Eccie mission of sharing info is failing

[lbbguy]

ECCIE is failing in it’s MISSION of sharing info

Because of the policies of the owner and/or mods, eccie has declining value/quality in its mission of sharing information among the guys and risks having their business model becoming irrelevant. Guys are motivated to post reviews (both good and bad) because of the promise of 6 weeks of free access. Now that free access is being denied more frequently and in more grey areas, guys are less motivated to post anything, good or bad therefore decreasing the overall value of the eccie site

Two examples:

UTR ladies have no posted ads online, because they are UTR.
When a guy posts a review of a UTR, including her phone number, 6 weeks of access credit is denied because there is not an ad to match the number.
Bummer # 1.

AMP with NO HE is not allowed free 6 weeks of access even though the guy described in detail how to access the amp and the FBSM and stated no HE is available. Bummer number 2.

If there is no free access, then guys are NOT motivated to post and guys will stop posting, further limiting activity (info sharing) on the site. A year-over-year comparison of most eccie markets will show a steep decline in postings and reviews. The eccie brand is dying from 1000 small cuts.
The escort market is changing. Either eccie will change with it or eccie will become more and more irrelevant. Remember the mission – sharing information. Eccie will either achieve its mission and encourage sharing or not.
In some markets, there are competitors that will take up the slack if eccie fails in its mission. (usasexguide comes to mind)

Comments are welcome – hopefully, the owner and mods will not get mad because of what I intend to be constructive advice to step up the game and remain a relevant info broker for the hobby.

[Twomuchfun]

I totally agree

[CryptKicker]

ECCIE has never given credit for AMP reviews where nothing happens other than a massage or you can't provide the name of the attendant. They also have never given credit for a review where a random, unverified number is posted as a contact point. This is nothing new lbbguy and you are just butt hurt over your latest AMP review of a place that has had multiple posts that nothing was available there.

[lbbguy]

as a former mod, you have totally misled my point.
I am trying to say to the owner that the site is in decline because of some of the owner's or mod's rules.
If the owner does not make adjustments then the site will continue its decline and blow away in the Texas wind.

If the site does not provide info, both good and bad then it has NO USE.
Info ONLY comes from the users who are motivated to provide the info

[Festivus]

I agree with lbbguy for the most part. It reminds me of the old saying, "It works in theory, but not in practice." What that means is that we should change the theory. Referring to older reviews or posts for a reason not to give credit doesn't make this platform very user friendly. Especially when we get criticized for bumping a review or post after 30 days. My .02 cents.

[CryptKicker]

No, you missed the point. The rules have not changed for years, before the so called decline. Ownership/Mods have not changed anything to keep mongers from reviewing or sharing information. The same info that could be shared 5 years ago can be shared today. Nothing is stopping mongers from sharing that same info other than the mongers themselves deciding not to share.

[Chief62]

I still took the time to do one that I won't get credit for today before this was posted. I can understand why they don't want to do it because it allows abuse. The ones that won't abuse it pay the price though of getting no credit though.

[Phrasing]

Sharing is caring

[lbbguy]

I do agree that sharing is caring ......

However, my point is that eccie should more actively encourage rather than discourage sharing.



The guys on this site create traffic by writing reviews, both good and bad, and other comments. When the guys here get frustrated with the site, most make no comments, they simply leave - thus less traffic

The owner's advertisers look at traffic and place ads accordingly. More traffic = more ads = more profit for all. AND we all have better info, both good and bad)

I looked at the men's lounge in Miss yesterday and calculated an average of ONE comment per week for the past 3 months. At the same time, usasexguide in both Miss and TN (Memphis) has much more traffic.

Regardless, eccie is their site. they can make adjustments or see a further decline in traffic and profits

Happy Thanksgiving!!

[George,Curious]

I have tried to post non specifc informstion and have been threatened to be banned from the site. I have tried to post accurate jnforation and have had warnings and suspensions.

With things like that its even harder to want to post anything.

[Unique_Carpenter]

As CryptKicker mentions above, the primary guidelines have been in place for over a decade. 99% of the warning and infractions issued are from these original guidelines.
As for PA from reviews, those criteria have also been in place for over a decade as well.

[sidekick]

I agree with lbbguy. He iis right on target. I got a warning this morning for what it thought was a good funny post. It was totally harmless.

[lbbguy]

The point is not how long have the policies been in place. the point is do they need to be changed in order to drive more traffic from the users, us, to have a more worthwhile site to get more advertisers and make more money and at the same time keep this site alive so that it doesn't die for a lack of interest.

[busternutzs]

I think more reviews such as reviews from Snapchat Seeking and Secret Benefits should get credit for PA.

Just because not every member doesn't have an account on those types of sites shouldn't exclude those that do from getting PA for a review.

[George,Curious]

I agree. Like you are not suppose to give out pereonal info which i have never done. But was harshly dealt with when i made a post about someones presence that disclosed no personal information at all but because i had knowledge of personal information of someone it was a mortal sin.
I agree one q policy that promoting drugs is bad but tonwarn others in a review the woman is drug friendy is a major no no. I would like to know if someone i am looking into is a drug user sijce that is info on determining if i was to visit them..again another sin.
Since these two items are apparently grey areas no matter how you right it just causes long time users to hold back.

I have meet a few that i could review but have held back. Its the iron fist verses the veltvet glove kinda thing.