Hal's recent review thread
- Thread starter cloudsurf
- Start date
Sometimes you waste more bandwidth discussing the bureacracy of rules than by just execising a little judgement and flexibility from time to time.
There has been an evolution of rules on MERB and I am not sure if the current Mods were even around for all of that history. Initially a TS could start his own thread on a lady even if one was already started. The reason for this was that posters were sometimes deleting their threads, and members posting their reviews in one thread complained that by doing so, they were at the mercy of the whims of any TS who may decide to delete the thread. Threads could not be restored in the early days of MERB. There were several examples of posters deleting their threads which contained many reviews due to pressure from agencies or the individual escorts involved. This caused many complaints and accusations that the deleting thread starters were "girlie men" or "pussywhipped."
Eventually due to these concerns the Mods allowed posting multiple threads on one lady.
Then complaints began that members were missing threads on ladies, when they searched, and that all information should be stored in one thread, so long as there was a guarantee that the information would not be lost. Although in the early days of MERB the Mods did not have the technological ability to restore deleted threads, they now do. So the rule of consolidation of threads then came into play, and along with it the rule of "no shotgun reviews". The rule against shotgun reviews or multiple ladies reviewed in one thread came about due to a thread started by a poster named Muffinbuffer, I believe, although it could have also been enacted due to a similar thread by Freedom3. What I recall was the thread was called a "Field Report" on 17 different escorts. As I recall, the thread was enormously well received and although it was initially deleted, outcry over the deletion led to its temporary or permanent restoration.
The chief concern with a compendium such as what Hal has posted is the so called "freshness dating." As I already said if there is a disclaimer giving the reader an idea that the reviews are not fresh and directing the reader to individual threads for updated information, the problem is solved. This Board should be about solving problems that are easy to solve, rather than erecting barriers to the posting of information that is important and credible. This is getting to be like the US Congress where gridlock over any new law leads to endless discussion, filibusters etc. What is needed is swift, decisive and reasoned action.
Eventually due to these concerns the Mods allowed posting multiple threads on one lady.
Then complaints began that members were missing threads on ladies, when they searched, and that all information should be stored in one thread, so long as there was a guarantee that the information would not be lost. Although in the early days of MERB the Mods did not have the technological ability to restore deleted threads, they now do. So the rule of consolidation of threads then came into play, and along with it the rule of "no shotgun reviews". The rule against shotgun reviews or multiple ladies reviewed in one thread came about due to a thread started by a poster named Muffinbuffer, I believe, although it could have also been enacted due to a similar thread by Freedom3. What I recall was the thread was called a "Field Report" on 17 different escorts. As I recall, the thread was enormously well received and although it was initially deleted, outcry over the deletion led to its temporary or permanent restoration.
The chief concern with a compendium such as what Hal has posted is the so called "freshness dating." As I already said if there is a disclaimer giving the reader an idea that the reviews are not fresh and directing the reader to individual threads for updated information, the problem is solved. This Board should be about solving problems that are easy to solve, rather than erecting barriers to the posting of information that is important and credible. This is getting to be like the US Congress where gridlock over any new law leads to endless discussion, filibusters etc. What is needed is swift, decisive and reasoned action.
Last edited:
Apparently at least Fox News agrees with you.....LOL
FoxNews.com by: George Russell on September 19, 2011
EXCLUSIVE: U.N. 'Fast Track Opportunities' Do Little to Cut Costs, Improve Efficiency
Six months after United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged top staffers to come up with solutions to cut costs and improve efficiency, the U.N.’s bureaucracy has produced a list of “fast track opportunities” for change that do little more than cut down on paper use .......
--“issue a guide on holding paper-smart meetings to promote their use among delegates and Secretariat officials.”
Hello Possum Trot,
The thing is that this is not a new discussion. It has discussed a number of times before and always with the same result. The majority of posters seem to have no problem in following the existing standard which is posting reviews in one thread per SP. We have always felt that this puts all the pertinent information in one place instead of members having to search for dozens of threads to get the entire review picture on any particular SP. If we begin to allow such collective threads, we might as well allow every member to start their own thread for each of their reviews or to group all their reviews together whenever they wish. Then we will have complaints that there are too many threads and that it is impossible to find the information that is needed. If that is what you all would prefer to see happen, I have no problem with it. It will certainly save a lot of time moderating the board as we will not have to bother merging review threads and renaming them when girls change agency, which is something we do on a very regular basis.
