Why a no review policy?

[Lil Oral Annie]

I'm not really sure why anything needs clarified since it was written by the board owners here:

http://www.eccie.net/announcement.php?f=5

#29.

You can find that link at the top right hand corner of every page and it's called "Forum Guidelines".

Hope that helps.

[Guest052813-01]

#23 - Each member's signature line is an extension of their ability to express their personality to others online. We offer a relaxed and flexible set of guidelines for our members and staff to follow regarding maintenance of their signature area. In short, you are allowed 15 lines of text, space, and images. You may include colored text or larger font sizes, and you may include images that do not exceed 60 pixels in height. Limit font size to "5." Images or larger-than-default text will be counted as 3 of your 15 lines allowed, so please consider this when constructing your signature area. Additionally, you may include links and other items of contact info, but avoid mentioning specifics regarding acronyms, services, or rates. We also ask that you refrain from including links to or mention of competing websites.

#29 - Verified Providers who use the Showcase feature or advertise in our forums are not entitled to a no-review policy. Should circumstances arise which require or prompt you to request a no-review policy on ECCIE, please understand that enforcement of this policy also results in revoking of your showcase or ad-posting privileges. Ladies who have chosen a no-review policy on ECCIE may still post and create threads in any of the non-advertising forums on the board and will still have access to the girls-only areas of the board.

Thank you, Annie, for pointing this out. This, I believe takes care of the definition of who may or may not have no review policies with regards to the ad boards. But, the policy does NOT address the issue of providers who post ThreADs or post advertisements as part of their signature lines, on which is what I wanted clarification. #23 states that communication info may be placed in your signature line; it does not state anything about advertising. #29 clarifies that if you post an ad in the ad forums, you may not have a no review policy, and if you have a no review policy, you may not post an ad in the ad forums. Neither rule/guideline states explicitly that providers may circumvent the specifics of rule 29 by posting ThreADs or signature line availability. This is what I wanted clarification on, and which I will wait for St. C or T-Bone to respond to my request for clarification. There is also no guideline for how to handle non-ECCIE member reviews for a no-review policy. In fact, the term "no review" is only addressed in #29.

[ElumEno]

Originally Posted by fritz3552

I did some consultation with the other mods of the board. The policy of ECCIE is that any provider who has an "internet presence" may have a review posted of their encounter in the appropriate review forum.

As I stated in the thread referenced by NTT, it is a "gentleman's agreement" between the provider and the client as to whether a review is to be posted or not. I would be of the opinion that if a hobbyist wanted to post a review of a provider that has a "no review" policy, that hobbyist may not be able to see that provider again.

However, unless it is a security issue, or the reviewer asks for the review to be pulled, the review is fraudulent or the provider reviewed is truly UTR (no ads or intenet) and asks for the review to be pulled, the review will remain. There are exceptions to every rule, of course, and there are DNR sticky notes at the front of every forum, especially in the Spa forum. But any provider who has advertised via their own website, on BP, in the provider ads forums, or as part of their signature line, is eligible for review.

Originally Posted by Jackie Devlin

Um, NO!

That is completely contrary to the stated rule and the policy of ECCIE as outlined by the owners - FROM DAY ONE.

The stated rule of ECCIE has always been that a verified provider may elect AT THE TIME OF HER JOINING THE SITE (or thereafter if she agrees to certain limitations) a blanket no review policy which remains in effect (indefinitely) as long as she 1) does not place an ad (formally) in the threads specified for such - such as the "Weekend Line-up", etc. and 2) She does not create a showcase.

I think we'll need Chris or T-bone to chime in on this one as you plainly and simply didn't read the stated rules of the very Website you volunteered to assist in moderating . . . and the mods you "checked with" are patently incorrect. If there was a policy change regarding NRP/DNR (no review policy / do not review) here on ECCIE it would have been plainly communicated to those Escorts and providers that elected such when they joined the community (as I did). It has not, and the rule is still published.

AS EVIDENCE OF SUCH - From the ECCIE rules: RULE #29 - Verified Providers who use the Showcase feature or advertise in our forums are not entitled to a no-review policy. Should circumstances arise which require or prompt you to request a no-review policy on ECCIE, please understand that enforcement of this policy also results in revoking of your showcase or ad-posting privileges. Ladies who have chosen a no-review policy on ECCIE may still post and create threads in any of the non-advertising forums on the board and will still have access to the girls-only areas of the board.

Additionally, as CaptainKaos (a former moderator here in KC) can attest (after lengthy discussion and FORMAL interpretation of the rule[s] in question by St Chris), a listing of availability in a signature line is NOT considered to be an advertisement in violation of the NRP/DNR exception.

