I haven't posted yet due to not much more info to add.  I did see curlyblond from pittsburgh and tried to post since she is less well known in D.C.  Got rejected with an inconsistent message.  Since I'm a $20 member, they should know that I'm not just trying to rack up the reviews for free membership.  I like to think I'm smarter than the average bear, so I don't think I did anything wrong technically.

Seems like it is not worth the trouble, but I do applaud the efforts of members of this board, who take the time and what now appears to be alot of effort to keep us informed.
steve

Re:Tougher than I thought to post...

Hi dude! Please do not give up your efforts to post? It is worth the effort, since the vitality of this Board largely depends upon new posters, such as yourself!
If there is any time that I can aid you with a recommendation for your hard-earned hobbying dollars, please, do not hesitate to TER e-mail me, or direct e-mail me, at [email protected] ?
I humbly stand ready to assist you, and other 'newbies,' and I wholeheartedly say, 'Welcome to the Board!'
Happy Saturn's Day!

dc!

-- Modified on 1/29/2005 10:10:41 AM

Not suer if it helps but....

MY REVIEW WAS REJECTED FOR BEING INCONSISTENT. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
This occurs when the reviewer pens a great review, yet gives the provider low performance ratings or vice versa. Also, if a well known provider who continually gets glowing reviews and high performance points is suddenly at an all time low, our suspicions as to the veracity of this review are aroused. We also use this term if the review states facts that other members have contradicted. The burden of proof is on the member who wrote the review.

RCP..

well, I have to tell you, the formula they are using, assuming you are correct, is absurd..

First.. HOW can anyone PROVE the 'veracity' of a review? These are opinions for Gods sake.. Just because someone gets great or bad reviews and suddenly gets an opposite review doesn't make it fake.  Think about it.. If they want to post fake reviews, won't they make them consistant with what's there so it simply slides by and gets approved??

Second.. TER has no right to refuse a review because they simply don't agree with it.  That's what you're saying they're doing.  How do you know that if I see someone, and her reviews have always been high, and on my visit, she totally sucked?  Maybe she had a bad day, maybe she just had a huge fight with her bf, maybe she hated me, maybe she just was depressed that day?  So, if I review her lower than her others, it's instantly deemed FAKE?  Isn't the whole point of the reviews to give people a basis on performance?  Maybe that consistant 8/9/10 lady has gotten tired of it and is performing at 4/5/6 levels.. Unless TER has a camera in the room, they can't prove or disprove the reviewer is lying or posting a fake review.  I am sure anyone in here could post fakes and get them accepted.. Posting something other than 'average' is what's being rejected and that's simply the wrong thing to do..

If that lady has declined in quality, and the poor reviews are all rejected as being inconsistant in her track record, we won't ever know her service has declined since TER has mandated all reviews must be consistant.  It's no different than a provider who's always been given low marks. .Maybe she went to a gym, got toned up, did the tanning salon and started swallowing.. What happens if her 4/5/6 reviews suddenly start coming in at 8/9/10??  Because her old reviews were less than stellar, will she be always labled shitty?  

It's no different than all the crap we have to fill out thats NEVER CHANGED.. If she was a redhead on her first review, she's a redhead forever!! It won't matter if she's a blonde now.. She'll be labled a redhead forever since the system won't allow for changes.. Damn.. people change.. What if she gained weight and her original review was 115# but now she weighs 150#.. Well, the current TER system will not change it.. she'll ALWAYS weigh 115#..

The TER system is flawed in many ways.. But the worst part is the human decision to toss out reviews based on what others thought weeks or months in the past.

This is an absolutely rediculous policy..

--JB

-- Modified on 1/31/2005 12:06:53 AM

Nice point.  you may be right on this one.  I did write a good review, since I did have alot of fun, and I didn't write any of the negatives down, and gave the person a 7 >>> because the next two people i saw were an 8 and 10 (but put down 9 to save some room for pure excellence).  I didn't think 7 was bad for performance, and it seemed like a 10 when i was there, but in hindsight, i wanted to be a little more stringent on the performance rating, so that my reviews would be more consistent.  Don't know if first time posting had an influence.

jeop.. don't think you can use yourself as a fair comparison to anyone else.  They see your name and probably don't even read it, and simply post it.. You've certainly got a track record of legitimacy..

the problem isn't someone with lots of reviews they don't worry about. it's the majority, with 0-50 reviews that get more scrutiny.. And the bottom line is when someone, according to RCP, when the review doesn't match previous history, then TER may change the ratings, or deny a review and that's what this is about, not your own experiences, which aren't going to be the same.

RCP even said this.. If a lady has 10 8/9/10 reviews and someone posts a 5, they'll likely reject it.  They're not willing to think maybe she was not good and deserved a 5.. Certainly, if someone writes 1 line and says she sucked, and that's all, and gives a 5.. ok.. maybe fake, but we don't know if the review SAID WHY she got a 5 cause we never get to read it..

My only point here is if someone writes a review contrary to others before her, TER may likely not allow it.  This in itself pretty much guarantees that we won't post a contradictory review since we know we'll likely be rejected and thus wasted perhaps an hour writing something they shitcan.

And while RCP posted his statement about how it's done, I'm still waiting for his response to my comments to see if he agrees or disagrees.  

How many people have been rejected due to contradictory reviews?  How many of us have seen a lady that said she was a redhead and weighed 120# only to find a blonde that weighed 150# because the original review was a year old.???  How many of us chose a provider because it said she provided a service, ie. swallows, or Greek, only to find she's not done that in a year?  

A great example of this would be Lila.  And I'm not using her as a bad example at all, just duration.  She's certainly one of the most entertaining ladies out there.  But, she's got PAGES and pages of reviews.. Almost all of em very high! Now, since her first review is several years ago, wouldn't it seem possible she's changed a little? She's certainly gotten older, if nothing else.  Yet, the informational part of the review NEVER changes.. How can it possibly be accurate anymore?  What if she's change her hair color a few times in 2 years?  Or gained or lost weight?  

My point is TER needs to find a better way to use the data they collect.  Things like hair color should update based on the most recent review.. Not just stay what it was on review # 1..

I doubt it'll change, and it's too bad.  TER is certainly a valuable commodity, and it still is a huge help for people to determine basic credibility of the ladies.  But if you're going to provide the service, why not make it the best possible?

--JB