Do the mods delete threads on a SP's request???

[Mod 2]

Now the Boards are pandering to SPs. One can't help but get that feeling. I agree with JB that the multiplicity of Boards is not in the best interest of the hobbyist. We must band together now and make sure these Boards are not letting the tail wag the dog.

Eager, can I remind you that the SP in question is NOT an advertiser of MERB? But thanks for pointing this out to me. I omitted to mention the fact that reviews may be pulled on request (again, ALL of them or none at all) regardless of whether the requester is an advertiser or not.

M2

 

[EagerBeaver]

Mod 2

Mod 2,

I don't think you have addressed the concern about SP advertisers threatening to take their business elsewhere unless you modify or eliminate reviews they deem undesirable. Would you not agree that the existence of the other Boards gives the SP a leverage that previously did not exist? And that this leverage will in fact be used to attempt to control the content of reviews posted on this Board?

 

[Mod 2]

Eager, the only thing I am saying is that we, as moderators, are using our common sense, objectively. I took the time to put in writing, for everyone to comment on, policies I previously only had in mind when acting upon a request for removal.

Although I see your point that multiple boards may be used as a leverage by some less straighforward SPs to control the contents of reviews on boards like this one, moderators have nothing to gain or lose as a result. Isn't that one of the reasons we are here? I personally don't care who the requests is coming from when I get one, as in whether the SP is an advertiser or not. I can safely say that all the Mods working together to maintain Merb think the same way in this regard.

M2

 

[Mod 2]

Anik, this discussion is about GLOBALLY removing reviews at an SP's request, if you didn't want reviews at all. Individual reviews still have to be dealt with according to the board's rules, and be managed according to rules being - or not - violated. As such, an individual review will NOT be removed simply because it contains innacurate information, as there is no way we can validate where the truth lies. You best course of action would then be to post in that thread with your side of the story.

I am positive that this board would not cater to blackmail in the advertising sense, and am certain that those deemed to be rip-offs would not be removed from the site... would they?

As I mentioned above in my explanation of the removal policies, "We still reserve the right to verify the request before taking action on it" and "the only thing I am saying is that we, as moderators, are using our common sense, objectively". I just hope you all trust our common sense

M2

 

[spartacus]

review no review.

To all my .002.
regarding reviews.
it is distressing to have bad reviews. but all in all I agree with the mod that readers make up their own minds based on the provenance of the reviewer.
We have also had SP's who have replied and commented on their reviews, I think this gave them more credibility than having all the reviews pulled.
see the post by Leila, and previous posts by other sp's.

to quote James Brown , I don't care what they say as long as they spell my name right.

a mix of good and bad reviews has to be expected as not everyones tastes are the same.
but the publicity generated by the board to all the members is awesome.
the sp's who pull their reviews because of bad press , as per the mod will soon disapear from our short term memory

to the mods
re the threads going when someone deletes himself.
I noticed that the thread for Claudia blond, and also a fantasme thread from Highelove disapeared, even though there were reviews by alot of other posters. can you explain?


spartacus

 

[joeblow]

I see Mod2's point about assuring any member (sp or client) the right to NOT be present on this forum and return to "private" life. Unfortunately, this right is open to abuse, as seems to be the case here when an SPs accepts favourable reviews and then pulls the plug when a bad one comes along. Nonetheless, I believe the right to privacy takes precedence over the inconvenience to hobbyists when it is abused. I realize my opinion has evolved since yesterday. That is because I now see the right to privacy, for legitimate reasons, as the overriding principle.

A public "Do-not-Review" list seems like a good compromise between an SP's right to privacy, on the one hand, and clients' right to objective information on the other. Thus if I see the name of an SP on a DNR list here, and I see favourable reviews of her on other boards, well that will speak volumes... If I see her name on a DNR list everywhere, that too will put me off.

Spartacus makes a valid point of pointing out the alternative to asking board management for removal of all mentions. Indeed, Laila yesterday took the trouble to respond to a bad review (the good, the bad and the ugly...outcall section) and successfully made her points. I urge any other SP who may feel she is unjustly demeaned or described in a review to respond in the same fashion -- with facts. SPs who act this way earn my respect a lot more than if they pull the plug and flee to another board.

 

[Mod 2]

to the mods
re the threads going when someone deletes himself.
I noticed that the thread for Claudia blond, and also a fantasme thread from Highelove disapeared, even though there were reviews by alot of other posters. can you explain?

