Since everything in the United States runs on money (I think it's called capitalism), I don't think we should begrudge the staff of TER charging for this information. If you think the price is too high, don't pay it. But don't be upset that money enters the equation at some point.

TER could limit the amount of content available in the "referral" forum, and make sure that the explicit content goes to the private forum.  Then, those that want access to the explicit reviews either have to pay, or to submit.I do not believe that the presence of referrals and non-descript reviews in the bulletin boards will take away from the more explicite private area.

At this point, referrals and very general reviews are available on a request basis in the ISO Area. If you want to give a girl a little plug, drop it into the ad area at this point. That is a great place for it, because people are in the area for that reason.Unsolicited reviews really need to be in the review section so that they are searchable, pulled together by provider, and meet our requirements. We really believe that if a provider is trying to stay out of the public eye, doesn't advertise, ect she deserves her privacy. Our guidelines help with that. We also believe that reviews should not be self promoting, and general post do not guarantee this. We will take your idea under advisement and may try some trial thing after the weekend if that is OK.Thanks for the input.

Reviews posted under "massage parlor girls" are not verified nor does the provider have to have an internet presence.  This is what Intuitive was upset about.  She does not have an internet presence and is VERY concerned about her privacy, but someone wrote a review and stuck it in the massage parlor girls section.  True, the reviewer misspelled her working name and the phone number is wrong but the review is there for the world to see and she feels that she can't do anything about it.Staff, if you want more information I believe you have my real name and e-mail address on record in the system.  It would not be appropriate to post more than this in the public forum since to do so would violate her privacy even more than it has already been violated.--modified by Mathesar at Wed, Nov 01, 2000, 20:29:42

You know, you are right, but she is working this site for dates. Due to this point, how can she expect reviews to the service that she provides on these dates not to be posted?

sounds like catch 22 to me.For those of you who may not know.  In World War II, tour of duty for bomber crews was 25 missions.  Approximately 20% of the planes were being lost each mission.  The crews figured their chances of surviving a tour of duty were somewhere between zero and none. (They were actually about 4 in 1000).According to the novel, you could be relieved of duty by reason of insanity.  Catch 22 was that if you requested to be relieved of duty because of insanity it was proof that you were sane.

I think a whole new BB format all together is in order. I emailed the staff about this a while back. Look at a few of the popular threads in the General area. They are a mess. There is no way to read through them with out getting confused. This leads to misunderstandings and mis-communication.This site is the best, why not go with one of the best BB systems? Ultimate BBS, recently had a name change though.

Just because she is a provider, you assume intuitive is working this site for dates.  You are wrong! Go back and read her postings.  They were very positive and good for the community.You should honor her request for privacy and remove her review.

This message software can look like the one that you pointed us to. We can hav only the topic showing. We can also have the topics with the newest posts showup at the top. We had tried that before, but most people liked it better this way.If there has been a clear change in public opinion then we will change the look.