San Antonio ROS Private or Not Private???

[Still Looking]

Most recently a review was published and the ROS did not have ROS tags around it. I have no idea if this was done by accident or on purpose. Regardless the ROS is in fact still in the open. The local MODS refuse to correct this. What are your thoughts?

Review:
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=953597

Providers Response to ROS in COED:

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=954223

[Guest082318]

Smear campaign against the San Antonio mods. The ROS was fixed when the mods noticed it. Next time use the RTM button.

[Guest081519]

SL, Please go to the review. Log off and then look at it again. The mistake was corrected early this morning, as I stated in SweetCara's thread. It is still not out in the open, as you suggest.

You where very quick to jump on the picture issue. It was not an issue until you made it an issue, and it could have very easily and quickly been edited. Unfortunately, you began arguing with CanyonMan about the pics and making it very obvious that there was an issue with her pics. By the time that I got to it, it would have been ridiculous for me to act as though it never happened.

Anyone with a browser and curiosity could have done some research and found out about the pics. So, the pics or validity of such pics could have very easily not been made an ROS issue.

If there were pics that were meant to be private, and she didn't want them out (and mentioned it because she saw the ROS, that was out in the open)… then you bet I would have made that stuff private, edited and sent out PMs as soon as I saw her complain (or if sensitive information was displayed, like Mokoa's address, or yours for that matter).

Immediately after I asked you to stay on topic, you continued arguing with CanyonMan. It seems that you were more interested in your argument and one-upping CanyonMan than actually sticking to the thread's topic.

Now this poll is ridiculous (in my humble opinion). We do care about the ROS that is in the open, and we try to rectify it as soon as we know it's out in the open. We also try to place the items that are wide open inside PRIVATE tags. You must understand that not all cases are alike. This was a very unique case, due to the circumstances and the nature of the pics.

[sms918]

reviewer has 51 reviews

[Guest032716]

Originally Posted by sms918

reviewer has 51 reviews

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything! In editing his review, he messed up the HTML tags that keep the ROS private.

As for the pic issue, as JJ stated, it's been in open forums often. Most recently in the description of her most recent review prior to this.

As to editing her comments or any others subsequent to the ROS being viewable to the public, if you fuck up editing a review and the ROS is out there it's no ones fault but your own! The mods fixed it as soon as it came to their attention!

Only this stupid ass discussion is keeping it alive! Move on for God's sake, and get over yourself!

[Laz]

I am confused as to why this is even an issue. The mods did not make the mistake that exposed it to the public and they did fix it. Why the unnecessary drama?

As to your general question as to should the ROS be public. I don't care. I will not write something I am not willing to have disclosed publicly. If I say something negative I will stand behind it. We all know the provider will see it or hear about it so strap on some balls and man up. If what you say is accurate you have nothing to be concerned about.

[Still Looking]

Originally Posted by hardnfast

Smear campaign against the San Antonio mods. The ROS was fixed when the mods noticed it. Next time use the RTM button.

I did use the RTM button but thanks for the solid advise!

[Still Looking]

Originally Posted by JJ

SL, Please go to the review. Log off and then look at it again. The mistake was corrected early this morning, as I stated in SweetCara's thread. It is still not out in the open, as you suggest.

My apologizes JJ I have confirmed that you are correct. I relied on another member who confirmed he could also see it as well. So then we are in agreement that "all" ROS should be private. Once again I am sorry I didn't catch that.

You where very quick to jump on the picture issue. It was not an issue until you made it an issue, and it could have very easily and quickly been edited. Unfortunately, you began arguing with CanyonMan about the pics and making it very obvious that there was an issue with her pics. By the time that I got to it, it would have been ridiculous for me to act as though it never happened.

The picture issue (Hers Being Fake) as I stated in the thread was that it was being discussed openly in that thread which stemmed from the ROS. Had the ROS information been edited from the OP post and the few that were discussing it none of this would be an issue.

Anyone with a browser and curiosity could have done some research and found out about the pics. So, the pics or validity of such pics could have very easily not been made an ROS issue.

If there were pics that were meant to be private, and she didn't want them out (and mentioned it because she saw the ROS, that was out in the open)… then you bet I would have made that stuff private, edited and sent out PMs as soon as I saw her complain (or if sensitive information was displayed, like Mokoa's address, or yours for that matter).