Highelove has requested us to remove his account as well as all of his posts. Unfortunately, although removing a thread starting post manually doesn't get the thread to be deleted anymore, it appears mass "pruning" someone's posts has this undesirable effect you just highlighted.

We'll try to be more cautious in the future. Sorry about that.

M2

 

[joeblow]

A little experiment

I just posted a copy of my review of the SP who asked for her thread to be deleted here on the THIRD board where, as I indicated earlier, she has moved her Web presence. There are thus 2 reviews on that thread, the initiator's (here and there) and mine.

My experiment is to determine how long a "less than stellar" review will be tolerated on that board before it gets erased. Any bets?

 

[metoo4]

I might be extremist to a point but I feel reviews should not be removed unless they are either diffamatory, reveal confidential information or reveal information who could identify a person. Same with somebody leaving the business; removing the reviews will no longer affect hobbyists since she's no longer available and having reviews erased will ensure nothing will backfire in her future.

Of course, some SP will refuse to be reviewed but, this is a REVIEW board! It's then a jugement call from the hobbyist to review or not. She's expressing a wish but hey, it's a free country! If the hobbyist have some class, he will respect her wish, unless he feel she was really bad. In that case, following her wish would just defeat some of the purpose of this board: helping hobbyist make good choices and assist in protecting them from bad services. If you go at a garage and they wreck your engine, will you agree not to mention it to anybody?

We see a good example of this with an SP in Ottawa who call herself "Fun V...". As soon as somebody ask info about her, the thread vanish... Rumor is she's not the best but who know? Result is, the rumors will never be defeated or confirmed.

Putting a list of who doesn't accept reviews is great but, ensuring the list will always get checked will get pretty complicated, with newbies posting, SP added at random time and plain everybody forgetting to check.

Bottom line: No reviews should be removed unless as cited above. What's written stays written. If the SP see false information on a review or something she disagree with, she just have to post her point of view instead of crying to get the review erased. If there is a bad review and the SP ask for it to be removed, she obviously know the review exist so, she have an opportunity to defend herself. If she decide not to defend herself then, no crying to the Mods, just tought luck. If an SP insist so much in getting a review removed without defending herself, we can believe chances are the bad things said were right!

Just my opinion. I'm open to debate but not to flames.

 

[Lawless]

Thread removal

I fully agree with the above.
This is a review board after all!
With due respect, have you ever heard of a provider requesting the withdrawal of a too good review?
Interpretation of the Rules (which Rules are far from being explicit in their meanings!) is left with the Mods and they exposed themselves to criticism each time they step in attempting to apply those Rules.
Some times should be spent in clarifying the said Rules!
Not necessarily an urgent matter though!

 

[Parish]

My opinion...........

Hi Bonjour

Let me just get it right here ............I was working with the board all of
August and September ...after i ask personaly the gentlemen
no review good or bad i dont want to work with that no more,
i did not respect my choice so that why i made my post delete, they were not bad at all......... not because i give a bad service.
I admit i dont really appreciate what i consider an intimate time share with someone ending on the world wide web with Pornographic details about are encounter detail and rating, disturbe me a lot .......So i have mix feelings about this site : I've sometimes witness embelishement or false declaration
being written.........after all the review are anonymous.....
So that why i decided to work whitout review. Is this a crime?

 

[Lawless]

Yourself

Parish!
I assume it's not you real name after all!!!
Why wonder!

 

[ManAboutTown]

I am sorry, but deleting reviews at the request of the person being reviewed is, well, sort of deleting the point of a review board.

Maybe a change of name to METPRB (Montreal escorts that permit reviews board) would be in order? Perhaps METPTARB (montreal escorts that paid to advertise review board)?

Guys, you have started down a slippery slope that will almost undoubtly lead to "posts after review only" which is what basically killed canbest. When you start to edit some, you have to edit all.

Where exactly is this bus going?

MATt

 

[MrLuvr]

Removing reviews or following any sort of no review policy that is dictated by the SP is something that will lead people to question the objectivity of a review forum.

For example, if tomorrow, GM says that they have a no review policy and none of their cars are allowed to be reviewed in the press, what do you think will happen?

The SP should be allowed to post a rebuttal of a negative review and explain her side of the story, but that is the extent of the input that should be allowed.