It cannot be done both ways. If we permit members to start group review threads, we have no grounds to prevent members from starting a thread for each review they write or from posting 2, 3, or more reviews together. Either we have an organized review forum where the information is relatively easy to find or we have total disorganization with members having to sift through dozens of threads, or more, to get the information they need.
Take your pick.
Mod 8
The thing is that this is not a new discussion. It has discussed a number of times before and always with the same result. The majority of posters seem to have no problem in following the existing standard which is posting reviews in one thread per SP. We have always felt that this puts all the pertinent information in one place instead of members having to search for dozens of threads to get the entire review picture on any particular SP. If we begin to allow such collective threads, we might as well allow every member to start their own thread for each of their reviews or to group all their reviews together whenever they wish. Then we will have complaints that there are too many threads and that it is impossible to find the information that is needed. If that is what you all would prefer to see happen, I have no problem with it. It will certainly save a lot of time moderating the board as we will not have to bother merging review threads and renaming them when girls change agency, which is something we do on a very regular basis.
It cannot be done both ways. If we permit members to start group review threads, we have no grounds to prevent members from starting a thread for each review they write or from posting 2, 3, or more reviews together. Either we have an organized review forum where the information is relatively easy to find or we have total disorganization with members having to sift through dozens of threads, or more, to get the information they need.
Take your pick.
Mod 8
Your point is well taken, M8. And we appreciate you taking the time to explain all this arcane board management stuff to us thick-skulled lustful guys...
My point is that there should also be a way to accommodate special or occasional posts containing interesting "value-added" content, which may go beyond pure SP reviews. I have been on this board for a year and I can only remember two such posts: Muffinbuffer's and now Hal's. Such notable posts/threads are not very frequent. These posts distinguish themselves from mere reviews by additional content on agencies, bookers, major comparisons, historical/geographical perspective, the hobby itself, and the poster himself. All that information is lost, or much harder to find, if reviews are dispersed in individual SP threads...
Maybe a sub-forum for "Trip reports" or "Special reports" could be created. Threads (or the initial post in each such thread, i.e. the trip report itself) in those sub-forums would have to be approved by Mods before becoming visible to members. Clear rules as to allowed/prohibited content would be posted. The Mods could base their decision on the "added-value" of the posts, that would prevent chaos and ensure that only quality (original, creative, unusual, etc.) reports are part of that sub-forum. Regular single-SP reviews would be prohibited. And generic multiple reviews would also be prohibited unless they come with significant "added-value" content. Nothing would prevent any member from adding a link in a lady's thread pointing to the "Trip report" if said member felt that the review was especially relevant/informative (crowdsourcing). That's my suggestion.
Again, I mention that MERB's software allows for individual blogs within the board's framework. Merb has had a "supporting member status" for quite a while. Why not ad that to the site for supporting members. You do two simple rules: 1) All review information must be posted in the SP or agency's thread, but also may be mentioned in the blog 2) Blogs may only pass on information directly related to the poster's actual experiences and methods. Basically travel reports that fill in all the blanks that the reviews can't give.
I tend to believe that these blogs should be limited in posting to the owners themselves. Discussions on particular points can be held in the forum. Should be easy to set up and easy to police.
I tend to believe that these blogs should be limited in posting to the owners themselves. Discussions on particular points can be held in the forum. Should be easy to set up and easy to police.
johnmbot,
Frankly I think we should let it be and restrict reviews to each SP's thread as usual. Time, change & progress move forward. While I really don't want to put any more work on the Moderators, I'm offering suggestions that give alternatives to each anticpated change. I just make suggestions and throw them out there.
In fact, we could take an idea off of one of the most successful review sites in the world, "Angie's List". For anyone familiar with it, "I'd never leave home without it". On Angie's list, a reviewers record is available with one click. It merely says next to the reviewer's name, "other reviews by this member". You can immediately see what type of temperment the reviewer has shown in the past. When I recently reviewed a cleaning lady, she was blown away by the number of phone calls she got of my one comment. This came right after some idiot gave her poor marks. While the negative report hurt her feelings only, my positive (and track record on that site) one brought her immediate credibility & business. How about this type of arrangement Mods?
Frankly I think we should let it be and restrict reviews to each SP's thread as usual. Time, change & progress move forward. While I really don't want to put any more work on the Moderators, I'm offering suggestions that give alternatives to each anticpated change. I just make suggestions and throw them out there.
