The case for Mark444

[dave1dave]

I don't have a clue how to do a poll. Rodney, do you know?

Just post a thread as usual but before submitting scroll down and select that's its going to be a poll, submit and then it will forward you to the poll options. You just need to know how many poll options you are going to have before you start.
I'd suggest having it public.

[Rodney69]

I don't have a clue how to do a poll. Rodney, do you know?

Yep, so what are we polling for:
Should the Top Reviewers be removed from the Escort Reviews Page - Yes or No?

I'll do it

[dave1dave]

Yep, so what are we polling for:
Should the Top Reviewers be removed from the Escort Reviews Page - Yes or No?

I'll do it

I really don't think that will help Mark in reducing his profile. It's not the issue.
Most don't even know its there..

[Rodney69]

Thank Rodney. I think we should have two polls in that case.. One for Mark444's name change and the other for the removal of the Top Reviewers. Kill two birds and all that!

Thank you.
xx

1st Poll submitted. Lets see how that goes before doing Mark444s name change one

[Forrest]

I reallydon't think that will help Mark in reducing his profile. It's not the issue.
Most don't even know its there..

Given that Mark want's to become less conspicuous, I think all these threads are achieving the opposite.

I don't see why he can't have his profile name changed as there is precedent, but publicly flogging the situation to death on here won't help reduce his profile.

Surely a pm campaign to management would have more effect and be far less conspicuous.

[aml]

The more this is discussed the more ridiculous it becomes. I do not see the logic in any of the argument put forward by EI management regarding Marks request. Mark wants to merely change his username from Mark444 to More444. What difference or detriment will that cause anyone? Let the man change his username for gods’ sake, what harm will it do.

I feel compelled to put forward a case for Mark because I feel it is an important issue that may be relevant to other users here in the future.

So lets examine the argument against..

1. We cannot allow multiple usernames:

Sam: “Really, the main issue is when it comes to reviewing escorts; we have found the same people out to be reviewing escorts two or three times under different usernames and that's a big problem. Like I've said before, this does compromise the reputation of not just the poster, but the escort too, so please consider that too, people”

This is Mark we are talking about, an established and well respected member. A member that has openly requested his username changed. Its not as if he covertly wants to review under multiple usernames for gods sake.

Therefore this argument does not hold…

2. It’s an administrative burden.

Sam: “The problem also lies in the fact that you can't transfer reviews from one user name to another; on an escort profile, the reviews are moved via the escort client details; it's time consuming (should they have a lot of reviews) but easy enough to do. This doesn't work the same with message board accounts. Even if we could, again it would generate a massive amount of work for me and Nicole anyway. What about all references to the original name in the posts? For newbies, it would just be confusing”

Its “easy enough to do” but we wont do it… hello…. Two options here,… 1. do the work for Mark and simply change the review name from Mark444 to More444 on his reviews or…. 2. let them remain as Mark444 but allow them become extinct as have the reviews of zobaanzoo. No detriment to the Escorts involved. He only requires to start anew as More444. There is no need to go back over previous posts and change “Mark” references, therefore no “massive amount of work” for management. Just let Mark slip into archives. Having said that to change Mark444 to More444 cant be that difficult.

Sam: “This is not something that is practical to do. In fact, if we allow an escort to change their message board user name for advertising purposes, there is more often than not a charge incurred for the time and effort of changing their names in all of their reviews.”

He has offered to pay for the service FFS.

Therefore this argument does not hold…


3. He should have been more discrete..

Sam: “The requests we have usually relate to a wife finding out or something. Unfortunately, if a poster is descrete enough, you would think that they would have the foresight to choose something that would not be very obvious. Of course there are extenuating circumstances, but I've yet to see a case were that would apply. I would have thought if it was a life or death situation, a client would simply keep a low profile?”

This I regard as blatantly unfair. Ok, he fucked up in his choice of username, but lets accept that and allow leeway. Mark having realized his popularity on the boards and especially on the reviewers board has reason to believe his anonymity is compromised, especially seeing as he has used his true christian name and the location attached to his reviews also relative to unwanted identification. How extenuating a circumstance is required?

Once again this argument does not hold…

4. Finally, EI rules are quoted:

"This website contains material submitted by third parties. All third party material contained in this website is the sole responsibility of the third party. We do not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any third party material on our website nor is any warranty expressed or implied by publication. We assume no responsibility and specifically disclaim and exclude all liability to any person for any loss or damage of any nature or however arising from any third party material published on this website"

There was never a case that Mark was holding EI responsible for his unfortunate lack of foresight in his choice of username, nor was he holding EI responsible for any of his posts or reviews. Im sure he stands over all contributions to this site with an open book and neither requires them doctored nor deleted. He merely requests they slip into page two.

Again this argument does not hold.

All references to Sam are not personal but merely quoting a representative of EI management.

