I'm sure there most be some discussion on this topic on the forums, but I can't find it.  I'm apparently using the wrong search terms.  My apologies if I'm flogging the dead horse here and I appreciate any pointers to prior discussion on the topic.

Recently I submitted a review for a provider that did not yet have a profile.  (FWIW I'm an experienced reviewer with a number of TER reviews under my belt over a few years).  I've had a devil of a time getting the review accepted.  The reason(s) for rejection have to do with the providers URLs.  

If I review the policy dealing with this (http://www.theeroticreview.com/info_policies/reviewFAQ.asp?#E) I don't seem to find the reasons given included there.  The powers that be might want to update this information to include these new policies.  

Apparently TER is getting parochial in that they will not accept URLs for provider profiles that includes links to reviews on other review sites.  Here's a quote from a reply I received, "[url deleted] is still not acceptable because they link to competing review sites." and "We don't link to competing review sites or any sites that contain escort reviews. "

So what's the motivation for the new policy?  Why is TER feeling so threatened by what they perceive to be competition?  

In my opinion NONE of the sites they have denied are any real competition to them.  I don't mention them here for fear of TER's apparent paranoia / insecurity causing me to get whacked up-side the head.  

In one case the "bad" site is an well-respected referral site that does not host any form of review forum. It does however allow providers to list links to review sites (some of which might not be TER - egads).  

In another case the "bad" site is an escort ad board (used HEAVILY in my area - Denver, CO) that in fact has NO direct affiliation with a regional review board ... the ad board and the review board may collaboratre closely, but they are in fact run by different entities / people.  And the ad board is deemed "bad" by TER merely due to its friendly affiliation.  The "bad" ad board doesn't even have a section for links to reviews that might be on any perceived competing review site.  

But I don't even get the base motivation for this.  TER is and has been a VERY strong review site.  Why is it getting so petty about this perceived competition.  In my view TER is the big guy on the 'review block' and shouldn't even be bothering with worrying about the little guys.

This petty behavior on the part of TER is going to do far more damage to TER's reputation and usability than the competition would do.  The policy is making it nearly impossible to post reviews for providers in our area since most of the providers only post ads on the sites that TER has erroneously dubbed "bad".  

Grow up, TER and put on your big boy/girl panties.  Geesh.

If the policy is as you state then many ladies will not be able to be reviewed here on TER as they have links to more than one review site.

To be consistent they probably should delete all the reviews of ladies who have reviews on TER and also have other sites listed on their web pages.

Let's see, that would leave maybe 10 providers listed on TER!

They who have the gold, make the rules.

In this case, it is TER's management.  It's their board and they are free to make up rules as they see fit.

Your only recourse is to use other boards or start one of your own.

It's like a local newscaster used to say at the end of his broadcasts:  "If you don't like the news, go make some of your own."

Not surprised. The other site has been deleting reviews that have reviews linked to this site. When you ask support (on the other site) about it they don't respond, you have to figure out yourself.

-- Modified on 3/23/2008 1:02:36 PM

It's not that they are a threat to TER. It's been like this forever, you never see Eros linking to Cityvibe, or Microsoft to Apple!! No matter how big or small they are, they work in the same field and offer the same service. It's just a matter of time till smaller sites start benefiting from the hard earned traffic of those on top.

Also one more thing to consider is the discrepancy between a providers' reviews on TER and a review site which does not monitor reviews.

If a provider's average on TER is 6 and the link on her profile sends you to another site on which her average is 9, how can you decide which one is to be trusted? If you say TER, then TER is misleading you by showing you her fake reviews. That's not smart is it?

Sure, no argument there ... its there board, they can make the rules.  

I'm just providing feedback (and ranting) at what I perceive to be a decision that I don't really comprehend, as it seems to be one that is shooting them in the foot.  

Don't misunderstand.  I've appreciated TER.  I like it.  That is why I bother providing the feedback.  Because, as I see it, this policy and its over-zealous implementation is going to make the board far less useful to me.  And that is sad (IMHO).  Sure, if its value diminishes enough it won't be worth the cost of my VIP membership and I won't bother to resubscribe.  I'd prefer that not be the case.

I'm not quite sure which 'other site' you are referring to, but I haven't observed that on the sites I am aware of.  I'm not saying you are wrong, just saying we might be talking about different sites / areas.  Send me a msg with details, please.  Thanks.