In fact, we could take an idea off of one of the most successful review sites in the world, "Angie's List". For anyone familiar with it, "I'd never leave home without it". On Angie's list, a reviewers record is available with one click. It merely says next to the reviewer's name, "other reviews by this member". You can immediately see what type of temperment the reviewer has shown in the past. When I recently reviewed a cleaning lady, she was blown away by the number of phone calls she got of my one comment. This came right after some idiot gave her poor marks. While the negative report hurt her feelings only, my positive (and track record on that site) one brought her immediate credibility & business. How about this type of arrangement Mods?
Not sure its all the mods fault but double bingo from me. Advertisers are attracted to traffic and traffic is caused by entertainment and useful information.
Possum Trot, people are also attracted to a board where the information is easy to find, not scattered all over the board. MERB is a review board, it is not a blog or a collection of personal blogs. I fail to see how preventing members from posting collections of their reviews in one thread would discourage the writing of reviews. Members are supposed to write reviews to provide useful information to other members, not to make the poster more important than the information being presented.
As for starting a new section - which would mean extra work for the board admins as well as extra work for the moderators, just to duplicate information that will also be posted in the individual review threads, for less than a handful of members who will actually start threads in it - it simply is not going to happen.
CS, if you look at the 'Angie's List' website, you will discover that it is a paid membership site and it does not run on the vbulletin software. It is a completely different kind of enterprise. I am sure that Fred would be interested if you could guarantee the same number of members that MERB has now at a price of $29.00/year per member. Somehow I doubt that people would be willing to provide their personal information to post and read reviews on MERB. Their number one claim is 'No anonymous reviews' and that would not really work here would it?
sigma69, there is nothing preventing any member from posting a trip report with comparisons of his encounters or other details as long as it does not contain detailed reviews. Reviews belong in the review forums, in the review thread of the SP concerned. There is nothing wrong with any member making such a post and including links to the pertinent reviews in his post. You make a point that the information will be hard to find if it is 'dispersed' in individual review threads. Well I will counter that the reviews will be much more difficult to find once that post fades away due to inactivity. How will anyone know to search for Hal's Trip Report for a review of a particular SP that may or may not be in that thread while doing a simple title search for the SP's name will present her entire review thread with all her reviews and comments? The extra details you speak of do not belong in a review post in any case, they are general hobby topics and belong in the Lounge.
I have presented a compromise but it seems that people do not want to compromise because it will require a little more work on their part. That is their choice and it seems that things will remain as they are.
Mod 8
As for starting a new section - which would mean extra work for the board admins as well as extra work for the moderators, just to duplicate information that will also be posted in the individual review threads, for less than a handful of members who will actually start threads in it - it simply is not going to happen.
CS, if you look at the 'Angie's List' website, you will discover that it is a paid membership site and it does not run on the vbulletin software. It is a completely different kind of enterprise. I am sure that Fred would be interested if you could guarantee the same number of members that MERB has now at a price of $29.00/year per member. Somehow I doubt that people would be willing to provide their personal information to post and read reviews on MERB. Their number one claim is 'No anonymous reviews' and that would not really work here would it?
sigma69, there is nothing preventing any member from posting a trip report with comparisons of his encounters or other details as long as it does not contain detailed reviews. Reviews belong in the review forums, in the review thread of the SP concerned. There is nothing wrong with any member making such a post and including links to the pertinent reviews in his post. You make a point that the information will be hard to find if it is 'dispersed' in individual review threads. Well I will counter that the reviews will be much more difficult to find once that post fades away due to inactivity. How will anyone know to search for Hal's Trip Report for a review of a particular SP that may or may not be in that thread while doing a simple title search for the SP's name will present her entire review thread with all her reviews and comments? The extra details you speak of do not belong in a review post in any case, they are general hobby topics and belong in the Lounge.
I have presented a compromise but it seems that people do not want to compromise because it will require a little more work on their part. That is their choice and it seems that things will remain as they are.
Mod 8
Mod 8, how can it be that you so throughly misunderstand my suggestion? Now Duh, I said I'm a member of Angie's list......So it would follow that I'm aware that it's a pay site. The principal suggestion was a link to the poster's other reviews. How about I put it in more simple terms?? Those reviewers who have more than 6 reviews may group them together in his own thread. He must still post each review in the SP's thread, but they MAY BE COPIED (verbatum) in the poster's own thread (no exceptions and no other comments/content to make policing easy). The poster will be allowed to have a link to his review thead in his signature so other clients can judge the poster's particular tastes. This approach results in two benefits. One, it helps the clients ferret out shills (yes, I know there's no shills here-but humor me). Second, it potentially increases the number of page hits as potential clients find reviewers to rely upon day in and day out looking at the poster's other reviews.
