AGENCY of THE YEAR: 2012

[Merlot]

So you are saying that Mod 10 who previous to my post posted that two posters who voted are shills is not evidence, and the Mod is full of shit? How do we know Mod 10 is full of shit and you aren't?

EB,

Hey nice spin, can you pirouette on your toes too.

Mods use proof by technical access we don't have. Did you send any to them or just post what
you can't possibly support? If you didn't then you are FOS.

There's nothing wrong with posting suspicions to remind newer members of the problems. When I do these polls I usually offer an explanation covering that to explain the restrictions. But, "It's nothing but a shillfest" comes off as NOTHING BUT a declarative accusation against everyone who voted and everyone responsible for trying to run it.

I've been on this board 10 years. Shills, discount schemers, and others are a serious problem. So are false accusations that have chased away highly respected contributing members and discouraged new ones from posting.

Cheers,

Merlot

 

[EagerBeaver]

I have had no communication with the Mods on this issue whatsoever and frankly I ignore the results of all of these polls regardless of the subject or who starts them. I feel the only poll that is safe from shills (for the most part) is hotel or restaurant polls.

Mod 10 posted that two voters were shills and I started checking posting histories of the other voters, and if you bothered to read my initial post on this I said they were suspicious and that I could not prove anything. There is NOTHING WRONG with being very suspicious of a poll like this. Nothing at all. And I do not need to prove that I am suspicious, I can just say it because I do have the freedom to say my opinion. And that opinion is based on 10 years of being on this board and seeing a lot of bullshit get posted.

 

[Mod 10]

EagerBeaver; Okupied is well-know as Marilyn Minx. As for the other one, she better be warned that if she ever post as a shill, she will get booted. Same thing as if I ever catch her sending PMs. And i will look at it, trust me.

I strongly suggest to ManApart to check the member history (number of posts, etc).

M10

 

[Montreal Sex City]

Mod 10 posted that two voters were shills ...

EB,


One of those 2 handles is related to my agency and I asked the vote to be removed
cause the person didn't knew it was forbidden to to so.

It doesn't qualify, true, can be see as shill, true. However the reason given of why
a vote was placed it's cause another did and mislead to think it was permitted.

Hope this is a better explanation of this sudden fiasco

 

[EagerBeaver]

MSC,

The focus of my post was actually on other posters who voted for other agencies. Mod 10's post stands on its own and my posting went beyond that to other posters in the poll whose histories suggested to me they were possibly sleeper handles. I probably should have left Mod 10's post alone and I apologize if there was any inaccuracy as to my labelling of the two posters he referred to. That was not my intention, although it would seem that the two posters M10 referenced were not voting in an objective manner. I merely pointed out that possibly nor were others voting for other agencies.

 

[Montreal Sex City]

MSC,

The focus of my post was actually on other posters who voted for other agencies. Mod 10's post stands on its own and my posting went beyond that to other posters in the poll whose histories suggested to me they were possibly sleeper handles. I probably should have left Mod 10's post alone and I apologize if there was any inaccuracy as to my labelling of the two posters he referred to. That was not my intention, although it would seem that the two posters M10 referenced were not voting in an objective manner. I merely pointed out that possibly nor were others voting for other agencies.

No problem EB, I just clarifyied a bit what happened :smile:

 

[Mod 8]

Hello everyone,

To be eligible in any such poll, a member must have posted at least one review in the past year for the agency or provider they are voting for. The poll results should be verified after the poll has ended, by the member who has started the thread, any votes that do not qualify should be disqualified and the final results posted. If any member has concerns about any vote that has been placed, you can contact a moderator by PM.

If members continue to get into arguments over these polls, they will no longer be permitted and that would be a shame for all members as well as the providers.

Mod 8

 

[ManApart]

This is not a scientific poll, I think everyone knows that. I still think it can be useful in giving an indication which agencies are doing a good job satisfying their clients. Could there be a few voters who are a little suspect? Perhaps. With a large enough sample size, I really do not think it will be significant enough to skew the results. At the end of the poll, I will go over each and every voter profile, with the Mods help, to make sure everything is on the up and up.

In addition to a member having to have registered prior to Dec 31st. 2012 to have their vote counted, I will stipulate that they must also have written a review sometime in their posting history. I don't think it has to be necessarily in 2012. If the member has written a review in 2011 for example, I think that would go a long way to showing they are a legitimate hobbyist and not a "sleeper handle", as EB put it. This review criteria to be elible to vote has been added to my original post.