If providers can't get profiles because of the links on their page, this will force TER members to seek out other review sites in order to get some information.

Will TER lose more members who see a link on a page for a provider they've already read reviews on (so why bother reading reviews elsewhere), or for those that can't get reviewed here?

And there are plenty of indirect links anyway. Cityvibe is advertised here. Go to that site, and escort ads for personal websites may link to their reviews at another site, and from that point on apparently cannot link to TER reviews because their profiles aren't allowed. So you are forced, at that point, to go to the other site instead of TER even if you prefer TER. And the more that happens, the less reason to stay at TER.

Seems like a bad business model to me. Maintain a near monopoly on hobbyists seeking reviews by maximizing, not minimizing, the number of reviewed providers.

You wrote:
[[ It's not that they are a threat to TER. It's been like this forever, you never see Eros linking to Cityvibe, or Microsoft to Apple!! No matter how big or small they are, they work in the same field and offer the same service. It's just a matter of time till smaller sites start benefiting from the hard earned traffic of those on top. ]]

The sites in question are not direct competitors to TER.  One is a referral/verification site and merely allows any review link.  Even though TER has it's white list I don't see that as a major thrust of TER.  

Another is a regional ad board.  Does TER have an ad board?

If you are going to start banning URLs for anybody with loose connections to the hobby you are pretty much going to find yourself an island onto yourself.  It almost feels like in order to be allowed to be link from a TER review you have to have a exclusive, monogomous reciprocal link with TER.  Given the nature of the hobby that seems just a tad bit ironic.

4 of my reviews on the other site were recently deleted because they have urls to cityvibe services. The cityvibe services urls had urls to the TER reviews. Pisses my off because I took the time to write the reviews and post them.  Some of them had been posted there for more than a year.

You wrote:
[[Also one more thing to consider is the discrepancy between a providers' reviews on TER and a review site which does not monitor reviews.

If a provider's average on TER is 6 and the link on her profile sends you to another site on which her average is 9, how can you decide which one is to be trusted? If you say TER, then TER is misleading you by showing you her fake reviews. That's not smart is it?]]

Let's not lose site of the fact that most of what we are talking about here is NOT direct links from the providers profile to other review sites.  All of this is indirect.  The link from the TER profile is to an ad web page, a profile for the provider on another site, or to an ad page for the provider ... and that page MAY contain a link to reviews this provider has on another review site.  I emphasize MAY, because URLs are being deemed bad not becasue they ACTUALLY contain links to other review sites, but just because those sites have allowed these links. Throwing the baby out with the bath water if you ask me.

I'd hope that everyone looking at a review ANYWHERE would take into account the nature of that site's reviews (i.e., are they moderated, what posting rules do they have, are self-reviews monitored and culled, etc.)  And of course every review site has it's own review scales and criteria.  Anybody reviewing reviews better know that.  And, by the way, the review sites INDIRECTLY involved are moderated review sites with reasonable guidelines ... not some free-for-all review space.

This is not normal business.

I hate the customer service of a particular advertising site, it is horrendous and any request I have they get wrong.

Should I take my business elsewhere, yes but unfortunately elsewhere won't get me the viewership and response that this particular site gets me.

Is anyone else going to open a site with better customer service .... probably not since the barriers to entry are so strong (legal) and since a few dominant the field.

At some point someone else will open shop and get viewership and the other sites will lose marketshare but in the meantime I have to deal with the site with their horrible customer service.

At this time, where other than TER are you going to get such a thorough compilation of (mostly) correct information ?

xo Lisa


-- Modified on 3/23/2008 4:24:43 PM

Your web site is one if the best I have ever seen.  It is very impressive and well done.  You should be very proud of it and of the remarkable review numbers you have attained.

I see you had some reviews from the Orlando area.  How often do you get there?

-- Modified on 3/23/2008 5:19:49 PM

You'll see various threads on rejected reviews.  It's not uncommon for inconsistencies in the application of review posting rules.  Resubmitting the same info can lead to approval.  Frustrating, but not uncommon.

Just make sure the site you find her on is an advertising site rather than a review site (a bit of searching may be in order).  If it is still an issue, an e-mail to staff asking why it is a problem if the issue is not the website but the content of the advertisement may help get some movement on this.

