Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Yowzer · 02-22-2012, 04:17 PM

I have a hard time believing this guy since I won't think any provider (unless extremely newbie friendly) that would see a guy w/o verification especially if he joined that close (if not after) his review.

Because he was/is a newbie, I'm more likely to believe Kia on this one. Although I don't know her, I would think a provider would be kind of dumb to do what he said in ROS. But stranger things have happened, but generally not with a well reviewed provider. I cann't go into it further w/o revealing ROS.

I don't know if Kia is "deserving" of a ban because someone told her about the ROS of the review. Cut and paste and sending it to her is a whole lot different than paraphrasing it. Plus the non private comments on the review are enough to wonder WTF did this guy say or do to warrent so many guys saying he was wrong. Also, a fair number of clues were given to the ROS contents. Any good provider is going to recoil from a negative review, especially if she believes it to be false.

Ban (or put in timeout) the dude already and lets move on. Its doubtful either party will give a retraction. Gove Kia a slap on the wrist if the mods think it necessary; I'd rather slap her ass

dearhunter · 02-22-2012, 04:34 PM

It is not a question of "someone told her about the ROS of the review". We all know that hooktards have WKs telling them the ROS information.......at least the ones too lazy to get access on their own.

The line is simple......hooktards do not disclose that they know, and we pretend that we thinck they don't know. When a hooktard crosses that line, the house of cards starts falling apart.......when a modtard starts making allowances for this hooktard and that hooktard, he is attempting to put the house of cards back together again without all of the cards.

It does not work........Wakeup was correct.....she was fine until that statement.

Now, she needs to give up the WK, and get a short vacation......or......take a longer one without him.

There are very clear reasons for doing this.

Wakeup · 02-22-2012, 04:54 PM

Why the fuck are some of you trying to rationalize this...she's on vacation...end of story...the only question is if she's going to give up the WK who gave her the ROS or not...

bbkid · 02-22-2012, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wakeuр

the only question is if she's going to give up the WK who gave her the ROS or not...

over / under ???

Wakeup · 02-22-2012, 07:37 PM

Strangely enough, in these cases...giving up their white knights is the one area that hookers universally display a semblance of honor...

It's quite intriguing actually...

Guest071514-1 · 02-22-2012, 07:39 PM

Some guys can't take rejection. It's just to easy to open up a laptop and try to ruin a perfectly good provider. I have not had it happen to me YET, but you never know what someone will say when they are upset. What a loser!

Sarunga · 02-22-2012, 11:34 PM

Following rules according to the letter is good moderation.

But using common sense to follow those rules is awesome moderation....and has been done before.

We need to look at the BIG picture here....the GOOD should prevail the BAD. This is real life, not a deck of cards.

spice-is-nice · 02-23-2012, 11:44 PM

I have seen Kia once, had an absolutely delightful time, and hope to see her again soon. I do not believe a word of the review which started this thread, and I am sad that it is so easy for such people to cause trouble for the ladies who give us such pleasure.

I don't see evidence that this guy has yet been banned, which I think he should be, because he is either a bald-faced liar (which is my guess) or his conduct was criminal. So I pressed the report button a few minutes ago in case the mods hadn't noticed this one yet, suggesting he be banned.

It saddens me, but probably shouldn't surprise me, to see as much misogynistic behavior as I see on a website ostensibly devoted to helping men and women enjoy each other's company. Fortunately that behavior is the exception, and I think the level of discourse is considerably improved compared to ASPD, for which I tip my hats to a group of mods who seem pretty exceptional to me.

Wakeup · 02-24-2012, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarunga

Following rules according to the letter is good moderation.

But using common sense to follow those rules is awesome moderation....and has been done before.

We need to look at the BIG picture here....the GOOD should prevail the BAD. This is real life, not a deck of cards.

There is no such thing as good and bad here...there's only the rules...trying to determine good and bad on a hooker board is a quick way to ambassadorship...

