Mistaken Identity

[Forrest]

As a thumbnail pic of the escort automatically appears when someone is submitting a review I very much doubt that this reviewer made a genuine mistake. More likely he/she was trying to damage Emmas reputation for whatever reason. As previous posters have stated this review is total bullshit and should be deleted.

I agree, but I just wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to the reviewer, as there was another Emma in Kildare, but there is only one Emmasweet

[richieboy]

Emma is wihtout question one off the nicest girls i have met the review is totally false should be removed.

[Seriouslyhot]

I agree, but I just wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to the reviewer, as there was another Emma in Kildare, but there is only one Emmasweet

There was another emma but not at the time he supposedly seen emma sweet!!
I wonder as we were the last people before that one to review emma if we would be allowed more comments on our review?

[Seriouslyhot]

There was another emma but not at the time he supposedly seen emma sweet!!
I wonder as we were the last people before that one to review emma if we would be allowed more comments on our review?

Personally I think its a total fake and he or she!!! Is trying to damage emmas good reputation!!

[Rocker123]

Good thread Forrest. Emma has 136 reviews of which a total of 3 are not green, including this one. Thats 1.36%... So although this is upsetting for Emma she should see that her reputation is too good for one silly review to damage it.

I am sure I speak for the vast majority of guys who have never met Emma when I say that this review has ZERO effect on my opinion of her. Anyone thinking of seeing Emma who is influenced by that review and not the 133 good ones is daft.

It will be removed on Monday.

[samlad]

I have looked into this and this issue has been resolved. This situation does stress a valid point;

Harry is a new, part time moderator and Floki is new enough to be unfamiliar with everyone on the forums at this stage. Both have been trained to take an impartial overview of the reviews system, something that we (the mods) always try to do to the best of our ability. With that in mind, in terms of process, Harry did absolutely the right thing activating this review. Sometimes escorts might have an off-day or whatever, and ironically, in cases like this, we are expected to disregard this ethos of 'impartiality' because this is an escort that everyone likes, she is popular and beautiful, etc.

The point is, we get so much flak for the credibility of the reviews system. Clients want us to publish every detail so that they can avoid a bad escort. An escort has a flawless run of reviews, so she couldn't possibly ever get a bad one, surely..? In this case, I have put this down to a malicious reviewer who probably didn't get his own way somewhere down the line, accounting for the fact that he was a first time reviewer. Sadly, malicious reviewers are commonplace nowadays, so it makes processing reviews even more 'fun'.

We activate negative reviews like this for not-so-popular escorts all the time, but they go unnoticed. Those escorts are always very upset too, spitting and yelling at me and my staff most of the time, telling us that the review is fake and not true. Clients are also very vocal when their negative review is removed. Reviews are removed when they breach the review rules, and we actually delete just as many positive reviews that breach the forum rules, i.e. too sexually explicit (against the escort's request), invalid time and date, wrong booking outcome (e.g. selects 'met without receiving service' instead of 'completed booking'), wrong service type (review for duo experience on a single escort profile), etc. Most of the time, the negative reviews are abusive or hyperbole to the point that they are ridiculous. They are often needed to be edited so much, that there would be no or little content left, so it needs to be deleted and resubmitted.

So, in short, we are expected to be impartial and yet make exceptions for certain cases. I am reading that this review has no bearing on a client's opinion of an escort, and yet people want all the gory details so that they can judge and avoid escorts.

Take the reviews system for what it is and always has been; a guide. The system is far from flawless, but it is the one thing that keeps clients out of the dark. It is something that is used to help the clients with the decision making process and it should be accompanied with good old fashioned common sense.

[Forrest]

I have looked into this and this issue has been resolved. This situation does stress a valid point;

Harry is a new, part time moderator and Floki is new enough to be unfamiliar with everyone on the forums at this stage. Both have been trained to take an impartial overview of the reviews system, something that we (the mods) always try to do to the best of our ability. With that in mind, in terms of process, Harry did absolutely the right thing activating this review. Sometimes escorts might have an off-day or whatever, and ironically, in cases like this, we are expected to disregard this ethos of 'impartiality' because this is an escort that everyone likes, she is popular and beautiful, etc.

The point is, we get so much flak for the credibility of the reviews system. Clients want us to publish every detail so that they can avoid a bad escort. An escort has a flawless run of reviews, so she couldn't possibly ever get a bad one, surely..? In this case, I have put this down to a malicious reviewer who probably didn't get his own way somewhere down the line, accounting for the fact that he was a first time reviewer. Sadly, malicious reviewers are commonplace nowadays, so it makes processing reviews even more 'fun'.

We activate negative reviews like this for not-so-popular escorts all the time, but they go unnoticed. Those escorts are always very upset too, spitting and yelling at me and my staff most of the time, telling us that the review is fake and not true. Clients are also very vocal when their negative review is removed. Reviews are removed when they breach the review rules, and we actually delete just as many positive reviews that breach the forum rules, i.e. too sexually explicit (against the escort's request), invalid time and date, wrong booking outcome (e.g. selects 'met without receiving service' instead of 'completed booking'), wrong service type (review for duo experience on a single escort profile), etc. Most of the time, the negative reviews are abusive or hyperbole to the point that they are ridiculous. They are often needed to be edited so much, that there would be no or little content left, so it needs to be deleted and resubmitted.

So, in short, we are expected to be impartial and yet make exceptions for certain cases. I am reading that this review has no bearing on a client's opinion of an escort, and yet people want all the gory details so that they can judge and avoid escorts.

Take the reviews system for what it is and always has been; a guide. The system is far from flawless, but it is the one thing that keeps clients out of the dark. It is something that is used to help the clients with the decision making process and it should be accompanied with good old fashioned common sense.

I would agree that Harry did the right thing to activate the review, and it shouldn't be a case of not processing a bad review, just because the escort is popular on the forum.

I assume the reviews chat section is there to discuss reviews, good, bad, or indifferent.
In this particular instance, I initially gave the benefit of the doubt to the reviewer, in that he may have selected the wrong Emma in Kildare. I'm sure that has happened in the past, and will again in the future, when escorts with the same name are operating in the same general area.

The details regarding the cleanliness of the apartment, and the accuracy of the photos, were a big giveaway that it was either mistaken identity or malicious bullshit, as there are plenty of long-term members that could vouch that it is Emma in her profile pictures, she is very attractive, and that her apartment is always spotless.

Emma has already stated that she wouldn't be upset if the review was genuine, even though it was negative, as sometimes things just don't work out, but in this instance, the reviewer was being malicious or mixed up as to who he saw.

I appreciate the swift action in having the review removed, and I'm sure Emma is too.

[emmasweet]

Good thread Forrest. Emma has 136 reviews of which a total of 3 are not green, including this one. Thats 1.36%... So although this is upsetting for Emma she should see that her reputation is too good for one silly review to damage it.

I am sure I speak for the vast majority of guys who have never met Emma when I say that this review has ZERO effect on my opinion of her. Anyone thinking of seeing Emma who is influenced by that review and not the 133 good ones is daft.



It will be removed on Monday.

You said 3 reviews are not green -one of them definitely fake review and N/A punter didn't decide what time wanted to see.
Third suppose to be fake because punter had bad spelling in his review same E-I staff who add it answer .

https://www.escort-ireland.com/6729/Emma/review.html

[emmasweet]

Thank you very much,Samlad to sort out .
Thank you very much to all punters who start it and reply to thread xxxxxxxxxx

[dr love]

Hold the fecking phones here , twas I the shy one who pointed out the mistake when I noticed this .

Anyways how are you my lady .: doc xxx