TER shouldn't limit discussion of those who are "banned." Yasmine's perspective is well-taken--if you, as a provider, ask that ONE review be removed, should you be dropped down an Orwellian Memory Hole? Especially if it looks fake?
As someone else pointed out, TER is paid a fee for information (for VIP). Those of us who have NOT been around or been members forever don't know who these "banned" providers are, and it is reasonable for us to want to know why to avoid them. "Just don't do it!" is an answer for a five-year old, not an adult who asks questions. In addition, newer members, of which I am one, don't know that someone who suddenly shows up on Eros as (completely hypothetically, and with apologies to all women named 'Jane') "Jane Globnitz(2)" is the notoriously psychopathic scam-artist and criminally insane "Jane Globnitz(1)" who dropped out of sight for a year, rats to LE, pees on your television, shows up drunk, looks like hell warmed over, doesn't floss, does a cash-and-dash, gets angry and posts client info, and will shoot your dog and steal your Richard Simmons DVD, ad nauseum.
We're adults--this whole thing is about adult entertainment. I want access to as much information as possible so that my entertainment dollars are not wasted, and I get the best experiences, as I define them, for my money. I don't need TER to be Daddy and protect me from information--our society gets enough of that now from other sources. Limiting information puts TER in the position of not just providing an informational service, but making value judgments for its subcribers.
The rules prohibit discussions of providers who have been banned or de-listed.
I will sometimes allow a post that says 'she was banned or had her reviews removed', but that is the extent of it. I do this to let folks know that these providers/agencies ahve either egregiously broken the rules, or told TER that they want no reviews of themselves here.
Now, at least in my mind, if you break the rules and get banned, we as a community should not be supporting that by still frequenting that provider - more so, we should not even be talking about her.
The same goes for delisted providers. This provider has stood up and said that she does not want TER to keep her information in it's database. Why should we allow her to use TER as a source of advertising? Why should we allow gentlemen to advertise for her? I think we shouldn't, and oddly enough, I am for once in agreement with a set of rules!
Now, for all you guys out there PM ing info on banned or de-listed providers, "because the mod won't let my posts through", I'd like you to think about it in these terms.....
You have a thankless job and perform it quite well. I understand the rules, but it is often quite frustrating as I have found that several of the banned or delisted providers have, by their account, either tried to work things out with ter management, or they take issue with the reason(s) they were banned in the first place. These are credible providers with otherwsie sterling reputations. I realize there are two sides to every story, but if they have really either tried to work things out, apologized for their purported transgressions or had some other explanation and haven't received any explanation or reply, then it hardly seems fair. Some oif the posts about these providers are only an attempt among hobbyists to exchange information about providers who still may be worth seeing, despite their status here.
All of that said, again, thanx for all of your hard work and efforts here.
Funny you bring that up.
I was considering seein a provider that I know was banned from here but I don't know why other than I'm pretty sure it was not her choice.
Turns out she must have just been kicked off another site I review.
She had lots of "good" reviews and then "Poof" she was gone from there too.
I think I will play it safe and let TER be my guide and avoid avoid avoid.
"Now, at least in my mind, if you break the rules and get banned, we as a community should not be supporting that by still frequenting that provider - more so, we should not even be talking about her."
I know several girls who REQUESTED that a review be taken down and they were BANNED. WHy on earth should the community stop frequenting the provider? I can understand not talking about her but you also saying to stop seeing her? Seems a bit off to me. To get this straight if I ask for my reviews to be taken off are you saying that the community should not see me?
My apologies if I am incorrect about what you were getting at.
I don't have any direct knowledge of a provider asking for one review to be removed from TER and then being BANNED. I do know of many ladies asking to have ALL their reviews pulled(delisted) - then trying to use the board for advertising and such.
My opinion is that if you are going to dis TER like that, they are thumbing their nose at the community that we have here, and what we do to help each other. To me that is a double standard.
Many folks work hard to give good clean information, and if you decide you don't like that information, or that you want nothing to do with it, then why should we support you?
Im sure everyone remembers the beautiful Taylor of Dc. There was a review written of her with ALL of her PERSONAL info(things that were discussed in private and then written on the review) she asked that this particular review be taken down and they all were. She was banned.
I do agree with what you are saying, If you ask that your reviews be taken down (because of a bad one or 2) then why should you be able to advertise on this site. BUT......on the same token alot of girls I know think the reviews have TOO much detailed and personal info that they dont want posted (they feel its incriminating) and if this is the case why do you state that NO ONE SHOULD SEE THEM?
Then there are some girls who are mean and post bad reviews on other girls that are false and cruel. Everyone has their reasons for having them pulled.
Sorry no debate here, just seeing things from all sides and dont think its fair that a girl should be banned from getting clientelle for having their reviews pulled (for reasons other than they were bad)
Yes, Taylor is one I was refering to in my post above. There are some others.
A provider is banned. She changes her name. I see her new ad on EROS. I post an ISO, and folks are to be discouraged from even BCing me? How is that protecting me? I pay a fee to TER for information.
In this type of situation, I would allow a post on the subject - so that folks know this person is back.
However, I won't allow lots of other posts saying 'she was awesome', 'why was she banned', etc.
TER shouldn't limit discussion of those who are "banned." Yasmine's perspective is well-taken--if you, as a provider, ask that ONE review be removed, should you be dropped down an Orwellian Memory Hole? Especially if it looks fake?
As someone else pointed out, TER is paid a fee for information (for VIP). Those of us who have NOT been around or been members forever don't know who these "banned" providers are, and it is reasonable for us to want to know why to avoid them. "Just don't do it!" is an answer for a five-year old, not an adult who asks questions. In addition, newer members, of which I am one, don't know that someone who suddenly shows up on Eros as (completely hypothetically, and with apologies to all women named 'Jane') "Jane Globnitz(2)" is the notoriously psychopathic scam-artist and criminally insane "Jane Globnitz(1)" who dropped out of sight for a year, rats to LE, pees on your television, shows up drunk, looks like hell warmed over, doesn't floss, does a cash-and-dash, gets angry and posts client info, and will shoot your dog and steal your Richard Simmons DVD, ad nauseum.
We're adults--this whole thing is about adult entertainment. I want access to as much information as possible so that my entertainment dollars are not wasted, and I get the best experiences, as I define them, for my money. I don't need TER to be Daddy and protect me from information--our society gets enough of that now from other sources. Limiting information puts TER in the position of not just providing an informational service, but making value judgments for its subcribers.
to set the rules, I nevertheless believe that this one should, perhaps, be reconsidered or modified in some form. While I appreciate what you have sometimes allowed, some of us would appreciate (or like to give) greater explanations).
For example, I have gone to at least one PV joint that has been de-listed, and I've never had anything but outstanding service, consistent with the reviews that were once posted.
I think it's one thing to respect a provider's request to be de-listed (perhaps because she's left the profession), but when she is de-listed involuntarily for some offense (perceived or actual), we, as consumers, should be entitled to know her offense. Wouldn't it be more appropriate, under those circumstances, to keep her listing, with links to discussion of the offense?
Just a thought.