She's gone...

lizardking · 02-24-2012, 10:14 AM

I've never understood the ridiculous charade that underlies the rule (or belief or assumption or whatever you want to call it) that the girls cannot or do not see what's designated as "private" on this and other boards. Everyone knows it's bullshit, yet many continue to advocate enforcement of the rule. It's silly and it's contrary to basic human nature.

I don't know about many members' respective businesses, professions, or occupations, but the same analysis applies whether you're a bricklayer or a brain surgeon. If you could pay roughly $100 a year for anonymous access to a message board similar to this where the details of your work (and, perhaps more importantly, your colleagues' and competitors' work) are discussed and commented upon by your customer/client base (and your colleagues and competitors), wouldn't you be a complete fucking idiot not to do it? Would a "no brain surgeon's allowed" rule be effective in keeping you from doing it? Again, only if you're a complete fucking idiot. ("Hey! You're not 'carnival personnel'!" See, The Jerk.)

I recall hearing a professional athlete pose this question in a discussion regarding the use of performance-enhancing drugs: "If you were a lawyer or doctor and you could take a pill that would make you smarter, would you do it?" As long as it was safe and healthy, hell yes, I'd do it.

Is anyone here really foolish enough to write anything anywhere based on an assumption that everyone can't see it. Again, if you do: CFI.

Wakeup · 02-24-2012, 11:22 AM

This isn't about the rule. If you don't like the rule, start a thread in Ask The Staff about it and try to get it changed. Until then, ban the bitch...

dearhunter · 02-24-2012, 01:57 PM

You are not going to stop them from reading it. But, you can get them to shut the fuck up about it........ROS information is not FOR the hooktards......ROS information is ABOUT the hooktards.

Reviews are already enough of a joke.

If you start picking and choosing which hooktards you will allow to respond to the ROS in a review that they disagree with, you are clueless to the kind of chaos you will be releasing onto yourselves.

The hooktard needs to be banned (not for being wrong about the fucktard). Because, every other hooktard in this thread is watching to see where the line is.......ijs.

Jusanotherdude · 02-24-2012, 03:24 PM

Ok..... I'm just catching up on all of this...... but one thing I'd like to comment on here quick....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarunga

Following rules according to the letter is good moderation.

But using common sense to follow those rules is awesome moderation....and has been done before.

We need to look at the BIG picture here....the GOOD should prevail the BAD. This is real life, not a deck of cards.

I could not disagree more with the second part of your statement...... who's "common sense" are we using here? And it is a slippery slope when you start grey-ing lines......... then other issues start to arise as to the integrity of each mod and their individual moral compasses or sense of "right and wrong"......... when that becomes the case then every rule and infraction is likewise debatable and ambiguous....

JaD

hornfreak · 02-24-2012, 09:05 PM

I don't think that she'll give the WK, she needs him.

Sarunga · 02-25-2012, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jusanotherdude

I could not disagree more with the second part of your statement...... who's "common sense" are we using here? And it is a slippery slope when you start grey-ing lines......... then other issues start to arise as to the integrity of each mod and their individual moral compasses or sense of "right and wrong"......... when that becomes the case then every rule and infraction is likewise debatable and ambiguous....

JaD

You are just the person we need, JaD.

As to whose "common sense"....well, obviously yours (the mods)....as long as you guys remain unbiased by the environment.

Now, I could cite several examples from my own experiences where rules were "bypassed" and judgment calls were made based on "common sense". I would be more than happy to elaborate on them here, if you would allow me to. Just say the word.

Well, clearly, it's good to have a set of rules....that can be used as a structural guideline. However, when you execute those rules, you should consider that we are all human beings....and not just a bunch of mindless zombies.

Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if there are disagreements amongst the mods as to a possible cause of action. In such situations, my suggestion would be, to take a vote. I would suspect that this is already the case.

In fact, we don't have to complicate this at all....as somebody erroneously prophesized.