Interesting development in Austin

[Guest101618]

So let me get this thread of name calling back on track. Specifically, the Austin mods have decided to not allow unverified providers in the SNATCH thread which exists in the Requests and ISO forum where they are allowed to post. The San Antonio mods have not made a similar choice based on my reading of the initial post of the SA SNATCH thread so apparently the unverified providers can post an availability notice in the SA SNATCH.

Apparently the Austin mods have time on their hands and need more posts to police which is cool.

Did I miss anything?

[rockerrick]

Or Austin mods don't want to reward the ho's that are too lazy to follow the rules to Verification. Thus not giving them the same privileges as the ladies who have followed the rules and got themselves Verified? Because even though the Snatch thread is stickied at the top of Request and ISO's, it's still clearly an ad board, and perhaps SA mods are lazy and let them run amuck.

[Guest101618]

All true Rick. The way the site is configured they don't really have the ability to limit access to the forums/threads as we would hope. I often wonder why providers are allowed to post in the review forums. It is a configuration issue that for some reason is allowed. The same issue here, though I need to go back and see if you can assign different permissions to a thread than the parent forum in the version of vBulletin I have access to. The thing about the configuration here on eccie, so much is done manually, or at least it appears that is the case. Yes, the mods can enforce the rules but the question really becomes, do they have the time or inclination to do so? Which brings us back around to the madness of the SNATCH thread to begin with. Apparently it works for the ladies, and some guys, but I have NEVER successfully gotten BCD via that thread.

[Camille Fox]

^^ call me skeptical but I think providers are not blocked from posting in the review section more for entertainment value and because it also gives members a general idea of that provider's personality than due to a configuration issue. Providers posting on reviews is not a overwhelming problem, so after being reported, the mod deletes their post, but the damage is usually done for the provider: she has already posted some BSC post.

[Guest112916]

Posted by Chica Chaser - Most areas have done away with them as they require a tremendous amount of staff monitoring for compliance with those local rules.

It can be a pain to monitor. Luckily the girls who actually read and follow the rules rtm the posts made by those girls who either will not read or do not know how to read and let their pimps post whatever they wish.

Dallas had a SNATCh thread at one time. But with 700+ providers and half of them (usually the same post whores) not following the rules and posting as if they were on Backpage, it became a disaster and was removed.

Other than a few girls who forget, and girls who become verified and go straight to the SNATCH thread and screw up by posting in the ISO section instead of the actual SNATCH thread, it stays pretty well self policed.

I like the SNATCH thread for when I'm in SA and my plans A thru Z bail and I go to SNATCH. If not I call TS Chincho, TS Joe Buck, TS Dr Dew, TS A10Bomb and TS SL and we hit the Karaoke Bars or strip clubs and sing "We Are Family" or "I Will Survive" while dancing on the tables..

[ck1942]

Thanks for the clarification(s) -- I should read through the rules more often to refresh my aging memory cells. Fortunately the cells that count are still being produced on a regular basis, used on a regular basis, and refreshed on a regular basis. Now if I could apply all of that process to my bank and brokerage account(s)....!