In the end, I believe the poll results will be fairly reliable and very transparent. Any member's vote that is not counted, at the end, will be listed and I will write a short explanation as to why. The remaining votes will be tallied and also listed, declaring a winner. There is no one who is more interested in having these polls as legitimate and fair as possible, than I am. So, I don't think we should get too disillusioned with them, until we see the final outcome and how it was handled.

Of course it is a member's choice whether they want to participate or not, but I really encourage you guys to take part. The more legitimate votes there are, adding to the sample size, the more accurate the poll will be.

 

[luv2kayak]

MA's approach sounds very reasonable to me.

 

[hungry101]

Manapart - thank you for putting this poll together. I am not concerned what the margin of error is. I am only looking for trends. I think it would be more useful if in addition to voting, if each hobbyist would explain why they voted for agency ABC and not agency xyz. Over the years I have read many reviews and exchanged many pm's with several members. I like to see where other hobbyists are going and know why. I find all this information helpful with keeping my finger on the pulse of the Montreal hobby scene.

Like the Greatwallou, I voted for Eleganza. I did so because I like the debutants that John recruits and I like the fact that you can prebook. I also love the website and the weekly schedule. I enjoyed the old members forum too. I only saw two girls this year and they where both from E. I had a great time with each girl and wrote two glowing reviews. I have never had a bad date with E. I had one or two mediocre dates over the years but most were spectacular. And I often would call John after the date and we would talk about how great of a staff he has. I enjoyed that. Now the bad: I tried to use John and Eleganza as a reference for a service located in the USA. The agency told me that John would not vouch for me. I sent John an e-mail and did not receive a reply. I don't know what John's side of the story is and I would still use Eleganza because the girls have always been so spectacular. I was just a little disappointed about this.

I will be back to Montreal a few times this year. I am looking forward to seeing some more beautiful, full-service girls.

I would really enjoy seeing some of the polls from the last 5-6 years. It would be fun to see how the agencies have faired over the years.

 

[Kasey Jones]

Don't you day-timers have jobs? :lol:

Good Girls for me by a mile... great roster, great booker, and a schedule that works for me

 

[Apprenti]

I hesitated a lot between Delight and MTLGFE. For me, both have been great. I will most probably try MSC in 2013.

 

[Special K]

I had some amazing experiences with GoodGirls in 2012 so they get my vote for this poll.

 

[Joe.t]

I voted for GoodGirls, how can I not vote for a agency that gave me free candy after seeing one of their girls.

 

[lgna69xxx]

and i got free Pizza from them b4 seeing one of their hotties, now thats customer service! (inside joke boys, (kinda) dont go hitting Mike up for an all dressed pie) :eyebrows:

 

[ManApart]

Hello everyone,

I would just like to remind people that to be eligible to vote:


- You must have been a registered MERB member before Jan 1st, 2013

- You must have at least 1 review of an SP in your posting history.



These criteria are in place to try to give as much legitimacy to the final results as possible. My apologies to ineligible members. This was the best way to find a happy balance to give the results some integrity.

There have already been multiple votes by ineligible members. At the end, every vote will be checked and ineligible votes will not be counted. So keep in mind the above poll totals can be misleading.


There is only 1 week left to place your votes!

This is going to be the tightest ever Agency of The Year poll!

Remember the above poll results are just preliminary. Many votes will not count because of ineligibility. Every vote will be very important from here on out.

 

[protagoras]

- You must have been a registered MERB member before Jan 1st, 2013

- You must have at least 1 review of an SP in your posting history.



There is only 1 week left to place your votes!

.

ManApart, if you give the permission, I would like to stress this in your second criteria: The review in the posting history should be written in 2012.

 

[ManApart]

Yes, of course. If someone wrote their first ever review yesterday and then voted, it would not count lol.

It would have to have been written before this contest and voter eligibility criteria were created. So, in 2012 or prior as you suggested. If someone wrote a review in their posting history, we can be quite sure he is a legitimate member and not one of the girls or an agency sleeper handle.

It isn't perfect, but is the best I can do to be as inclusive as possible and get as wide a range of voters as possible, and still maintain some measure of result legitimacy.

 

[EagerBeaver]

MA,

There are serious issues with this poll, which I have already shared with Mod 8 (I think) and since I sent the Mod that info shortly after my last post in this thread, a number of other suspicious votes have been cast.

You have a serious cleanup to do. I hereby give the Mods permission to forward my PMs to them to you, but that is just the beginning, I am afraid to say. Your cleanup is going to be very time consuming, although I have already done some of the cleaning work for you (see my PMs to the Mods when forwarded).

 

[Special K]

Wow, in just glancing at the voters in the poll this is going to be much closer once all the shills / joined a day ago's have been eliminated from the polling. Unbelievable!!