Possible other benefits:
A third and less obvious benefit is Fred can sell advertising more easily as he points out the benefits of this board system vs. an advertiser's alternative. Fourth potential benefit is reviewers will write more interesting reviews as they seek to incorporate more style and creativity into their own personal review thread (i.e. better reviews in the SP's own thread as well). Fifth, from an SEO point of view google, yahoo and other search engines will have more content to "crawl" over depending on how you handle the availablity (i.e. private, not private, or some limited viewing capability if available) of the new type of thread. Sixth, at least some posters will use their threads as repositories to keep copies of their own reviews in one place.
It should be understood this idea was posted here first, before another board adopts it. Where's a good copywrite attorney when you need one? EB, do you do copywrite law?
Damn! I spend a week in the boonies, fight my way to get a MODEM connection and what do I find? This thread is still alive!!!!
Let's make one thing clear: These "Look-at-me-I-saw-all these-girls-and-I-am-so-good" threads have ONE main purpose: an ego boost to the poster. There is a desire to share but, by making HIS OWN reviews stand-out, the goal is to shine, consciously or not. Somebody who does it with the sole goal of contributing won't take offense at following established guidelines. MERB is intended to share info, not to be a psychological booster. Often, the best and most objectives reviews come with no strings attached. Other might be entertaining but they often review the poster more than the girls.
I do see an entertainment value of mega threads BUT, that entertainment value can easily be kept by the poster posting reviews the proper way and then, creating a lounge thread with his general trip report, with links to his reviews, in the proper section. Is that so much extra work? If you're willing to spend an hour or 2 to create a mega combo review, probably offline, I don't see why adding a few minutes could be so dramatic. After all, the poster's goal is to make things easy for others, right?
Those who can't find their own reviews, I don't get it. The only way so many reviews would get lost to the point of being difficult to find in the REVIEW SECTION is, if the member post mainly useless banter in the said section. If the poster maintain the discipline of posting only reviews and appropriate posts in the review section, without the useless "I've seen her also", "where does she work now", what a great review you made" and such, his reviews will be extremely easy to find.
Mega combo posts are not frequent for one simple reason: we don't allow them. Why? See Mod 8 replies. Without heavy moderation, those would quickly turn into a melting pot of unrelated info with no head or tail. The thread would likely go quickly from:
- "I've seen Jennifer at BestPlace and Lily at Somewhere"
to:
- "I've also seen Kathy at BestPlace" and "Lily is now at OverThere"
Soon followed by:
- "Yhea OverThere is a good place, I've seen Cassey with them"
Somebody who drop in the middle of the thread can just wonder what the fuck does Cassey and Overthere have to do with Jennifer and Lily"?
Kapich? Discussion closed?
Let's make one thing clear: These "Look-at-me-I-saw-all these-girls-and-I-am-so-good" threads have ONE main purpose: an ego boost to the poster. There is a desire to share but, by making HIS OWN reviews stand-out, the goal is to shine, consciously or not. Somebody who does it with the sole goal of contributing won't take offense at following established guidelines. MERB is intended to share info, not to be a psychological booster. Often, the best and most objectives reviews come with no strings attached. Other might be entertaining but they often review the poster more than the girls.
I do see an entertainment value of mega threads BUT, that entertainment value can easily be kept by the poster posting reviews the proper way and then, creating a lounge thread with his general trip report, with links to his reviews, in the proper section. Is that so much extra work? If you're willing to spend an hour or 2 to create a mega combo review, probably offline, I don't see why adding a few minutes could be so dramatic. After all, the poster's goal is to make things easy for others, right?
Those who can't find their own reviews, I don't get it. The only way so many reviews would get lost to the point of being difficult to find in the REVIEW SECTION is, if the member post mainly useless banter in the said section. If the poster maintain the discipline of posting only reviews and appropriate posts in the review section, without the useless "I've seen her also", "where does she work now", what a great review you made" and such, his reviews will be extremely easy to find.
Mega combo posts are not frequent for one simple reason: we don't allow them. Why? See Mod 8 replies. Without heavy moderation, those would quickly turn into a melting pot of unrelated info with no head or tail. The thread would likely go quickly from:
- "I've seen Jennifer at BestPlace and Lily at Somewhere"
to:
- "I've also seen Kathy at BestPlace" and "Lily is now at OverThere"
Soon followed by:
- "Yhea OverThere is a good place, I've seen Cassey with them"
Somebody who drop in the middle of the thread can just wonder what the fuck does Cassey and Overthere have to do with Jennifer and Lily"?