It sounds as thou we are in agreement here that ROS is meant to only be accessed by PA members and is meant to be private. So if "ANYTHING" is discussed in the ROS then further discussion in the same thread out in the open should be edited. Cara's thread was a direct response to that review thread and her entire post directly addresses ROS topics and issues which she obviously viewed because the OP accidently misused the ROS TAGS. This should not change policy and procedure in that the ROS should be edited out of her post and subsequent posts.

Immediately after I asked you to stay on topic, you continued arguing with CanyonMan. It seems that you were more interested in your argument and one-upping CanyonMan than actually sticking to the thread's topic.

If you go back and review the thread you will find that in each case I was responding to CanyonMan which I'm sure you find when you look at post #17. Perhaps it is he you should have a chat with in regard to starting shit. Truth be told I could care less what he has to say. It's usually negative anyway. If he isn't WK'ING he is usually giving someone grief and he does have his favorite targets.

Now this poll is ridiculous (in my humble opinion). We do care about the ROS that is in the open, and we try to rectify it as soon as we know it's out in the open. We also try to place the items that are wide open inside PRIVATE tags. You must understand that not all cases are alike. This was a very unique case, due to the circumstances and the nature of the pics.

I think everyone has grown accustomed to ridiculous posts here in San Antonio. But hey they are entertaining. When is the last time you saw anything as funny as SKF video? Bravo!

PICS? I guess I'm at a loss of all the discussion about these "PICS". I really could care less about any pictures. She admits to using fake pictures and as I understand it that's in direct violation of rule #26

#26 - False advertising will not be permitted on ECCIE. If you utilize our forums, Showcase, or other advertising features, we ask that your tactics are straight-forward and accurate. If you choose to use images in your advertising, we require that the subject of the images are in fact you. Cases of alleged "false advertising" whether it be through inaccurate images or with text, should be reported to staff by the members using the RTM function. Investigation and appropriate actions will be taken, which may include removal of the false material and could possibly result in loss of ad-posting privileges.

JJ this is a "mens" board. The ROS is intended for PA access members only. If ROS is openly discussed, policy has "ALWAYS" been to EDIT and warn or point violators. Further more Providers are NOT allowed to post in reviews. Opening a COED thread and then openly addressing ROS material should be unacceptable and edited.

Here is her POST addressing ROS information:

So, I see that I have my first bad review in almost a year. Not too bad I guess. You just can't please everyone. And not everyone "clicks".

