Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 51

Thread: A Reviewer's (and Board Member's) Responsibility

  1. #1
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327

    A Reviewer's (and Board Member's) Responsibility

    Over in the Cerulean Haven of the Emotionally and Intellectually Dispossessed, there’s a thread that refers to Merb as “The Shill Board.” While I imagine there is shilling going on here, there are other factors which are even more injurious to the credibility of our little community.

    The purpose of reviews, to my mind, is to entertain, to enlighten, and to improve service. Undermining the effectiveness of the board are factors that question the credibility of reviews and the tendency of certain sanctimonious Knights of the Keyboard to attack vociferously any review that is in any way critical of one of the fair girls who work in our city. Ironically, the negative review is often, as it was yesterday, the review that works the most for good.

    I call to mind two reviewers, of varying literary quality, whose reviews are of zero value for their lack of critical balance. The first, now departed, a gentleman for whom, he claimed, the ladies were always crazin’, graded the girls on a scale that ran from 9.5-10. The lack of critical balance rendered his entertaining and well written reviews worthless. Another reviewer, ironically the first to jump on me yesterday for my review, is the master of hyperbole, his reviews so unbalanced in their mellifluous praise of whomever he happens to be reviewing, that his praise must necessarily be discarded for their lack of critical objectivity. For me to take any value from a review, I must consider the source and the source must show some critical balance to what he writes.

    I was privy yesterday to a conversation between two persons each with a direct connection to a local agency. It was their sense that negative reviews provide more valuable information to them than the positive and that it is the duty of the hobbyist to post negative reviews when appropriate. Yesterday’s events provided an object lesson.

    Here’s a brief capsule of what happened for those who weren’t following. I had a date this past Friday night with a young woman who captivated me the moment she entered my home. Over the ensuing hour, she distinctly failed to perform services that were within the range of those advertised by her employer, leaving me both angry and frustrated. Off she went, me still captivated by her and wondering why she was not able to perform or chose not to. My experience with working girls is extensive enough for me to know that it had nothing to do with me. I sent off a PM to the agency informing them that I'd just had what I referred to as "one of the most disappointing" sessions I'd ever experienced. And over breakfast with a friend the following morning, we agreed that my responsibility as a member of this board was to write her up. So I did.

    While the Knights of the Keyboard got their bowels all in an uproar, Mike at Chloe's Playground, the agency in question, turned his attention to customer service and defusing the problem. He spoke with the young woman, heard the story from her perspective and got back to me with what I deemed a satisfactory response, satisfactory to the extent that I chose to see her again last night. The upshot from the posting of the negative review was a) a regular client's dissatisfaction was well addressed and his future business retained, b) a young woman learned a lesson about professionalism in her difficult but well-paying job and that there are times when one should simply take the night off if one isn’t up to the tase. And she was rewarded with a new regular client, and c) Mike, calm under fire, reacted quickly and appropriately further establishing his reputation for customer service. Everyone winds up happy, except the Knights of the Keyboard.

    In summary, for Merb to retain its credibility, we need balance in reviews and we need each reviewer to show balance. I'm not suggesting that every less than fully satisfactory session warrants a negative review as certainly there are questions of appeal and chemistry, but there are certain times when it is not only warranted but is the client's responsibility. And I'd further suggest that negative reviews be posted in as constructive a fashion as possible, withholding anger. Finally, to the Knights of the Keyboard, when reading a negative review, first stick your thumbs up your ass so as to provide a disincentive to jump to quickly on the reviews author as, in doing so, you do this community a disservice.
    The mounties always get their man.

  2. #2
    Well written and exactly why I stopped writing reviews. My last and most famous review on this board being the Poutine Review. I've used to write many various reviews (positive, negative & neutral) of all prices ranges and types of SP's. This included the very first review on the famous Samy, and reviews of many notable SPs(including a couple of SPs who are now agency owners). I even used to refer to SPs exclusively as "ladies" or "lady". Now I rarely do, as even the indy SP's have learned how to scam white knights and others (fill in your definition or description here).

