If the provider doesn’t give us her name, should we even write a review?

[rfl]

This has happened to multiple guys in this community. We see a provider based on her ads or even an AMP. We write a review with all the correct info and even post a link to the ad. However, the provider does not tell us the current made up name she’s going by this week. So since we know we have to give a name for reviews, we write “none” or “none given”.

So what are we supposed to do if we legitimately do not get a name from the provider?

So we are not receiving credit for these reviews because we don’t know the name. The moderator’s response is that even if the review doesn’t meet criteria, it’s still helpful. Here’s the problem: If I know I’m not getting credit because the provider doesn’t tell me her name, then I’m not going to write the review. And then this community goes downhill because we have less reviews. So I’m legitimately asking what are we supposed to do?

[Kettlechip]

Ask them for a name. Or research. The review of yours that got panned literally had the chick's name in the ad title. Other ads of hers do too. Or just make some shit up I suppose. It's not like the mods are calling them up for an interview or something. Suffice to say there is a lot you could have done. Just take it as a lesson and throw up another one.

That said, it does seem incredibly pedantic that the name can't just be edited in and credit given. It's not my website though.

[rfl]

I swear I thought the ad said come see me in my van.

Making up a name is the issue. I’m seriously asking, are we supposed to make up names now? In the past, “none given” has always sufficed. I’ve never given fake information in reviews and I don’t want to begin now.

[Joe Blows]

Simple. Ask the provider for her name.

[Raindog115]

This is a particular problem for girls you find on the street. Many dont have a legit phone number. So if you write a review with no contact info then no review credit. I learned that the hard way years ago. Now I never write such reviews even though I just picked up one recently. So everyone loses.

[rfl]

Exactly, I’ve always been able to say “non given” and it was known that I put a name in the review. I followed the rules and always have. This is evident by the dozens of reviews I have. But if one particular mod isn’t going to give credit, I’m not going to write the review. And this community goes downhill. We aren’t leaving the name blank, we are telling the community that they didn’t give a name.

I’ve been here nearly a decade and I want us to thrive. That’s why I’d really like to know the answer from the mods that make these decisions. I don’t want to stop writing the reviews just because the girl doesn’t have a name. And I’m not walking into a meeting and saying “hey, what’s your name, I need to know so I can review you based on how you perform today?”

[albundy]

Just ask her “So what do I call you?” She spits out some made up name. I just put that down on the review.

[myren1900]

I was also denied PA credit for a review by our new moderator. It was a duo review of a new Agency girl without any prior reviews at the time and my ATF. First excuse was that I had reviewed my ATF in a duo with another girl within 90 days. I pointed out that a brand new girl without reviews was part of the review, so it qualified as a new review. Then he claimed there was no contact information for the second girl. The agency email applies to both agency girls.
Basically he then finally stated he would not grant PA credit.

Rules are just randomly made up and applied it seems.

Guess the solution is just not writing reviews

[Guest021824]

You should have the name in the review. If you are going to see someone you need to out in the review contact info


As for you myren. This has been discussed with you. You write so many reviews on your atf. If it is a new girl. Just write the review on the new girl only. Simple as that




You guys can play with what is written as rules and complain in open Forum to guys who don't have the back story. Rest assured if your review is denied, something was wrong


https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2461139

[Joe Blows]

Don’t write reviews of girls who can not be seen in an ad or otherwise contacted. 1. You are wasting your time in terms of getting “credit” 2. Nobody gives a fuck.

[rfl]

Thanks soulmanike, I guess there’s no answer as to whether we make up a fake name or don’t write the review. Shame there’s no solution.

Myren, the new mod denied me another review as well. I put the activities in the activities section. In the ROS, I said “activities began”. Even though I specifically listed the activities in the form, because I didn’t specifically list the activities in the ROS for a second time, it was against a rule. I accepted it. It wasn’t worth fighting. But this name thing…the moderators are telling us we won’t get credit if we don’t know a name. That’s seriously bad for this community. I’m not upset because my review was denied, I’m upset because this is a problem for our forums.

[Kettlechip]

Originally Posted by SOULMANIKE

You should have the name in the review. If you are going to see someone you need to out in the review contact info


As for you myren. This has been discussed with you. You write so many reviews on your atf. If it is a new girl. Just write the review on the new girl only. Simple as that




You guys can play with what is written as rules and complain in open Forum to guys who don't have the back story. Rest assured if your review is denied, something was wrong


https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2461139

I know people are upset and not communicating as diplomatically as they could, but I personally appreciate the work the mod team does here and the patience y'all do it with. I'm sure the majority of us feel that way too.

