Suggestion for BCD Credit

[TexTushHog]

It seems that I'm seeing more and more reviews for girls that have web sites where the reviewer is not adding a link to the girl's site in the blank provided for the same. See this review for an example:

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1768418#post1768418

Failing to insert that basic information makes using the board more cumbersome and can create confusion when you have two providers that share the same name. I hate to add requirements for granting BCD credit for reviews, but in some sense a review without a link for the providers web site (or recent ad) is incomplete.

Perhaps we need a rule that requires the reviewer to provide a link in any review to get credit unless a provider simply has no public adds and no web site.

Thoughts?

[chipper]

TTH, I agree with you. There should be no PA unless all of the blanks are filled in.

Chipper

[urhuckleberry]

If you want an argument from me, you'll have to change the subject. I agree.

We shouldn't reward lazy reviewers with premium access credit.

(Folding up portable soap boax and slinking away)

Huck

[iso_women]

I don't necessarily agree that all blanks have to be filled in, but some way to contact the provider is a must. I could post fake reviews all day of UTR providers. Some way to allow others to act on the review MUST be included.

[TexTushHog]

I don't know whether to start a new thread or just amend this one, but I was trying to search for doubles reviews last night and couldn't figure out a way to do so. Perhaps a rule that Doubles be put in the title of the review to assist with searching?

[saintsFanChris]

Sometimes the lady has only an email OR only a phone number OR doesn't yet have a website. I understand more ways to contact someone you really want and there are always some who'll refuse to use email with hobbying and those who'll text but refuse to use voice, me I'd much rather hear her voice (and the no written record of conversation, is a nice bonus). Takes all kinds.