I would like to clarify a few things that were said in my last review for you gentlemen that haven't met me. The scheduled appointment WAS an hour later than it was supposed to be. However, the reason for this was COMPLETELY out of my control. There were issues with the hotel that I originally planned on checking into, so I had to go to another hotel. This isn't the first time this happened to a friend I've met. But it obviously seems to have been a big deal. Even though I COMMUNICATED with this gentleman up until he knocked on the door. I firmly believe in communication. And I hope you all understand that sometimes LIFE HAPPENS. When you have other responsibilities such as work, children, etc. sometimes things that are beyond your control come up and cause delays. It happens to me a lot. But I ALWAYS communicate and make sure that anyone I'm supposed to be meeting knows what is happening. There have been times that things have came up and I wasn't able to let my friend know until afterwards, but I ALWAYS let them know regardless. And there have been times that I've forgotten I was supposed to meet with someone (happened today). I'm sorry, but I'm human. I make mistakes. These gentlemen seem to understand, and I ALWAYS try to make up any mistakes I make. If I make a mistake, I can guarantee that I will offer some way to make it up to you. As long as it's a mistake that wasn't out of my control.
I did let this gentleman know that I had JUST became a bit nauseated. I had even contemplated on rescheduling. But I took a chewable dramamine and felt fine afterwards. I told him this when he came into the room.
It was also stated I didn't dress up, put makeup on or anything. I want you ALL to know, if I EVER intend on coming to a session without makeup or in casual clothing, I will ask you to make sure it is ok. I have NEVER had a gentleman complain about how I look when I'm dressed casual with little makeup. And I ALWAYS at least put on mascara, I never go without ANY makeup to a session. I DO dress casual most of the time. If you would like to see me dressed up, or would like a specific outfit, you are more than welcome to request it and if I have it, I will wear it for you. Also, if this gentleman was not satisfied with the way I looked or dressed he DEFINITELY did not show it or even say anything. And I'm positive I asked him if casual with little makeup was ok, just like I do EVERYONE before a session.
Another thing that was said, "she was amazed that San Antonio had so many old farts in the hobby"....I'm sorry but this is a COMPLETELY UNTRUE statement. I have NEVER said anything of the such! In fact, I enjoy the company of an older gentleman over the company of a young gentleman. Most of the older gentlemen here I have met carry on GREAT conversations, and as I state in my rules, this is a 'turn on' for me! Also, many of the older gentlemen are a little more "seasoned" when it comes to bedroom activities.
IJS.
As far as the things I enjoy. No, I'm not a big fan of DATY. Do I EVER tell someone they cannot partake in this activity? NO!! I'm sorry, but it's not something I enjoy. I have met gentlemen that are pretty good at it, but still isn't something I enjoy. I let all my new friends I meet know exactly what I enjoy, and I believe that I'm entitled to enjoying myself in the hobby too.
And the biggest thing I want to clarify:
"You need to Note the rules she has on her show case..the first thing you do is make your donation and the first thing she does is scarf it up...there is no getting it back or reducing it..LOL" (THIS IS A DIRECT QUOTE FROM ROS???)
The above quote is COMPLETELY UNTRUE!! I have had gentlemen meet me, and change their scheduled 1 hour session to a HHR and I told them to only leave the HHR donation. Some have asked if it was ok, and I have NEVER made an issue of it. In fact, in the past, I have let gentlemen know that if they are not satisfied with the way I look or ANYTHING else that they are more than welcome to leave WITH THEIR DONATION.
If ANYONE ever has a problem with me, or what I offer, you are more than welcome to tell me or talk to me about it. If you are displeased, I will happily let you take your donation and leave. I would GREATLY appreciate if you are not satisfied with how I look when you meet me, then cancel the session then and there. PLEASE DO NOT follow through with a session if you are displeased with my looks or anything else and then post a negative review.
Again, if I ever make a mistake that was in my control, I will ALWAYS try to make it up to you. And if you are EVER not pleased with anything I offer or the way I look, then you are welcome to take your donation and leave.
I know I cannot please everyone, and never thought I could. But I do not appreciate the untrue statements that were made in this review.
I hope you are all having a lovely Monday, and hope you all have a lovely week.


The items highlighted in RED should be edited and removed. Then her post would for the most part look like any other COED AD placed on a regular basis.

[dearhunter]

The reviewer fucked up.......what happens due to his fuck up is on him.

If he posts in the open and I respond in the open.......then he says "I fucked up. That was supposed to be in private tags", he can ask a modtard to change his comment to private all he wants.

BUT, if that modtard attempts to extend that private tag to my comment made out in the open to a post that was out in the open without my consent...........we are going to war and it won't be pretty.......ijs.

SweetCara was an idiot for responding to the review. She had every right to respond to anything she saw in public view. If it had been a system failure that caused the breach, you would have a case for putting the shit back in the horses ass.........this was the asses fault......he can live with it.

[Guest062114-5]

I said it before, I think JJ handled this unique situation as well as possible. The information got out, many of us saw it. None of it is that bad. It's not anyone's private info or anything.

It was fixed rather promptly. JJ clearly explained what could be discussed from that point on and those of us who had seen the ROS (who shouldn't have) followed his instruction.

This should be a non-issue.

I, for one, like the way I've seen JJ handle several situations. Bravo, JJ!

[Beagle]

Originally Posted by Still Looking

The items highlighted in RED should be edited and removed. Then her post would for the most part look like any other COED AD placed on a regular basis.

Boy, surely the current poll results aren't reflective of what members really think....

You've a point regarding ROS commentaries. I've been wondering about it lately. Still haven't decided if that's the best way to handle it in this case, though. It's clear cut to me that SC's comments should have been edited out if the problem was discovered earlier, but once everyone else chimed in, the dynamic's changed. I can't yet figure out why, but it doesn't feel right having everyone else's post edited.


On a broader note......