 

[joeblow]

Since this practice is quite minor (Juliana and Parish) i would not mind to keep it, but if it would become a frequent behaviour among sex workers, then, i would revisit my position and question the existence of this site.

Exactly. The number of occurrences is key, and 2 over the past 8 months does not appear to me as excessive. At this rate, I think the DNR list remains a good compromise, as has been discussed further up in this thread by several posters.

Keeping tabs of SPs who request DNR, either as a policy or pursuant to a bad review, is also key. I urge members and Mods who know of such SPs to dilligently post their names in the thread created for that purpose.

 

[MrLuvr]

Once you exchange money for services, then the reason to say it is a private matter between client and customer is defeated. It is a service. That is all. We are not reviewing a private, relationship such as a girlfriend or something and the service she provides. As an SP, you cannot have it both ways. You have to accept that what you are providing here is a service in exchange for compensation.

Of course you can say that it depends on how you click with the person, etc.. etc.. and YMMV. But, are not the most well reviewed and popular SPs those that provide consistent service regardless of the YMMV factors?

If you look at some of the international review boards for example, the services are stated in explicit detail. Punternet is a good example. It is business, nothing personal.

 

[hobby11]

who cares???

.......................

 

[joeblow]

DNR policy open to abuse

I was happy with the outcome of this debate, with the public list of SPs that requested not to be reviewed. I thought that solution had struck a good balance between an SP`s right to privacy, on the one hand, and the hobbyist community`s righ to information on the other. But I realize now this policy is open to what appears to me like abuse.

In the public DNR list https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=9559 (which is closed for debate), M2 informs us that the SP Juliana has lifted her DNR request and will now allow herself to be reviewed. Is the net effect of this to have permitted all the bad press she got when her shilling was exposed to be erased, and to let her restart afresh? If so, the newbies here, or anybody here who did not follow that story, will be deprived of a important piece of information in their apparaisa of this person.

Example 2: Chloe. In her case, she decided to leave the biz and asks to have all her reviews deleted and even all mentions of her. The mods buy her story to the point of not even listing her name in the DNR lists (see mod4`s May 11 note on this in that thread). A few weeks later, she changes her mind and returns here to hang out for a while, only to re-retire soon after. I have no problem with people changing their mind; but in retrospect, the deletion of all her reviews and posts now seems unwarranted.

I admit to not having a cut and dry solution to all this, but I think we need to revisit this policy.

 

[Mod 2]

As I mentioned, I had numerous email communications with Juliana. She broke the rules in the past, got mixed reviews, wanted to get out of the boards, apparently amended helself and took massage lessons, etc. etc.

As you said, there is no "cut and dry solution to all this", but I am willing to give her a 2nd chance. Her future as an MP is in HER hands right now, and it's up to HER to provide a good service and accept constructive criticism.

With her "no-review policy" lifted, I expect her to respond to criticism in a professional manner, with no anger, and react accordingly. We'll all see how things evolve.

M2

PS: I'm off for the day, enjoying the sun... Will come back later tonight.

 

[EagerBeaver]

JB,

As far as I am concerned, if a lady is officially retired, leaving her reviews on the Board is only likely to cause confusion. Posters seeing those reviews may have missed the fact that she retired, and then they end up wasting time trying to send emails to the lady (and perhaps even money reserving a hotel). The lady probably has disconnected the email account and telephone number, so all that is going to happen is the wasting of time, energy and perhaps money of a hobbyist who may have missed the fact that she retired. I frankly do not understand why anyone would want reviews of a retired lady left up on the Board.

Now, if a lady "unretires" and we need to re-activate those deleted reviews, I believe the Mods have the technology in place to accomodate such a request. And I believe that is how it should be done.

As far as the DNR list, I am in favor of it. Either you are going to use the Internet or not. If you choose to reap the benefits of Internet advertising, then you must also accept the downside of negative reviews should they come your way. The "Marie Antoinette" SPs, who want to have their cake and eat it too, should be exposed by way of a DNR list. I don't believe you should have it both ways, using the Internet when it serves your purpose, but stifling critics when it does not. Such hypocrisy should not be tolerated! This is Canada and the USA where we all believe in free speech so long as it is within the Board rules. You want to live in a society where free expression is repressed, go to Saudi Arabia.