Just was wondering about the dilemma that the reviews mods face when approving/activating reviews sometimes.
I know that Ireland has changed a lot in the last 10 years or so in terms of the fact that we now have lots of people from other countries for whom English is not their first language and I have seen some reviewers who have lots of reviews which have been accepted but the language/syntax is very poor.
I have also seen lots of reviews ratted because there was an ip issue, ie, the ip was the same as the escorts.
However, if I were an escort and wanted to post a flattering review of myself, I would first post a couple of reviews of other escorts and the myself, and all from an internet cafe....
I have to say that there are an increasing number of reviews appearing from reviewers who seem to have no command of the English language and who conveniently seem to have 2, 3 or 4 reviews (and sometimes more) and who have generally got only good things to say (in their own way!!) about their experiences...
In any event, my point is that it must be really frustrating for reviews mods who must suspect these reviews as rattable but can't do anything about it...
Any comments?
BLD
reviews moderators dilemma
Printable View
-
03-09-10, 20:24bigladdubreviews moderators dilemma
-
03-09-10, 21:05finewiththat
Escort Ireland - Escort Reviews - Review 028168 - Irish Independent Escorts, Irish Touring Escorts, Irish Escort Agencies
Here is a good example of moderators run wild. JRambo rats this just because the guy thinks her photos are dated and no one else does.
Clearly mods are protecting the people who pay .. to the detriment of those who read/post.
Easy ways to spot a rat. But JRambo you need to fix this ASAP. -
03-09-10, 21:21lutherQuote:
Originally Posted by finewiththat
Ya, a typical example of a judgement call a mod had to make over a review and gets accused of "running wild"........
BLD, you have no idea the amount of work and dilemas review mods have to face here on a daily basis, doing so in their own time. Hundreds of reviews are published, but then there's one that people have a different opinion on and they get slated for it............
This protecting people is absoulte bullshit. I've been in there, I have no reason to lie about it, I'm just a regular member now, but I can tell you all this "protection" shit doesn't happen............ -
03-09-10, 21:25bigladdubThanks for the comment Finewiththat.Quote:
Originally Posted by finewiththat
I just want to make this clear.
I think the reviews mods have a tough job. I do NOT think that there is any possibility of funny business from any review mod. \i have had an argument with them recently regarding a review from mr fussy on lucy chambers but that is self explanatory and outside the scope of this post.
BLD -
03-09-10, 21:37WestsidexIn theory what your saying is fair enough but in practice its not that simple. What he is doing is giving the benfit of the doubt to the majority. Nothing wrong with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by finewiththat
Westside. -
03-09-10, 22:30bigladdubWhat majority?Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidex
These guys have a really hard job. I just made a simple point. In theory what your saying is fair enough but in practice its not that simple. I have tried to defend the mods in my post. I would like to keep it on topic
BLD -
04-09-10, 00:36JohnRamboMILF Hunter – 60 reviews said this about Christina’s photos, “Pics are accurate”.Quote:
Originally Posted by finewiththat
galman – 40 reviews said, “Pictures are accurate”.
footiefan – 14 reviews said, “better looking in person than photos.”
So overall the call that I made was there were more pervious reviewers who commented on the accuracy of Christina’s photos than those who doubted them.
You also have to take into account some reviewers from some reason (sometimes only known to them) they’ll take a spite at a girl and try and post something negative.
So my overall call was taking into considerations MILF Hunter and galman who are trusted reviewers word over anyone else.
There are other factors we take into consideration you might not be aware of.
And if you think I need to sort something out please by all means just say I’m listening. -
04-09-10, 06:23finewiththat
JohnRambo - I appreciate you explanation but I still don't agree so we may leave it at that. It is my feeling that the reviewer is entitled to his own opinions and assessment. Just because someone visits and dislikes a person doesn't make that reviewer a fake.
And just because others assess a person differently doesn't make anyone who disagrees with them wrong.
You yourself acknowledge it - the only reason you ratted the review was it wasn't consistent with others. So if opinion doesn't conform, it is fake? wrong?
Now, had reviewer posted inaccurately, had facts been fabricated, or the poster was an obvious sham (to BLD's original premise - and BLD sorry that my post has hijacked your thread), if any of that was the case and the basis of your decision, I think we would all agree.
But in this case we will have to agree to disagree. In any event, I am thankful for what mods do. -
04-09-10, 11:10Mousey
I think there should be a certain level of fluency in English before the review is activated. I don't care about English not being your first language - what's the point in even attempting a review if you don't speak-a da lingo? If you haven't a clue what the reviewer is trying to say a few words in, can the review.
-
12-09-10, 09:37sharkskin
JohnRambo made a good point about the review in which just one reviewer complained about the accuracy of an escort's photos.
Rather than just ratting the review, perhaps it would have been better to discuss the matter with the reviewer by pm and then make a judgement. (I do realise that there is an issue with the time that mods have available for that sort of thing.)
It could be that everyone is right. Perhaps the client saw the escort at the start of her working day and she was not at her best after a late night.