You know guys, I am amazed that this is such a fuss. I
replied to a fuss with a clear explanation in
the other thread and Stick has given a clear explanation here in this thread.
No one has invalidated anything. Sweet Tea's
female handle simply cannot be approved for PA and access to the
Men's Lounge. This is not complicated.
What I don't understand is: "
Why the fuss?" Sativa and Kaitlynn both can spin this in such a positive way, both in their showcases
(which Sativa has never set up for some reason, why not?) and in their signature lines. They could also enhance all future ads in Provider Ads and Weekend Lineup sub-forums.
If I were Sativa or Kaitlynn, I would be drawing positive attention to the reviews of Sweet Tea. I would include in my showcase, signature line, and in all of my ads something like:
Oh, and be sure to check out my reviews from ladies too!! (click here)
That would seem to me to give the opportunity to highlight the
uniqueness of the reviews rather than just fuss about a software functionality that does not even exist (i.e. "approving" a review from a female handle while granting PA to ROS but not granting PA to the Men's Lounge). Now I understand that this
bitching about it may ultimately result in the owners choosing one day in the future to pay for a software re-write of certain functionalities, but the fussing is all negative energy.
With a positive outlook, the providers could be using this software limitation to their benefit by
positively commenting in their review threads (something they cannot do in the Independent Reviews sub-forum) and also by
positively splashing links to these reviews everywhere.
I thought Sweet Tea's reviews were great, but I don't think Sweet Tea should be given PA to the Men's Lounge because her handle statistics indicate she is
not a man.
FWIW, IMHO.
Best Regards, UF
