Of course that's my interpretation. I never claimed otherwise. Never claimed it's the ultimate truth or anything. That's why my post had plenty of "maybe"s and" guess"es
Now, you saying nothing was swept under the rug, after yourself saying that the number of mediocre or worse reviews, was "held" and instead sent as feedback to orgs/bookers, is pretty dishonest.
We just discussed about ratio of reviews and how some mongers might not even read negative reviews once ratio of positive to negative grows large.
If the negative feedback was held and instead of five mediocre reviews there's only one, it does not give the correct picture. So yes, things get swept under the rug. If there's one negative review, people who like to minimize the impact will claim outlier, but where there are five saying the same thing it's tough to do so.
Even you saying "irreversible situation" implies sweeping things under the rug. As long as the truth is said, there is no irreversible situation. Girls feelings get hurt? Boo fucking hoo. If no one goes to se her again, that's a good thing to me considering many mediocre reviews. Don't get mad about irreversible situation if truthful reviews caused it. Be mad that someone served a subpar product.
No, before covid the reviews in the Bay Area have been on the donkey (and before that on aamp_maps) , with hundreds and even thousands of fake reviews created by orgs. It was very difficult to sift through them. I'm glad to say the grades/reviews on TER now are much, much closer to the of real situation. And something to say - to me, a truthful representation that caters to least common denominator, is a lot more important in the long run than the ability of org to pump out two extra girls because people have kept their mouths shut. Truth > withholding of truth.
Again, yes, that is just my interpretation and I'm not claiming it's the only way or some mantra everyone has to follow or agree on. It's just a healthy discussion.
As far as ignoring my posts, I don't know why you feel the need to announce this,but sure. You simply don't like what I have to say. That's fine. You don't have to agree. I consider orgs to be entities who will stoop to lying and bullying to make money. I think they need to be held in check, and be shown their place in the food chain. And customers can control them via two things - their money and reviews. As long as reviews are truthful, of course.
Making the bad feedback only available to pos, you misrepresent the total picture to others, and give orgs time to rectify the issue, a time during which many more can step on the same proverbial rake.
But, again, only one man's opinion. You are welcome to disagree, which you obviously do. And I know you disagree. I was more interested in KlientDMVs answer of why saving bad reviews for PO was a good thing. I already knew your answer.