Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasGator
I would be surprised if it weren't allowed, although admit I haven't read rule (and confident WU has them memorized). BUT, common sense tells me the rationale behind disallowing disclosure of BCD/ROS is the expectation of privacy others posting are "assured." (tongue>cheek).
What possible basis exists for disallowing one from retelling that which HE has posted? He's the only one with an expected right of privacy.
True, the aftermath & resulting questions about replies might ensue, but who are we to discourage those benevolent souls. In the name of Tebow, I beg of you - encourage them to continue on this noble path. The freedom to acknowledge these acts should never be discouraged.
Edit: BP & CB have the cajones to tell us they send review to the lady first, criticism of the malcontents notwithstanding. Anyone else big enough to step into their shoes?
|
Thanks, Gator. I miss the old days, and am glad that at least a few of the good guys are still around.
As I recall, ASPD actually used to have a rule against sharing your review with a provider, inane as that sounds. I found a simple way to circumvent this within the rules - I sent her the review first, then later posted it. I don't think Eccie has anything so silly.
I see no downside to sharing a review with a provider, especially if I have suggestions to make the session better. Of course, I understand the concept of tact, and can give constructive criticism without being a jerk about it. For some of the "gentlemen" here, that might be an insurmountable challenge.
My Bio Page - Texas - West
