lying now.  You said, anyone can "point out a deficiency and  . . . . get TER to remove a review," like its an everyday occurance.  Pointing out a deficiency will seldom get a review removed, it will more likely get the score adjusted, but the review will remain. Reporting a Rules Violation requires extrinsic evidence like I described in my post, something you failed to mention.  Reporting reviews does NOT automatically get reviews  removed, which you ultimately CONCEDE at the end where you say . . . ."It's a high bar to get reviews removed because reviews are the lifeblood of TER."  Getting a review removed though a problem report is the exception, not the rule, which you seem to know, but choose to ignore, because it doesn't fit your obsession with me.  Once again, you prove why you are the most dishonest poster on TER, not to mention the LEAST knowledgeable about Kgirls.  Why are you even here other than to make a fool of yourself?    

from TER for variations on this theme.  Some actually dictate what should be in the review.  Others will threaten to drop a regular is he doesn't write what she wants, etc.  Just about everything that can be done to manipulate reviews has been tried by SOMEONE, but if TER finds out, justice is swift and certain.  Without the freedom to review strictly from the POV of the reviewer, reviews are compromised and can't be trusted.

I think I mentioned to you on perhaps your very first week here that taking the default position that anything you read that was written by BLRPOS is a lie will end up making you right a LOT more often than wrong.

Most K-mongers don't know, but that line is always used by "followme", the weakest poster on the Politics board.  Lefties and righties agree on NOTHING on P&R, but one thing they agree on is that followme is a ridiculous loser.

TER should leave them up, with an asterisk explaining that this org is known for compensating reviewers. Banning the org just results in a lot of people not knowing about the offender.

This is actually something along with what I thought. It preserves all reviews but also makes the reader aware that this org rewards those reviews with money

Delisting a provider or Agency does nothing to warn the community as there are a thousand legitimate reasons for de-listing. I think de-listing PROTECTS the dishonest providers/agencies a lot more than it protects the community.

then assume the worst.   That is usually a safe assumption.

Hmm, one thing Ive noticed is that cll stopped being password protected a couple of weeks ago, which kinda coincides with your pms timeline.  

All you want.  It was several touring Kgirls who work there from time to time and I did tell them what to tell the agency about the review problems and how it might be fixed so they could get reviews in the future, and if the agency would not make some changes, I said they should work somewhere else.  That threat of a mass walkout is probably what got the agency's attention.   One WAS the password protection.  The other was offering discounts for reviews.  I also said they would have to contact TER about whether restoration of past reviews that were taken down is possible after the other problems have been fixed.  Thank you for corroborating that I most likely DID receive PM's regarding CLL, but the booker does not know that I am CDL.  I never use my handle to book with any agency.  Agency bookers usually speak pretty good English.  Some of these PM's were difficult for me to figure out what they were saying.  Obviously, they were using translator apps which are often incorrect translations.  After a few back and forth questions and answers, I was able to understand what they were asking.  

My intent was not to cast further doubts. You still think I'm out to get you. I'm not. Relax.  

That everyone benefits when agencies are responsive to the concerns of mongers, and one way to do that is by pressure through the Kgirls who work there.  Its not the first time I have used this approach to get an org to make changes for the betterment of the monger experience. Sometimes, the interests of the girls and the interests of mongers are on the same side, so you just have to devise a solution to whatever problem there is that works for both sides, and show that to the agency one way or another.  Its a win for everyone.  

Honest question. Didn't you put Rocket on "Ignore"?

by PM, so I took him off.  We'll see how it goes.  So far, its fine.  We're both keeping to our agreement.  

I don't remember agreeing to anything.  

We had three or four PM's at the beginning of June where my impression was that we were of the same mind that when you and I go at each other and create a ten-foot thread, it discourages others from joining the conversation.  I thought we had an understanding that after a few exchanges on a topic, we would try not to get carried away.  If this was not your understanding, too, then say so, and its easily fixed by me hitting the ignore button again.  You have NOT been arguing ad nauseum since then, so I assumed we had a gentlemen's agreement.  Apparently, you don't think so.  Is that correct?

In these pms I said that I understood where you are coming from in regards to our arguing, and said that I don't have any big grievances against you in particular and that I think we can coexist. Ie, I don't argue with you just to argue with YOU and to make you look bad,like your exchanges with bigp and so forth. I will argue the point that is being argued. In this very thread you implied I was trying to make you look bad, when it couldn't be further from the truth - I simply wanted to know if it was you who helped cll to get pwd protection off.  

What part of PRIVATE in the term "PM" don't you two get?

I simply wanted it to be known that I did not have any gentlemens agreement with cdl.  

BOTH of you divulging a PRIVATE conversation that you had via PM is a violation of TER rules and a fucking nuisance to the rest of us. Not as big a nuisance as BLRPOS and his constant search for "gotcha" posts from several years ago, but it still adds to board clutter and is against TER rules.  

You are like one of those idiots who replies to all to point out the obvious when somebody accidentally emailed the whole distribution list.

Poof, here you are. ROFLMFAO

He started it with his mention of the PM "agreement."  Using the PM argument is CDL's M.O.  He uses the cover of PM's to tell his lies because he thinks that his lies can't be refuted due to TER rules.