I wish we could have platform to respond our reviews cause some of them are not accurate. When the guy failed to erect or perform its provider fault and gets low grade.  
Any opinion?

but I suspect the risk of such a functionality just turning into a huge mess of two people pointing fingers is not really worth any benefit that might come from it.

 
One review doesn't really matter to most of us. Most here will look at the over all pattern of reviews and the "averages". Then they read the reviews to get a sense of where the reviewer is coming from (and if they seem like someone that is credible/believable). Then look at the reviewers other reviews, also part of the credibility check. Most will also look for reviews of someone they have seen to see if their assessment of the lady is in line with the other reviewers assessment.

 
It's mostly about the details and "statistics" of the entire collection of reviews. No one review is the deal breaker generally so not worth making too much fuss about.

or reviews in general?  It looks to me that you have only glowing reviews.  

It seems to work quite well. Many of the providers have the same complaint as yourself. Maybe Ter will consider it?

Like Jensen said, here how it will work:

 

1. John gives low score
2. Provider responds, blames John for low score

 
if no further replies are allowed, provider going second is always in a better position. If further replies are allowed, then it will just be finger pointing back and forth.

 
 I don't doubt for a second there are opportunistic providers who will use that opportunity to make sure they get better scores no matter how good they really were. Ie, they will reply to every negative or mediocre review and blame the John.

And if a provider were to reply to "every negative or mediocre review" don't you think the guys looking at that ladies profile would consider those numerous responses as red flags and thus probably not patronize her? I would, and have, as I am sure you would as well. It really works quite well on other sites and ladies are more apt to join those sites and stay there, as they feel they are getting a fair shake.

From my POV If a client failed to "get up" then most honest reviewers will state that in their review.  At this point I see you have 12 excellent reviews so unless your goal was all 10/10s or placing #1 on the Top 100, I don't see what the gripe is.  

No, I don't think so, given the amount of white knights I see for the girls versus the amount of white knights for the mongers.  

 
I think it would further discourage those on the fence about writing truthful yet non-glowing reviews. Many mongers already live in fear of being bld because provider/agency has unconditional power to bl over whatever,including reviews. To quote a well-known author, power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 
I don't mind a provider response to give provider a voice,in theory. In practice, many people will take the provider's side no matter what. I have seen, many times, people ganging up on a reviewer who dared to give a girl of their affiliation a low score.

 
What's stopping the same thing from happening here? TER has aliases to help mongers to be able to write reviews from a name that might not be traced.
Well, it's incredibly easy to question credibility of an alias,dont you think? I've witnessed many an attack be based on credibility or its lack of.  

 
"This guy didn't get what he wanted and now he wrote a fake review and put me down hiding from an alias". BOOM. Now what? This is a template. OK, you say, we can observe providers who overuse this technique. What about the agencies where a girl has ten names a year? You have to consider each edge case here.

Because if you're concerned about your reviews,  it makes you look like anything less than a perfect 10 is a problem for you.  

Perhaps your careful client curating skills need some work.

...and it's likely to continue spiral out of control for the foreseeable future.    

The fatal flaw in every offered solution is they all rely on the integrity and honesty of the reviewer and the provider. Unfortunately, there are far too many reviewers who may have a (hidden or public) agenda to "punish" a provider for some real or imagined slight, and far too many providers who have a (hidden or public) agenda to refute or deny any negative part of a review, no matter how accurate or inaccurate the negative observation is.  

 
So any submission, rebuttal, rebuttal to the rebuttal, etc. system is only as valuable as it's least "honest" contributor. The end result of such a system would be to essentially "force" every review to have the same score as all others - probably all 8's, And that reduces the value of submitted reviews to zero.  If every provider is an 8, then why bother to read reviews in the first place. They will fail to differentiate one provider from another.  

 
The best way forward?  How the hell would I know?  But I can agree with a previous reply that unfair reviewers are eventually called out for being too harsh, too lenient, or just plain full of shit.  And I agree that experienced hobbyists learn how to read between the lines (sorry, I mean read between the lies) and still make a pretty good selection of providers that they will like.  

 
No provider likes to get a bullshit or overly critical review pinned to them. And IME, too few providers take the criticism that may be a fair critique as an opportunity to improve their performance, which leads to increased return and new business and revenue.  But despite its obvious flaws, the current system provides a level playing field for providers and reviewers.  It's understood, and it's generally consistently useful.  

