Provider Comments in Reviews

[notdeadyet]

Instead of the "No Provider Comment" rule, what does everyone think about trying a one-comment-rule (comment is not PA-limited-only), when the review rec is a "No"? The purposes are (1) to put all the review information in one place, and (2) eliminate or lessen the need for a separate he-said-she-said coed thread (which some of us never find anyway).

The provider would have to understand that the comment privilege is not MSOG -- i.e., if one wants to rant incoherently, that's okay, but there's no second shot to come back with a rational reply. Of course, since the providers don't have PA, they certainly couldn't know the ROS details (cough! cough!), which might be limiting.

And, staff needs to allow comments only when the rec is "No", to prevent the provider cluttering up the review thread with thanks and such.

[Fort Worth Punk]

Since they can't read the ROS what would they want to say? Thanks for getting my height right?

[~Ze~]

I thought about a tick box our review tab.

Where all of our reviews are listed, just add another column with a box and drop down menu for choices.

Tick - I met with this person and this review is accurate to my knowledge.
Tick - I have not met with this person.
Tick - I have reservations about the accuracy of this review.
etc.

Something extremely limiting but gives the provider some option as well.

Or give us a small 1000 character limit comment box on our review tab.Attachment 94894

[pyramider]

A bad idea whose time might be upon us.

[FishGuy13]

I don't see the down side of this one, just yet. Ze's idea looked great or the one response idea but let it be to all (yes & no's) even if it was just to say thanks, perhaps give the providers a bit more lee-way to edit if they go on a rant about nothing. I don't see a problem with clutter it is not like it prints out paper.

[lisa.lisa0302]

Please NO!!!!!!!!!!!.

Some of these providers already post in the review just to say "thanks", or something shiny and sparkly. Makes no sense.

A good provider knows to just move on when she gets a NO review. Not sure what one would say to a VALID NO review. Such as a provider showing up drunk, spaced out, or showed up super late, or pulled some crap. What do you want her to say.

The thought is nice though, but I think some ladies will spin it their way, and ruin it for the rest of us.

[Torito]

As pointed out earlier, what can she comment on, unless she is reading ROS?

Torito

[Iaintliein]

I'm guessing this would be a nightmare to police (making sure only the provider in question answered, and only one time) etc.

[Larrydumbass]

They already have haters and lovers to either build them up or tear them down so added drama is not necessary. Just go after the girls that are attractive to your tastes, read as much as you can and then make a decision. Remember only you can truly decide and know what you want.

[Torito]

Originally Posted by Larrydumbass

They already have haters and lovers to either build them up or tear them down so added drama is not necessary. Just go after the girls that are attractive to your tastes, read as much as you can and then make a decision. Remember only you can truly decide and know what you want.

Larry is not such a dumbass after all. LOL

Torito

[notdeadyet]

Originally Posted by Torito

As pointed out earlier, what can she comment on, unless she is reading ROS? Torito

As many people have commented in the past, it's pretty obvious that some (many?most?) providers have ROS access, either directly or indirectly, notwithstanding any rule to the contrary.

The idea of allowing a provider comment in a "no" review is just to put everything in one place. It doesn't seem much, if any, different to me than the current set-up in coed, where a provider is permitted to contest/explain/apologize/whatever a review in a coed thread, which invariably is closed after both sides have their he-said-she-said. Putting the he-said-she-said in the review just means that you don't have to cross-reference the coed area to get both sides.

I don't see any downsides, but then, I don't have to moderate or administer it.

[Randy4Candy]

It sounds like a monumental waste of time and a further encouragement to the thespians among the ladies. I'm probably wrong, but I thought this was a board where the guys reviewed the ladies in order for other guys to get information as to whether or not they would like to see them. That plan has already degenerated to the point to where many, many reviews are worthless and continuing to allow provider "input" after the session is sort of the cart before the horse methodology. Their "input" needs to be during the session and lackluster "input" should be freely noted. Checks and balances sort of thing - the guys write the checks - hmmm, can't think of anything pithy to write about providers and balances...lol!