Also from that discussion (of which have a copy) . . . Signature lines containing tour dates are acceptable for ladies with NRP/DNR status, mentioning rates or services in a signature line is not allowed. ALSO, contact information (such as a phone number) is allowed and does not violate the rule as it was clarified last year by St. Chris himself via PM. ThreADs too are allowed for ANY member regardless of NRP/DNR status - and linking to an external Website is perfectly okay . . . Having a presence anywhere else on the Internet or a lady advertising on Backpage does NOT negate her policy here on ECCIE. It hasn't since the site began . . .

I clarified every word and aspect of the rule prior to joining this site with both Becky and T-bone. They both said THE RULE IS VERY SPECIFIC and the totality of the policy is contained within rule #29.

- Jackie Devlin

Jackie I believe your right on this one, BUT when I asked the same question, I got the EXACT answer that fritz wrote in his first reply, almost word for word.. albeit not from St. Christopher, Becky or T-Bone.

[Grizzly]

I have thought long and hard before posting this for fear of getting labeled a WK

First off I have never met Jackie yet, we have talked in the past but that is for another story.

I did not find Jackie Devlins post confusing, rude or condescending. From my past talks with Jackie she is get to the point don't beat around the bushes kinda of lady and has no problem telling it like it is.

My .02 cents on the matter if the lady who is willing to step up and date gentlemen and requests that a no review policy be in place than so be it. Yes I understand the rules of this board but to me not to respect a ladies wishes is to treat with disrespect. I have on occasion written reviews but I do not like to because what happens between me and the lady is nobody else's business.
The lady whether it be Jackie or another lady if she asks not to be reviewed and you review her in my mind you just disrespected her and treated her like another notch on your bedpost.
So if they ask you not to review them than respect that right and treat them with respect.

Fritz I mean no disrespect to your position of authority as a mod but it appears to me your letting the power of your position get to your head. In my honest opinion your coming across a little heavy handed and acting like a dick. Yes I know you and Adeptus need to keep civility on this board but in my opinon you have been seen wielding the power of the mod more than Fire Serpent did and frankly that worries me that you were not the right person for the job.

I am sorry if that sounds harsh but that is my opinion, I have had to deal with to many people of late that are a little power hungry.

[Guest121212]

Originally Posted by ElumEno

Jackie I believe your right on this one, BUT when I asked the same question, I got the EXACT answer that fritz wrote in his first reply, almost word for word.. albeit not from St. Christopher, Becky or T-Bone.

OneMule (@ElumEno): I have no idea if ECCIE policy has changed - if it has, it hasn't been communicated to those ladies like myself that elected NRP/DNR policies when we initially joined the site - AND THERE ARE MANY OF US!

I can't share information verbatim from PMs on the open board as it is considered to be a violation of rules, however, I CAN paraphrase PM discussions that have taken place previously. In October of 2010 CaptainKaos (who was at that time a mod in KC - and you'll need to remember that this was PRIOR to ECCIE stating that threADS were going to be allowed) took issue with my and other ladies' signature lines as he considered them to be in ad. In all fairness to the Captain, under the working rules as they were at that time, he had a bit of a point, many ladies were RTMing other ladies' posts that were blatantly threADs, and Kaos was acting on the threADs (removing them, editing them or admonishing their authors). It was pointed out to Kaos (and he noticed himself) the hypocrisy of the manner in which signature lines were constructed / written and the information they contained being really no different than the information contained in the threADs that he was treating as an offense of board rules. Subsequently it was fiercely debated between many of us here (and ECCIE staff) as to what was an acceptable signature line (as the guidelines for verified providers signature lines had then just been recently updated by Fawn, a female moderator).

In the course of that discussion of signature lines and advertising, the issue of those ladies having an NRP/DNR as it realtes to signature lines was raised. Ultimately, it was decided at that time by the staff involved (Fawn, St. C and T-bone to name a few) that the covenant that ladies not advertise on ECCIE if they have an NRP/DNR MUST be observed, HOWEVER, it is/was PLAINLY stated that ANY/EVERY lady that has an NRP/DNR may have a signature that is compliant with the rules and standards of the board even though they have a no review policy and that such signature may be equal to that enjoyed by any other verified provider. At some point, the line had to be drawn and that was where it was drawn, in fairness to all verified providers.

One of the main rationale used for the decision at that time was that BEFORE most ladies joined ECCIE they were made aware of the issues re: the NRP/DNR policy and it's prohibitions. Many of us that joined ECCIE that had enjoyed an NRP/DNR on other Websites had concerns with ECCIE over the signature line, and ECCIE staff at that time said the rule would be the same as on ASPD, that as a verified provider with a NRP/DNR, ladies would enjoy the SAME consideration as any other verified provider in regard to signature lines.

