meiji
Global Moderator
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2012
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 4,931
Not speaking as a moderator here --
Lots of other boards have review queues generally so that they can give credit for quality reviews. The main successful one that I've been on -- ECCIE -- didn't pre-screen reviews to verify their authenticity. Objections to those reviews were handled after they were published.
As has been mentioned before, this is way too much machinery to put in place at the moment, especially given the manpower needed.
I personally have a really tough time giving a 3rd party final approval on board content. Nothing against any provider here, but there will be expectations not met, either via misunderstandings or a provider having a bad day, and everyone has a right to express their own opinion in the matter. A good review writer will be gentle instead of going thermonuclear, but even someone that's outraged by a situation has a right to express that outrage, just as the provider has a right to respond. Allowing a provider to ax a review that's suspicious allows her to dump any criticism of her, whether that criticism is accurate or not. Again, nothing against provider TAG members, but if they have the right to ax an accurate but negative review, don't you think many would do so? I know if it would affect my business, I probably would.
The key here, as @Willful mentioned is research. Seeing a 'well-reviewed' provider doesn't mean going to see a woman with a single glowing review by some random user. It's seeing one that has a long history of good reviews, or is reviewed by a user that I trust, or she works for an organization that I've had a lot of good experiences with in the past. And there's always going to be negative reviews, suspicious or otherwise. Everyone has bad days. A provider that is known for mindblowing experiences 90-95% of the time is a really good bet.
On ECCIE, there were users that I knew had very similar tastes in body type, etc that I did, so when they gave a provider a glowing review I knew to put that woman on my short list. That's slightly harder to do given the more transient nature of the foreigner hobby network in Tokyo, but it gives you an idea of what we should strive for.
I completely disagree with this. We can't be axing reviews of non-member providers when one of the main points of TAG is to give guys options above and beyond the foreigner friendly.
Wiping out review history is a really bad idea for a number of reasons.
I don't personally think this is really that common of a phenomenon to be a major issue. We need to encourage people to post reviews, and we need to encourage people to continue reporting things they think are fishy. I don't think we really have that much of a problem with people reporting those things, honestly.
It's difficult, but my initial reaction was:
1. All reviews go into a "pre-approved" queue before being published.
Lots of other boards have review queues generally so that they can give credit for quality reviews. The main successful one that I've been on -- ECCIE -- didn't pre-screen reviews to verify their authenticity. Objections to those reviews were handled after they were published.
As has been mentioned before, this is way too much machinery to put in place at the moment, especially given the manpower needed.
2. Any suspicious reviews are mailed to the escort (if she's a TAG member) and asked for her to verify.
I personally have a really tough time giving a 3rd party final approval on board content. Nothing against any provider here, but there will be expectations not met, either via misunderstandings or a provider having a bad day, and everyone has a right to express their own opinion in the matter. A good review writer will be gentle instead of going thermonuclear, but even someone that's outraged by a situation has a right to express that outrage, just as the provider has a right to respond. Allowing a provider to ax a review that's suspicious allows her to dump any criticism of her, whether that criticism is accurate or not. Again, nothing against provider TAG members, but if they have the right to ax an accurate but negative review, don't you think many would do so? I know if it would affect my business, I probably would.
The key here, as @Willful mentioned is research. Seeing a 'well-reviewed' provider doesn't mean going to see a woman with a single glowing review by some random user. It's seeing one that has a long history of good reviews, or is reviewed by a user that I trust, or she works for an organization that I've had a lot of good experiences with in the past. And there's always going to be negative reviews, suspicious or otherwise. Everyone has bad days. A provider that is known for mindblowing experiences 90-95% of the time is a really good bet.
On ECCIE, there were users that I knew had very similar tastes in body type, etc that I did, so when they gave a provider a glowing review I knew to put that woman on my short list. That's slightly harder to do given the more transient nature of the foreigner hobby network in Tokyo, but it gives you an idea of what we should strive for.
None TAG members, the suspicious review is automatically removed.
I completely disagree with this. We can't be axing reviews of non-member providers when one of the main points of TAG is to give guys options above and beyond the foreigner friendly.
3. If the escort approves the review, and it turns out to be fake, then ban the escort, remove all positive reviews of her and change the shill review into a warning post. This would work for TAG account holders only.
Wiping out review history is a really bad idea for a number of reasons.
I don't personally think this is really that common of a phenomenon to be a major issue. We need to encourage people to post reviews, and we need to encourage people to continue reporting things they think are fishy. I don't think we really have that much of a problem with people reporting those things, honestly.