BAT SHIT CRAZY TO ANOTHER LEVEL- ECCIE2NDAVE- MAKE IT RIGHT FOR EVELYN CRUZ -PROVIDERS PLEASE BE AWARE OF THIS LUNATIC

[essence]

Originally Posted by gtoman

Does that make it any more clear?

Yes, and he has said he is not going to tell you.

There is no such thing as proof, except maybe in pure mathematics.

Even proving 1 + 1 = 2 took hundreds of pages of detailed argument.

If you look to live by rules, what are you doing here?

[SpiceItUp]

Originally Posted by gtoman

No, Spice, you are the one failing to comprehend my question. Instead you are trying to make it out that I am arguing with you all's decision. I am asking what a reviewer would have to provide to provide sufficient evidence, at minimum, to prove the event occurred if a whore (any whore) writes a rebuttal regarding the review (any review)?

Does that make it any more clear?

Originally Posted by Pistolero

Have you noticed that there are few rules but many guidelines on the board? The answer to your question is simple, but yet not. You have to supply info which shows that the review is true. It could be just one item. It make take 20 smaller items which add to the whole. As you said, each case is different.

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

We don't publicly discuss the details of such matters nor will we make it easier for people to get away with fake reviews or other violations by revealing our specific methodology or criteria. Not only is every case unique but much is left to moderator discretion and discernment.

[gtoman]

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

We followed the fake review protocol, period end of story. You don't like the results or apparently that any review at all could be marked as fake. Well that's fine, you're entitled to your opinions.

I realize you don't have access. But, if you had access to modtardville you'd know that there is a detailed SOP for such matters and how to handle them, which was followed. You'd also know that the guidelines leave out a great many details in the interests of brevity, but plenty exists behind the scenes to expand upon them and their interpretation in more detail. The marking of them as fake and not necessarily pulling them is one such elaboration and it is how the powers that be want it handled. I'd imagine they feel it better for the membership to be able to hold the reviewer accountable than for us to simply disappear the thread entirely.

Let's keep in mind that this is a molehill not a mountain. A disputed review is a rarity in percentage terms and 95%+ of those are and will continue to be a complete "he said, she said" where nothing is done at all. Ask the ladies how they feel about disputing reviews and I guarantee they will tell you they think it's pretty much worthless because we don't just pull them like other sites do.

System is working as intended.

Great! Now we are getting somewhere. What does that SOP state for minimum required evidence to be provided for you to make your decisions?

Originally Posted by Azebella_amor

if your issue is with Natalia why are you also attacking her roommate/friend? Natalie a is defending her friend. You don't have to like her I agree with but she was being a friend.

Excuse me, but if you are not going to read the entire thread please do not comment. If you go back to page, motherfucking, 1 you will see that she attacked me initially (see post #10). Would you let someone say something derogatory to you slide? I bet not. Please keep up, mmmkay cupcake.

Originally Posted by Azebella_amor

Stop posting for a whole 24 hours and read all the RULES on here. Absolutely nowhere and I mean absolutely nowhere does it say that we have to speak English or write English so you can understand us. Again I understand that your issue is with Natalia. But in the process you have offended a lot of Latinos that have never done nothing to you. You think she's the only one that has some enemies now?

I have been criticised, made fun of, laughed at because my English is not perfect. You have no right to criticize anyone or question that's all you because she's writing for her friend. Not every provider care put up with all the trolls and negativity on this site.

Instead of criticizing somebody or questioning them how come they don't speak such good English in your words speak English on this thread why don't you try to help her out and see it what way can you show her a little better English. Are you too busy being a troll? You have made so many remarks on this thread.

Are you out of your mind? Did you quote the wrong post or person?

Where the hell did I say anything about having to speak English as a rule?
Where did I criticize anyone for the language they speak?

I bet your response will be stellar since you can't seem to comprehend the statements that have been made in this thread. I have not seen one person criticize EC for not being able to speak English.

[armature]

Originally Posted by dearhunter

Kind of difficult to do that from Southern Mexico.

When I got back to town I'd do it. Easy.