This has been a back and forth issue three or four times since I have been a member here, EACH time it comes back to the same decision and EACH AND EVERY time it is ALWAYS an issue with / raised by a new moderator. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

I don't know if someone pushes the issue for some reason when there is a ' changing of mods' or if the rules are just that damn hard to reconcile with actual working policy of the board - as we all know, many times rules and how things really are may be sometimes two very different things.

All I know is that to me, personally, because of past events, it feels like (this issue) is beating a dead horse.

Fritz makes the comment that ladies that have an NRP/DNR are basically (to paraphrase) getting one over on the system - that is the furthest from anyone's intent. We're simply doing what we have been told was acceptable in the staff's decision to EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD FOR ALL VERIFIED PROVIDERS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE LADY ELECTED AN NRP/DNR.

The two rules are separate; it isn't that difficult IMO . . . there's a rule for NRP/DNR that prohibits a Showcase and a formal ad. There are rules governing the signature lines of verified providers. ALL verified providers enjoy the same rights to their signature line. Pretty easy.

In the above posts, Fritz mentions that in his view a lady will violate (forfeit) her NRP/DNR for having an advertisement on a competing Website, etc. - THAT HAS NEVER BEEN POLICY HERE ON ECCIE.

The rule as stated has always been and MUST BE the board's policy - it isn't something for a moderator to interpret at whim - his only duty is to enforce those rules as written. If staff (owners) want the rule changed, they need to actually change the rule (in this matter, it would be changing multiple rule[s]).

- Jackie

[Guest121212]

Originally Posted by Oenghus

[...]civility on this board [...]

Now there's a whole other thread and a damn good topic for discussion. Especially on a board where the profane is the very REASON for the board's existence.

Kisses,

- Jackie

[SinsOfTheFlesh]

Originally Posted by Oenghus

I have thought long and hard before posting this for fear of getting labeled a WK

First off I have never met Jackie yet, we have talked in the past but that is for another story.

I did not find Jackie Devlins post confusing, rude or condescending. From my past talks with Jackie she is get to the point don't beat around the bushes kinda of lady and has no problem telling it like it is.

My .02 cents on the matter if the lady who is willing to step up and date gentlemen and requests that a no review policy be in place than so be it. Yes I understand the rules of this board but to me not to respect a ladies wishes is to treat with disrespect. I have on occasion written reviews but I do not like to because what happens between me and the lady is nobody else's business.
The lady whether it be Jackie or another lady if she asks not to be reviewed and you review her in my mind you just disrespected her and treated her like another notch on your bedpost.
So if they ask you not to review them than respect that right and treat them with respect.

Fritz I mean no disrespect to your position of authority as a mod but it appears to me your letting the power of your position get to your head. In my honest opinion your coming across a little heavy handed and acting like a dick. Yes I know you and Adeptus need to keep civility on this board but in my opinon you have been seen wielding the power of the mod more than Fire Serpent did and frankly that worries me that you were not the right person for the job.

I am sorry if that sounds harsh but that is my opinion, I have had to deal with to many people of late that are a little power hungry.

You need better reading glasses. Fritz's responses have been polite, Jackie on the other hand appears to have accidentally double dosed herself when she took her Bitch pill. But, this is not surprising coming from her. She pulled the same crap when FS started off as a mod too. So basically par for the course.

[Grizzly]

never mind, I stated what I wanted to

I am done here

[Guest121212]

Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

You need better reading glasses. Fritz's responses have been polite, Jackie on the other hand appears to have accidentally double dosed herself when she took her Bitch pill. But, this is not surprising coming from her. She pulled the same crap when FS started off as a mod too. So basically par for the course.

In point of fact Stacy, I believe you have me confused with Elena. Elena had it out with FS (but really it was more her having it out with BBD - Elena had a fairly big [reasonable] issue with BBD) and they had words when he was new(er)- I never had a big issue with FS. In fact, my posts here in the open forum and in the Hole show a great deal of respect for FS (which I do in fact have). I believe the issue was the whole BBD / Alexxxis controversy . . . I backed off and stayed pretty much out of it completely as I had no direct involvement in it . . . Any issue I had with FS (if I had one at all) was small (dig it up from the archives and post it if I'm not remembering correctly - and I'll own it and admit I was wrong) and wasn't anything like you're making it out to be - not at all, actually. And this thread / issue I raise isn't indicative of ANY issue I have with 'a moderator as a moderator' (I don't have one) - but I do have issue with people that exhibit less than a working sense of competence. AS WE ALL SHOULD.

And no, I didn't take any bitch pills today. If I come off as a bitch, it is because I actually have the reasonable expectation that prior to moderating a forum (especially one such as this where people's incomes may be of issue) the volunteer moderator would care to read and remember the rules of the forum they volunteered to moderate.