Kapich? Discussion closed?
Not exactly sure why you refuse to understand the point here. In fact there is nothing easier in terms of finding information than Hal's post. That is the point and that is why people are supporting it. What you are doing is simply enforcing your own narrow view. Since you have been given the authority I guess you have the right to do so as I, and many others should have the right to express disagreement with such an approach. Good job on finding a comprimise, sounds like you guys are finally loosening up .
Possum Trot,
The only thing that posts such as Hal's make easier, is finding information on which girls that particular member has seen. If each member starts their own thread, compiling reviews of the girls they have seen, it will not make it easier to find information on a particular SP as you will have to look through each member's thread to see if they have seen that SP. Such compilation posts also tend to cover a wide time period, you may be reading a post made today that speaks of a SP's performance from months ago which may no longer be a valid representation of her current level of service. And in the end, you will still be required to read the SP's main review thread to compare that member's opinion with those of the other members who have posted a review of her.
I fail to see how this is easier than having all the reviews of a particular SP in the same thread with reviews in relatively chronological order so that a reader may compare past and current levels of service very easily. What is important is reading various opinions of each SP's service to get an impression of her consistency of service, not reading one person's reviews of multiple SPs. As has been evidenced over the years, one reviewer may be very liberal in his ratings and give every girl a high rating while other reviewers have different standards. It is useful to be able to compare these various viewpoints in the same thread and not have to look through a number of separate threads, reading multiple reviews on different SPs to find the information on the one particular provider you are interested in.
If any member wishes to make a thread comparing the services he received from different providers, he is free to do so as long as the primary reviews are posted in the provider's individual review thread as I outlined in a previous post.
Mod 8
The only thing that posts such as Hal's make easier, is finding information on which girls that particular member has seen. If each member starts their own thread, compiling reviews of the girls they have seen, it will not make it easier to find information on a particular SP as you will have to look through each member's thread to see if they have seen that SP. Such compilation posts also tend to cover a wide time period, you may be reading a post made today that speaks of a SP's performance from months ago which may no longer be a valid representation of her current level of service. And in the end, you will still be required to read the SP's main review thread to compare that member's opinion with those of the other members who have posted a review of her.
I fail to see how this is easier than having all the reviews of a particular SP in the same thread with reviews in relatively chronological order so that a reader may compare past and current levels of service very easily. What is important is reading various opinions of each SP's service to get an impression of her consistency of service, not reading one person's reviews of multiple SPs. As has been evidenced over the years, one reviewer may be very liberal in his ratings and give every girl a high rating while other reviewers have different standards. It is useful to be able to compare these various viewpoints in the same thread and not have to look through a number of separate threads, reading multiple reviews on different SPs to find the information on the one particular provider you are interested in.
If any member wishes to make a thread comparing the services he received from different providers, he is free to do so as long as the primary reviews are posted in the provider's individual review thread as I outlined in a previous post.
Mod 8
Must have been someone else`s. I made one post in the Lounge summarizing my trip and setting forth the basis for reviews (such as why I didn`t include certain information that I thought guys would ask about, for example) and some general comments about logistics and such that didn`t really have a place anywhere else. I also made 14 separate posts with reviews for each girl I saw, mostly in existing threads though in a couple of cases I had to start new ones for girls who hadn`t been previously reviewed. My summary post included links to each of those reviews, but did not include any review information. Each of the reviews had a link back to the summary post to limit the amount of repetitive information posted in individual reviews. As far as I know, it was never deleted, but I suppose if it had been restored quickly enough I wouldn`t have noticed.
I agree with requiring individual reviews rather than shotgun ones for the many good reasons enumerated in this thread. One advantage of multi-poster review threads on a single girl is that it brings together in one place many opinions about the same escort. The Lounge is the appropriate place for general things that don`t contain reviews, such as Trip Reports, and that may focus on one person`s opinions, experiences, or rantings.
I`m not saying my way is the right way, but I think it follows both the letter and the spirit of the rules by putting reviews in the Reviews sections and a general report in the Lounge with links in each post that tie them together. The additional work to tie 15 posts together this way took at most an additional 15 minutes.
In reading Hal`s original post I had the following thoughts:
- There were no particularly useful reviews there, since each snippet was so brief and telegraphic.
- The comparisons and opinions were interesting and could have been extremely useful if they had been linked to full reviews.
- It was frustrating that the post gave no way to find additional information about any of the girls through links either to their sites or to reviews here.
- I kept thinking that with just a bit of additional work that could have been a post for the ages.
Similar threads