    But the White Knights of the keyboards, mostly referred to on this board as the "veterans", are the very ones who have put a stop to this with their fake posturing and hypocracy. This has made this board less useful and frankly I don't blame many for NOT writing all of their experiences in the most objective way possible. Many of the trends and happenings in this little community were entirely predicable and easy to identify in advance if not for the behavior of some who saw advantage in being in the pockets of the agencies and various "independents" out there.

    rumples, while I endorse the "theories", the practice of the open exchange of any useful information is a fairytale. May I also suggest that had a poster with lesser profile been involved in such an instance they may not have gotten the same response. There have been multiple instances where less than positive reviews by less frequent posters have resulted in accusations of board terrorism and blackmail.

    So to answer your central premise, a reviewer and/or board member has only one responsibility on this board: TO FOLLOW THE POSTING RULES!!!!

    Dear Moderators,

    I've attempted to follow all of your rules in this post. My appologies if I've screwed up. CS Martin
    Last edited by CS Martin; 07-03-2010 at 10:16 PM.

  3. #3
    Guys, let's keep it civilized. Already 3 posts out of 5 deleted because they were either banter or ammunition for a flame war.
    Anybody is entitled to his opinion and is free to share it but, if it turns to personal attacks and other ugly stuff, that would again cause some members to say MERB is over-moderated.

    Thanks

  4. #4
    Rumples ... good point... readers will recall that I made the same points with Chris and Billy... I hope they took them to heart.

  5. #5
    Why am I not surprised at what gets attracted to this thread.

  6. #6
    I don't understand why anyone would cease posting reviews or sugar-coat them due to apprehension about white knights. We are safe and sound at home while we troll the internet. Am I naive and not only will someone identify me, but knock down my door and chastise me physically? I got some negative feedback when I made some less than completely laudatory remarks about Penelope of Devilish a couple of years ago and don't think that I have flinched then or since.

    I do share CS Martin's annoyance about the diminished frequency and usefulness of reviews. Sex and money are basic human needs, so it is hopeless to appeal to the sense of responsibility of amateur and pro shills. I suggest the opposite tack of CS Martin. Let's drown them out by posting lots of frank and honest reviews (as did Rumples). Frankly, I do blame many of the non-shills for NOT writing all of their experiences in the most objective way possible.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by anon_vlad View Post
    frank and honest reviews (as did Rumples). .
    Frank ...yes. Honest .....not so
    Rumples had an agenda with his negative post of a girl who was known to be YMMV with a long list of mixed reviews.
    He posted a new thread that served no purpose to educate ....only to feed his agenda.

    I saw Nadia to-nite and have her side of the story. It adds a second dimension onto a 1 dimensional review.

  8. #8
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudsurf View Post
    I saw Nadia to-nite and have her side of the story. It adds a second dimension onto a 1 dimensional review.
    Your agenda-riddled clutter has no place in this thread, Mr. Knight. I saw Nadia tonight as well and you can rest assured that we had better things to do than talk about you.

    I've tried to start a serious conversation here and thankfully there are others willing to contribute to it. Your infantile ranting has no place here.

    Note to Mod; My apologies for having to reply to Cloudsurf's sub-juvenile bullshit. I know you have better things to do than clean his turd out of the sandbox, but I couldn't let it sit unanswered.
    Last edited by rumpleforeskiin; 07-04-2010 at 01:47 AM.
    The mounties always get their man.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by rumpleforeskiin View Post
    I saw Nadia tonight as well .
    How about an honest review now trooper

    BTW did you give her back the 40 bucks you short changed her last night....I know its none of my bussiness but once a Knight....always a knight.

  10. #10
    I can't imagine that it is easy to write reviews when the girl and/or agency knows you by your merb alias. Rumples and Cloudy, you have both obviously identified yourselves to Nadia.

    Incidentally, I just posted a review about a different Nadia (XXXtase).

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudsurf View Post
    Frank ...yes. Honest .....not so
    Rumples had an agenda with his negative post of a girl who was known to be YMMV with a long list of mixed reviews.
    He posted a new thread that served no purpose to educate ....only to feed his agenda.

    I saw Nadia to-nite and have her side of the story. It adds a second dimension onto a 1 dimensional review.
    Ah, as the knight appears with his damsel's side of the story to smite those that would henceforth be known by the name "board terrorist" or "blackmailer". What a very sad statement as the SP and agency owner have learned the stategy well of "divide and conquor". Yes, they've indeed learned well as they make $$$ on the original session that caused the isssue, the other board member's session looking to discredit the original poster, the original poster's "make-up" session to make things right, and possibly a few more from guys just wondering what's interesting about the SP to make her worth all the bandwidth. The SP & Agency got to be loving it. The SP here is not the one getting f__ked, but from her perspective sex has little to do with this.