 
Life is good

 
The Cat

It eloquently describes the conundrum as of now.

Well said!

Naturally, I can't find a single example at this time, but TER does allow Providers to contest some reviews. I think that the review is marked with a non-specific "This review has been challenged by the Provider" or something like that. Contested? Appealed? Whatever ...

I don't only think Natasha is pointing out that a guy gave her a less than stellar review, maybe it's because the scoring guidelines require specific services to be performed in order to get a perfect score. Even if every service is offered and available, the hobbyist's decision not to partake affects the provider's score. That is not necessarily fair.  

I certainly don't have a problem with a provider that strives to get perfect scores every time, wouldn't you love to be the recipient of such driving goal? Still, I agree that allowing fingerpointing won't solve OP's main concern.

Fortunately, I think most of us know how to research reviews, and one post alone doesn't affect the final decision to meet a provider. There are a lot of other factors.

I think most of us disregard a poor rating when a provider has all 10's or 9's and then all of a sudden a 5 or a 6 shows up.  You can't please all of the people all of the time.

***Admin note: Provider disputes review***

she wants all 10s or else she's not happy, hence, the reason for this post.

Take a look at her reviewers. Personally, most of them have given out way too many 10s for my tastes with many only reviewing her.

Disregard? The lowest reviews is what I read first. To paraphrase Tolstoy, all glowing reviews are glowing the same way. All the bad reviews are bad in their own way.

 
I always want to know the reason she scored low. If anything, that gives me a floor and worst case scenario.

 
I do it with pretty much any product good or service I buy. The 1-star % on Amazon is probably the most important stat they have.

 
And from my personal experience from reading literally thousands reviews from many different sites, the lower reviews tend to be more truthful. There is far less incentive for a monger to write a fake/dishonest review ghat is negative. Because you risk getting bld/despised by provider and attacked.

...allows responses from all members, including providers. Both providers and clients can also issue "Alerts," which are supposed to be for flagrant issues about which the community should be aware.

Now, this site only allows "star" reviews (1 to 5, 5 being the best). In the wake of FOSTA/SESTA, the site started NOT allowing detailed reviews. This severely limited the usefulness of reviews, and most clients just started handing out 5-star reviews as a matter of course.

So, the utility of reviews truly depends on the details.

Also, the Alerts turn into shitstorms of he said/she said, with the White Knights and GPS providers dishing out all kinds of crap.

Over the years that I've been here, I see this suggestion bandied about now and then. From where I sit, if things ain't broke...

"Also, the Alerts turn into shitstorms of he said/she said, with the White Knights and GPS providers dishing out all kinds of crap."

 
Basically exact thing I think will happen here as well. It's inevitable. For many providers, loss of money (or bruised ego) due to reviews, no matter how truthful, trumps truth. And in my experience, white knights are faar, far more numerous than those who try to protect mongers (not sure there's a term for it).

In theory the consolidated numbers showing at the top of the provider’s profile should tell us if one particular review is an outlier (the kind a statistician would probably toss from the data pool). My presumption is that most of us scroll past those consolidated results and go straight to the individual reviews, and thus one outlier review at the top carries more weight than it deserves.  

Maybe TER could put some flag on individual reviews that are way out of the norm for the provider? The review would still be there but the reader might take it with a bit more grain of salt than normal. (That could go both ways of course. A wildly positive review that is far out of norm could be flagged.) My stats knowledge is exhausted at this point, so someone else could suggest a standard the flagging might use. (For instance, at least ten prior reviews and the new one is more than 2 standard deviations from the prior history. That kind of thing.)

I'm sorry but what is this drivel?

"the kind a statistician would probably toss from the data pool"

?¿????? ¿??????  

 
"Maybe TER could put some flag on individual reviews that are way out of the norm for the provider"  

The fuck? Why would there be a flag on a review if it's  a truthful review? There is NOTHING wrong with outlier reviews as long as they are truthful. It's just a good as a review as others and deserves the same exact treatment other reviews deserve.  
Being at the end of the bell curve does not earn you a flag. You're suggesting putting a scarlett letter on reviews for simply deviating from majority? Wow.