It's common seeing ROS commentaries in reviews. My initial instinct is that whenever the commentaries suggest that there were some negative contents within the ROS when it was a "Yes" review, those commentaries should be in private tags. Eg. "Sounds like you should have given a 'No' ", "She should have let you known in advance that Aunt Flo was visiting", "etc......these commentaries were in reviews that would have looked positive to non-PA members otherwise.

What's the right thing to do? Gauging by reviewer's intent, it would seem plausible that he did not want the provider/non-PA members to know about the negative aspects. Yet from many hobbyists' point of view, they think the reviewer should man up and "be honest" about the "yes/no" recommendation and/or include some of the negative details in the "physical description" section so non-PA guys would know. There's a conflict in interest between the OP and the other hobbyists. Whose interest gets priority? Should those commentaries be edited out or be placed in private tags?

The lines are often blurred and if you start editing one, you'd be held accountable to take consistent actions for all other similar posts. It's a judgement call and I think the mods would only open themselves up to more issues once they start editing close-call commentaries.


On a separate note....

It's easy to nitpick and call the mods out on every judgement call. I don't always agree with their decisions, but I respect that they had their own rationale for making the decision they did, and especially since they're volunteering their time, they sure as hell don't deserve every member calling them out on every move.

Having said that, it's also healthy to keep the mods in check every now and then. If there are blatant ball-drops, they need to be called out. Can't say I disagree with some of the other call outs, but I'd be careful drawing the line between trying to make a mod resign vs reforming the way things are done. Does the end justify the means?

[Still Looking]

Originally Posted by dearhunter

The reviewer fucked up.......what happens due to his fuck up is on him.

If he posts in the open and I respond in the open.......then he says "I fucked up. That was supposed to be in private tags", he can ask a modtard to change his comment to private all he wants.

BUT, if that modtard attempts to extend that private tag to my comment made out in the open to a post that was out in the open without my consent...........we are going to war and it won't be pretty.......ijs.

SweetCara was an idiot for responding to the review. She had every right to respond to anything she saw in public view. If it had been a system failure that caused the breach, you would have a case for putting the shit back in the horses ass.........this was the asses fault......he can live with it.

So DH if what was posted was sensitive then it gets edited but if a MOD doesn't think it is...then they can let it go. I can't help but wonder why ROS can't just all be ROS? Ahhh live and learn.

[Still Looking]

Originally Posted by LilMynx69

I said it before, I think JJ handled this unique situation as well as possible. The information got out, many of us saw it. None of it is that bad. It's not anyone's private info or anything.

It was fixed rather promptly. JJ clearly explained what could be discussed from that point on and those of us who had seen the ROS (who shouldn't have) followed his instruction.

This should be a non-issue.

I, for one, like the way I've seen JJ handle several situations. Bravo, JJ!

I totally agree... JJ is doing a great job. I especially appreciate his promptness!

[handyGiraffe]

I am the one that fucked up...not JJ. Let me take a minute to simply defend the Mod here..in this case it was JJ. As soon as JJ saw the fuck up he edited the posting so that it didn't show up. I didn'ty have to ask him....

It wasn't JJ's fault that I posted in the open..it was mine. I happened because I inadvertantly hit the post button and posted a empty/ misfire review and tried to edit it so that I didn't have a double posting...
Of course I screwed up. That is my fault. Thankfully, I didn't put much in the ROS and I would have put just about all of what I did put in there in the open anyway.... Meanwhile...she put most of it out there in her comment thread anyway and basically confirmed everything I reported without confirming some of her comments that might have been damaging to her...

I wish this had not generated such a backlash on JJ ..or our mods here in San Antonio. SA has a super active community and group of opinionated players (understatement) and it is hard to stay on top of it, of that I am sure. People like me make it harder when we screw up.....so...thankfully I managed to go 51 reviews and finally fuck up. But it was not as bad as it could have been...just an honest recommendation based on what happened...

Now, I have been both the beneficiary of actions by the MODs and a victim of them and thankfully I have always been treated fairly by all of them...

Know this---if one is going to be active on the board with commentary, reviews and etc.. one is going to accumulate some scars along the way... all we can hope for is fair treatment and that is what I have been given

In this case I was a victim of my own device and got what I deserved...why not lets move on to more important things.....

[Guest032716]

HG - I couldn't agree more! Follow this thread to something that is important!

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1054848089