    Per another thread she's now overbooked. Mission accomplished and we have our entertainment for the weekend. Wow, the last time this happened the little SP got a trip to San Francisco and a multi-page day by day review. Where shall some white knight take little Nadia? I hear New Orleans is cheap these days.
    Last edited by CS Martin; 07-04-2010 at 08:41 AM.

  12. #12
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudsurf View Post
    How about an honest review now trooper

    BTW did you give her back the 40 bucks you short changed her last night....I know its none of my bussiness but once a Knight....always a knight.
    Discussing my date with her? Boy, you're in Tony territory now, pal. A few comments on your very serious transgression.

    1. Mike offered me a $40 discount on night two, his cut, not hers. When I booked with him yesterday afternoon I told him that, considering his role in setting things right, it was unfair that he be the one getting short changed. I gave her $220 last night. Funny thing is, I'm happy, Nadia's happy, Mike's happy, the audience is enjoying the show, engorged on popcorn as they must be by now. And you, you poor sorry excuse for a man, have this massive hair across your ass. Get over it. Also, there is some thought that Mike's leaving her with me for an extra half-hour on Friday night was, in itself, a form of payback for Friday night.

    2. I did put up a brief statement in her thread yesterday, publicly announcing that I had a wonderful time with her. My ego doesn't require that I post the intensity of my orgasm. And by the way, my first review was an honest one. Someday perhaps you'll post a review that isn't all 10-10-10-10? Some of us will post both the good and the bad; credibility, something of which you have none, demands it.

    3. Prior to posting my initial review of her, I showed it to a friend. His response was, "Wait until Cloudsurf sees this." Your reputation for wanting merb to exist simply as a shill repository precedes you.

    4. The fact that you paid her good money to spend time discussing someone else's date with her is clear evidence a) of your continuing agenda and b) what a total schmuck you are. It really is too bad that this post will disappear later when the mods clean up the mess you started, as your post here is one of the most revealing of a person's true character in the history of merb. You're right it's none of your business; and booking a date with an escort to discuss her date with another doesn't make you a knight, it makes you one sick motherfucker and a stalker to boot. Have you sought professional help?

    Note to Mods: My apologies for having to reply to Cloudsurf's sub-juvenile bullshit. I know you have better things to do than clean his turd out of the sandbox, but I couldn't let his invasion of my private affairs sit unanswered. I'm not going to comment on whether this invasion warrants action on your part and I'll accept without comment your decision whether or not to take action against him. The fact that, despite your intervention, he insists in turning this thread, a serious discussion he wants no part of, into a flame war is, to my mind, also actionable, but a less serious offense than his invasion of my privacy and that of Nadia.
    Last edited by rumpleforeskiin; 07-04-2010 at 01:47 PM.
    The mounties always get their man.

  13. #13
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by anon_vlad View Post
    I can't imagine that it is easy to write reviews when the girl and/or agency knows you by your merb alias. Rumples and Cloudy, you have both obviously identified yourselves to Nadia.

    Incidentally, I just posted a review about a different Nadia (XXXtase).
    If Nadia knows my board handle, it certainly isn't from me letting her know it. If she has seen my review, I'm not aware of it. I've had two wonderful dates with her since I posted the review and there is no indication that she is upset with, or has even seen, what I wrote. The simple fact is she understands that she was in the wrong Friday night.
    Last edited by rumpleforeskiin; 07-04-2010 at 01:16 PM.
    The mounties always get their man.

  14. #14
    ‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^› Special K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Red Sox Nation
    Posts
    5,108
    This might make going to the GT on the 15th worth it in itself! Lol. Got your zebra shirt Doc?
    Jules Winnfield (Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction) English, motherfu*ker, do you speak it?

    Typical Yankee fan in the Merb Sports Section!! Bwwaahh.

  15. #15
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Special K View Post
    This might make going to the GT on the 15th worth it in itself! Lol. Got your zebra shirt Doc?
    Dunno, K. I'm sure it's a large room and that we'll be able to ignore each other quite easily. The questions are a) whether he's adult enough to not raise a fuss in public and b) whether he'll even have the huevos to show up after his Tony routine last night.
    Last edited by rumpleforeskiin; 07-04-2010 at 08:21 AM.
    The mounties always get their man.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •