Quote:
Originally Posted by jokacz
I think this place is more friendly than the old one. I think it could be even more friendly if it adopted a review format more like GTERB where the providers actually interact with the clients. I think the whole concept of BCD or ROS or whatever you want to call it ought to be relegated to its own section and be labeled "Crank Yankers". I don't know what it brings to the table other than to provide thrills for guys too cheap to come up with the 2 or 3 bills to experience life first hand.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jokacz
If the review process were ever to be opened for providers to participate, I think it would be mandatory that the anonymity of the client be guaranteed. Piss off a provider and get outed, not a good thing. Also, does anyone really believe that providers have never seen BCD or ROS portions of their reviews? I don’t think the Canadian boards are perfect, but I do think they can be a lot of fun when there are lively dialogs between the men and women. Regarding my distain for graphic BCD portions of reviews, I will leave you with an anonymous quote from one of the most respected providers in this area when we exchanged emails on this topic:
"...I guess the way I feel is that whatever happens between 2 people should stay between those people. Its no-one else's business what goes on behind closed doors. Its an intimate closeness that I think should be considered private. It about tact and I'd like to consider myself a classy lady."
|
This thread has sort of bounced around a bunch of issues that I think are worth pondering as this new community solidifies for upstate NY, and many of them are in some way found in jokacz's posts.
For me, I think the review process should stay as it is (ASPD style, FWIW). I, like some others (although not jokacz), find the review interactions on some of the other sites a bit strange, and no doubt hobbyists are more apt to review differently and be less forthcoming in those situations. I also agree with cnym's observations about the provider comments on E.com. While it's nice to get a thank you from a provider after submitting a review, it seems perhaps more appropriate for that to come in the form of a PM, IMHO. Sure, it's rewarding in a sense to get a public thanks from a great provider. However, for some guys I'm sure it can also be very offputting to see a provider making lots of "can't wait for next time" kinds of comments to an array of other hobbyists, as well. Something to think about, anyway...
I think the thing that works best about the current review setup is that it leaves room for different approaches and hobbyists can (at least in theory) discuss things among themselves in ROS portions of reviews and comments. Take away the ROS idea and you have a profoundly different board, to say the least. Also, the mods and other hobbyists can easily call out BS reviews and put things in perspective when needed, so providers are already protected in that sense.
Lastly, while I again support the idea of different approaches and appreciate the general contributions of our diverse group of hobbyists, I concur with some of the things expessed by jokacz and others in this thread. While there is no right or wrong (and hey, we can just ignore what we don't want to read), some questions/comments as we start things up on this site:
*What is the appropriate amount of detail for ROS comments?
Obviously this varies a lot in terms of taste/style. My own reviews have varied somewhat here depending on the situation, so I guess I can relate to both sides, although I have tended to stay more general. However, like jokacz, I can say for sure that many providers and hobbyists do not care for overly detailed comments. Should that matter? I don't know, but understand that many will find them silly and/or even offensive. (Little doubt the "crank-yanker" following really is out there, as well. LOL)
*What is the purpose of a review: Information sharing? Entertainment? Ego boost?
I think this gets right at the idea of different approaches yet again, and there is room for all. For me, though, the main thing I am really looking for in a review is information. Some additional questions that follow from this:
What is the purpose of lengthy, descriptive reviews? Are we trying to "one-up" each other's tales as if in high school? Are we writing directly to the "crank-yanker" crowd at that point? Does it make sense to spend several hours (or much longer) to review a one-hour meeting? If so, what does that say about the role meetings, reviews, and time on the board plays for us? Didn't we all get into this for the *experiences* in the first place?
What is the purpose of reviewing the same provider or few providers a bunch of times, even in a short time span? Why would one take that approach? Does that really benefit the provider(s) in some way? Could it actually harm the provider(s) in some way?
Anyway, it seems like a good time to bat things around a bit now that we are in a new place. Again, personal preferences aside, I'm glad we have room for variety under this format. In my view, there is no right or wrong answer to many of the questions raised in our community. I do think there are good times to ask questions, however.