[dearhunter]

Azabella just proved my point........ijs

[canihitit]

"If you go back to page, motherfucking, 1 you will see that she....."

This shit made me laugh and spill my drank.
That sounds like some shit I would say.
Hahahahahahahaha
But with out the commas and an exclamation point at the end.

Hahahahahahahaha

[gtoman]

Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Nice, so all reviewers are still at risk of ANYONE posting a rebuttal about your review and if you don't provide what the Mods want in your PARTICULAR case then the weighted decision goes to the reviewee.

Good to know. Thanks.

[GlobeSpotter]

Originally Posted by canihitit

^^^^^. That ass is nice.


Edit. Not you gs.

You don't know.

[gtoman]

Originally Posted by essence

Yes, and he has said he is not going to tell you.

There is no such thing as proof, except maybe in pure mathematics.

Even proving 1 + 1 = 2 took hundreds of pages of detailed argument.

If you look to live by rules, what are you doing here?

The rules here are heavily weight to whomever is dishing out the freebies to the Mods that's for sure.

Edit: As Spice has stated, there is a SOP for this, but they refuse to share the details of it to the people who have to adhere to it ultimately. Meaning, they are making this shit up as they go. Where else have you ever heard that a SOP is "secret"; except where there really isn't one.

[Guest092816]

STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM!!!!

POST #10 MY CUBAN ASS!!!

You started it why did you comment on her thread if you were never looking for no problem? All you been doing is questioning everything and everybody. Shut up go read the rules and if you don't like it shut your ECCIE accountdown

Originally Posted by gtoman

Great! Now we are getting somewhere. What does that SOP state for minimum required evidence to be provided for you to make your decisions?



Excuse me, but if you are not going to read the entire thread please do not comment. If you go back to page, motherfucking, 1 you will see that she attacked me initially (see post #10). Would you let someone say something derogatory to you slide? I bet not. Please keep up, mmmkay cupcake.



Are you out of your mind? Did you quote the wrong post or person?

Where the hell did I say anything about having to speak English as a rule?
Where did I criticize anyone for the language they speak?

I bet your response will be stellar since you can't seem to comprehend the statements that have been made in this thread. I have not seen one person criticize EC for not being able to speak English.

[armature]

Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter

You hear that fuckTards and Mitches?

"....took away the WakeUp crown."

Whores love them some GlobeSpotter.


You've mistaken. "Third person" means it was written by her pimp.

Lo siento si no entiendes. Es todo bien.

She understands; it's not all good; and, no, speaking in third person doesn't mean it was written by a pimp. There is no way, literally no way, NM is pimped.

[gtoman]

Originally Posted by Azebella_amor

STOP PLAYING !!!!

POST #10 MY CUBAN ASS!!!

You started it why did you comment on her thread if you were never looking for no problem? All you been doing is questioning everything and everybody. Shut up go read the rules and if you don't like it shut your ECCIE accountdown

READ THE THREAD!

Damn you are just being ignorant now. I started what? Calling her a "manager"? What other term would YOU use for describing someone who handles screening, communication, setting appointments, etc for another provider? Also, notice I also used quotes on the term as to indicate it as suggestive, but if the fucking shoe fits.....

What rule would you like me to reread. Not one states that they won't share details of what is required to refute or prove a review. Nor do any discuss that particular aspect.

EDIT: As Spice has already stated previously, this is Co-Ed, it is an open communication forum. Meaning anyone can comment. Don't post here if you don't want that to happen. That sounds like it is A-OK for anyone to post here.

[gtoman]

Originally Posted by armature

She understands; it's not all good; and, no, speaking in third person doesn't mean it was written by a pimp. There is no way, literally no way, NM is pimped.

How do you know this for a fact?

[canihitit]

She has nice tits and she's a great kisser.
Who really cares if the review is called a fake.

If you got the pussy, you win.

[GlobeSpotter]

Originally Posted by armature

She understands; it's not all good; and, no, speaking in third person doesn't mean it was written by a pimp. There is no way, literally no way, NM is pimped.

Kk. Thancks. Everyone can feel better now.

Nothing more to see here folks....move along.

(Of course, EC still pimped.)