AS zisk mentioned, if TER were to go so far as refuse to accept URLs that contained secondary links to any other review site, there would be few profiles.  Many ladies' personal sites oontain links to their reviews.  Why bother subscribing if TER contains nothing more than the profiles of ladies who exclusively have reviews on TER? Hopefully this is just an issue with a staff member  going too far in interpreting the rules.

if she has a site, page or whatever that has the ter seal linked, her reviews will be accepted.

i dont think ter fears competition as much as it fears trying to create and maintain profiles on such fly by night characters that have yet to settle down in one place long enough to slap their golden seal up.

not saying an escort has to have a site with the seal, but just saying if she does have one, the review wont be rejected because of the url.

if she wants to email me at [email protected], i'll help her out.

-- Modified on 3/23/2008 5:39:59 PM

I HAVE resubmitted multiple times.

I have also had a lengthy exhange with TER support about the matter.

And yes they did tell me that a profile page URL from a nationwide referral / verification site would not be accepted because that site allowed links on the profile page that were to competing review sites.  

And, yes, I have noted the inconsistent application of these policies.  Very frustrating indeed.  

One new thing popped up though when the form submission softward started denying the submission of the form due to one of the "bad" websites being utilized.  So now it is automated ... And the really ironic thing is that the URL I provided was one that one of the TER staff told me was okay.  Go figure.

Hopefully, TER being a progressive review board will take the comments posted here into consideration and modify/update their policies accordingly.

oh, were you serious about that?

Are you trying to incite the TER gods to ban you? Telling them to grow up? Oh lord...

Why don't you simply find a link to the lady that doesn't include a site with reviews? EASY. It would be so much easier than inciting drama and asking for trouble.

Katie

I believe that Cityvibe and TER do work together because you can see their banner on both sites.  Plus my ad here is linked to CV and my reviews from CV is linked here.

Ive been saying these things for weeks - but TER deletes my posts, and the responses of others.

This time change the days from 30 to 330 to 0. Use your phrase "reviews rejected."

Their reviews got rejected because of a legit link even though it has no reviews on it. They even called me a "Prick" when I asked why my review was rejected. (First they thought it was a joke and laughed, when I said I was serious, then they called me a prick)

I have a ter link on my site and only a ter link.
My site is listed under ters site reviews and still my reviews are rejected on this board.
several gents have tried to post but it takes such a long time and then it gets kicked back a day or so later.

Sounds like to much work.

That is why i don't have any reviewes HERE.

sexymaddy

Who are you to question their "BUSINESS MODEL" ?

Obviously they are doing something right, considering TER came to the field when TBD was already in the field and it took them less than 2 years to take over the market. Not to mention earning the title of the biggest escort review site in the world and almost 1 million members, in less than 7 years starting from scratch...


There is much in this business that we do not know, I might be a great business man in petroleum field but that does not mean I can be as great in other businesses.

my fuzzy ATF is hot... hey how about a 3some???


lol,.. kidding,... but on a serious note,... Damn you are HOT!!!

Right, which just highlights the inconsistent application of the policy.  I would think it would be a daunting task to go back and retroactively apply the policy to all existing profiles.  The place where I bumped into it was on a submission for a provider that did not yet have a profile.

TER is a business, which the head of a popular agency has recently been reminded.

I've been a mod for a little more than a year now, and thus can't post reviews.  But when I could, I had a few rejected for linking to profiles on other escort discussion/review sites.

I have never known a review to be rejected because it had a link to a competitive site.  What I have seen is reviews being rejected because the link is HOSTED on a competitor site.

Why should TER allow you to link a lady's escorts.com profile as her homepage?  That site requires you to be a paying member, or reviewer to even see an email address or URL!!!

I don't have a problem with restricting the allowable URLs to those URLs that don't require membership to get a reasonable amount of information.  Though if you think about it that is a bit odd considering the fact that TER requires memembership to get most interesting information ... oh well.  The ones that were denied in my case didn't require membership to get a reasonable amount of information on the provider.

im happy to help her get something up that would get approved. [email protected]

its nothing to get upset over.
i've helped lots of girls get established, it doesnt take me long at all.

every escort i know has links to other reviews sites on their website and i had my website with those links 3 years before my profile was created on ter.

im not looking to charge her, i'll assume if she inspired a guy to raise this much of a hullabaloo, then she's worth the 5 minutes of my time.