If I may, a theme that I have seen a few people repeat at this point is that some of the rules seem counterproductive to the goal of creating both numerous and quality reviews; that they feel disincentivized from posting information that is useful to the community and the growth of Eccie.

Now, clearly this issue is causing some headbutting between the moderating team and the rest of the community, but I personally don't see the point; everyone here actually has a very similar motivation: the aforementioned growth of Eccie as a community and information base for the hobby world:

As a hobbyist, information, even partial information, is useful. Not only can it help ensure the hobbyist is going to get what he wants, it can also have a direct impact on his personal well-being and safety. As an example from my own experience, I 100% believe I would have been robbed or worse from a provider I had seen well over a dozen times had someone not posted information regarding her robbing and scamming people. I really don't like the thought that maybe he wouldn't have posted that information due to Eccie's policies.

As a provider, Eccie can be a complete boon for business. A good review on Eccie always results in a significant uptick in both revenue and, from what I have ascertained, client quality. Eccie has become such a mainstay in certain circles that a good review here can even be used as a bargaining chip; I know of a local provider that provides nearly a 20% discount on services for a new review. Simply put, good providers want good reviews, and a system that encourages these reviews can have a major impact on their ability to make money safely and comfortably.

As staff, the incentive to maintain Eccie's brand quality is obvious I think. Eccie is a business. The bigger it gets, the more potential it has for income, power, and influence; an enviable position given the nature of hobbying and its completely morally and legally unregulated market.

For the reasons mentioned above, and from personal opinion, I don't see how having more reviews on Eccie is anything but a win/win/win for everyone involved, and that is something nearly everyone attempting to improve this community and hobbying as a whole can agree with.

With all that in mind, there has to be a middle ground somewhere between "rules are rules" and "give me what I want now". Admittedly, I'm not familiar with some of the let's call it nuances of being essentially an employee of Eccie. Are there things we don't know, perhaps monetary or legal, that would allow the community to understand the reasoning behind the rules regarding reviews if brought to light?

If not, is there the possibility of a compromise which leaves all parties happy as well as contributes to the overall goal of the health and growth of Eccie? One thing that occurred to me while writing this, for example: reviews that do not strictly meet the guidelines of an Eccie review can still contain a wealth of valuable information. So if the report is partially within expectations, why not offer a partial credit as a reward? Say one week instead of six. By doing this we would:

Incentivize people to share useful information they might normally not without the reward of premium access.

Maintain the ability to, in turn, provide them feedback regarding the formatting and content of their reviews, so as to provide quality assurance to the Eccie brand.

Reward those more familiar with Eccie's review system while also not alienating those who are still learning the ropes or otherwise have difficulty complying, increasing customer satisfaction and retention.

Reduce customer complaints and incidents, thus reducing mod team customer interaction and workload.

I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts as well as others regarding this. This is an issue that keeps repeating itself over time, and I am certain that we as a community can come up with a solution to this clearly contentious problem. Thank you for your time and attention.

[rfl]

I agree. Partial credit is a solution. This isn’t an attack on the mods, but an attempt to legitimately find a solution to a problem is users have.

We aren’t leaving the name blank, we are writing “none given”. We are filling in the box like we are supposed to, following the rules. But just like with an email, if she doesn’t list an email, we can’t give you one.

I wish administrators and mods would talk to us instead of post threats and throwing rules at us. Credit to soulmanike, he at least responded like a person.

In 10 years, I have had 1 warning. Yet the administrator’s response to my issue is “you’re welcome to leave eccie and here’s how you do it.” I just wish they would speak to us and listen to our problem.

[Joe Blows]

Ask the girl her name. Problem solved.

[Danislong]

We can all learn from this and manage expectations going forward on what is to be required for acceptance. I’m not even going to argue about what use to be vs now and owner requirements. It is what it is. I do believe the communication on reasons for this could have been handled better but that’s my opinion and frankly the entire thing is a dead issue. My gripe is going to be for the new guys coming in or the next one who didn’t realize this old rule but newly Enforced. I don’t believe in partial credit or muddying the water. What I do believe in is that if the review is “lacking information”, it should be whacked and resubmitted. If it’s good enough to be listed as a review, it should be enough for credit and vice versa.