If you want to call me a bitch Stacy, well, the pot can call the kettle black all day long.

[ss4699]

Originally Posted by tucson

I always ask the provider after the session if she wants me to write a review. Only one time did the provider and I decide to not write a review. The provider was great and she did her best BUT we did not click. It was no ones fault it just was. I noticed five or six clocks on the wall as I was getting a BJ and started laughing so hard that nothing would help.

Similar to what I do Tucson - request, write and ask the provider to review before submission. I did a review once for a lady and she pointed out the way it was written, it suggested a service she did not provide and after reading, I agreed and modified. A wrong email or phone number would be bad also.

But I was wondering why ladies don't want reviews. And there has been some sharing on that topic.

Originally Posted by JayceeRivers

For me personally it comes down to privacy intimacy and connection. What I might do with one I may not do with another and vise versa.

Example: I may feel comfortable letting one client dominate me but not the other. Or perhaps one particular day I am in the mood for greek. Or Maybe one lucky guy gets a extra hour at no cost because i have the time to spare.

Ect...

The other reason is generally I build a fantasy around each person. His and mine combined and it kind of shatters the illusion to see it written up in detail someplace.

Though I have never said NO REVIEWS. I have always gently discouraged them. For me the worst would be pressured into something I am not comfortable with or dissapointing a hopeful client.

Anyway those are my reasons hope it helps shed some light

Jaycee you touched on 3 things - privacy- intimacy - connection?
So these would go into the YMMV area? Your comfort with a client is the main consideration from what you are saying? And the review might suggest or imply something you did not want to do with a first time visitor. Does your showcase or website say something along those lines?
I will admit that I don't always check those for services offered. I do tend to look at reviews primarily. So those two avenues might be a way to operate beyond or outside the review forums. So if you have one site or showcase, that would be a valid option to see if what is offered, if that is alright? That may clairify things for me, if that was your intent. And that does seem reasonable. Other ladies with a similar policy for a different reason? Or ladies who allow reviews with observations that would be willing to share on the topic?

Mod Fritz - I may have misquoted you in some way, if so, my apology. My intent was not to disrupt. I have written a number of reviews and had few ladies that have taken this type of stance. But I did not think I should pull a quote out of the review section and place it in Co-ed, there may not be a rule but, but it just seemed inappropriate.

[Guest121212]

Originally Posted by newtotown

Similar to what I do Tucson - request, write and ask the provider to review before submission. I did a review once for a lady and she pointed out the way it was written, it suggested a service she did not provide and after reading, I agreed and modified. A wrong email or phone number would be bad also.

But I was wondering why ladies don't want reviews. And there has been some sharing on that topic.

What amazes me about your query is that the question has been raised and the issue has been discussed numerous times before on ASPD, here on ECCIE and on the board where you moderate (on the national boards and in the KC sub-forum) - and you've even participated in the discussion . . . What answer have you not received that you're wanting to hear??

I'm asking sincerely - as I believe you yourself have even raised the topic before, if my memory serves me correctly (of course it is my luck that it was posted under a different screen name belonging to you [ss4699], so I can't easily pull the post for citation).

It may just be me, but the timing of this post / topic appearing now seems to be intentional / contrived.

If it is not, and if I am mistaken, do please accept my apology.

[Guest030824]

I will see a lady next week that is UTR and after emails we talked on the phone for over an hour. Because she is UTR she requested no review. I will gladly do as she wants. We were both brought together via a thread here on ECCIE and through several PMs I hope to see her and perhaps she will become my ATF.

[ss4699]

Jaycee - your showcase says
Escort (GFE), Escort (Limited GFE), Escort (PSE), Fetishes

And your site lists:
Body Rub FBSM Reverse Body Rub FS GFE PSE HJ LFK DFK Foot Fetish DATY Missionary Cowgirl Reverse Cowgirl Asian Cowgirl Doggie Style MSOG CBJ BBBJ Sixty Nine BLS Russian Pearl Necklace Facial Couple Friendly Doubles Bisexual YMMV Toys Domination BDSM Submission
So this would be a valid option to allowing reviews. Thanks again for sharing that does help me.

[Modda]

Nothing against anyone with NRP.....as a general rule (a self imposing rule)...if a provider says 'no' review after the session....then chances of going back are 'nil'...in my case.

[MsElena]

Here's my opinion of reviews:

1. It really does nothing for the lady except show she's legit if she's reviewed by reputatable hobbyists at first.
2. Its an ego stroking, chest pounding way for the guy to show off his "skills."
3. Half of what the guys write in the reviews is false anyway.
4. Too many reviews for one lady draws too much unwanted attention.

Its a catch 22......damned if you do, damned if you don't.