I am concerned at this defiant standing by EI on a matter that may be considered trivial to EI management but seriously worrying to members that feel their anonymity here may be compromised, even in a little way. I cannot understand the lack of consideration on behalf on EI management on this matter, and am deeply saddened that a member of loyal standing may not be accommodated in some way to continue to enjoy what is in fairness an excellent site. I am also seriously concerned that someday I may find it necessary to request to conceal an impending discovery of identity only to be told it is against company policy to protect you. I find this to be not only outrageous but more importantly disconcerting, and makes me think seriously of my future here.

Please give this consideration EI.

Thank You….

Very good post james and i would have to agree,i assume with mark444 he is more than likely using his first name and unwittingly used it like many who didn't realise there was a forum and he would become a prominent member on the boards.I really don't see the harm in making a minor change in his username as he obviously has concerns over his privacy but as i mentioned in another thread if his concerns are that great he should perhaps stop or limit the amount of reviews he puts up....

[El Gordo]

This is true. I joined E-I as "anonymouse" (which, if you think about it, is a fantastically brilliantly witty username for a punter with a mouse avatar) but none of you semi-literate half-wits got the joke. Everyone started calling me "Mousey", and the name stuck like my dingleberries on an escort's bedsheet. I PMd Mammy and asked her to make the switch, and she did - quickly, easily and with no fuss, I might add.

Later, after the frog and all those other mod muppets came along, I asked Sammy to temporarily change my name to "Hamstery" as part of a gag I was planning against Horan (who at the time was bigging up the whole hamster thing - haven't a clue where he's getting that from, by the way). Lo and behold, I got a new Corporate E-I PM back - thank you for your inquiry, now feck off etc.

So now I am Mousey Forever.

I got the "Anonymouse" joke. I'm not sure how many of the other semi-literate halfwits did. I didn't post anything saying "Anonymouse! Haha. Good joke." I don't post every time someone does something clever. It would get dull. I'd have to post two or three times a month sometimes.

[samlad]

The more this is discussed the more ridiculous it becomes. I do not see the logic in any of the argument put forward by EI management regarding Marks request. Mark wants to merely change his username from Mark444 to More444. What difference or detriment will that cause anyone? Let the man change his username for gods’ sake, what harm will it do.

I feel compelled to put forward a case for Mark because I feel it is an important issue that may be relevant to other users here in the future.

So lets examine the argument against..

1. We cannot allow multiple usernames:

Sam: “Really, the main issue is when it comes to reviewing escorts; we have found the same people out to be reviewing escorts two or three times under different usernames and that's a big problem. Like I've said before, this does compromise the reputation of not just the poster, but the escort too, so please consider that too, people”

This is Mark we are talking about, an established and well respected member. A member that has openly requested his username changed. Its not as if he covertly wants to review under multiple usernames for gods sake.

Therefore this argument does not hold…

2. It’s an administrative burden.

Sam: “The problem also lies in the fact that you can't transfer reviews from one user name to another; on an escort profile, the reviews are moved via the escort client details; it's time consuming (should they have a lot of reviews) but easy enough to do. This doesn't work the same with message board accounts. Even if we could, again it would generate a massive amount of work for me and Nicole anyway. What about all references to the original name in the posts? For newbies, it would just be confusing”

Its “easy enough to do” but we wont do it… hello…. Two options here,… 1. do the work for Mark and simply change the review name from Mark444 to More444 on his reviews or…. 2. let them remain as Mark444 but allow them become extinct as have the reviews of zobaanzoo. No detriment to the Escorts involved. He only requires to start anew as More444. There is no need to go back over previous posts and change “Mark” references, therefore no “massive amount of work” for management. Just let Mark slip into archives. Having said that to change Mark444 to More444 cant be that difficult.

Sam: “This is not something that is practical to do. In fact, if we allow an escort to change their message board user name for advertising purposes, there is more often than not a charge incurred for the time and effort of changing their names in all of their reviews.”

He has offered to pay for the service FFS.

Therefore this argument does not hold…


3. He should have been more discrete..

Sam: “The requests we have usually relate to a wife finding out or something. Unfortunately, if a poster is descrete enough, you would think that they would have the foresight to choose something that would not be very obvious. Of course there are extenuating circumstances, but I've yet to see a case were that would apply. I would have thought if it was a life or death situation, a client would simply keep a low profile?”

This I regard as blatantly unfair. Ok, he fucked up in his choice of username, but lets accept that and allow leeway. Mark having realized his popularity on the boards and especially on the reviewers board has reason to believe his anonymity is compromised, especially seeing as he has used his true christian name and the location attached to his reviews also relative to unwanted identification. How extenuating a circumstance is required?

Once again this argument does not hold…

4. Finally, EI rules are quoted:

"This website contains material submitted by third parties. All third party material contained in this website is the sole responsibility of the third party. We do not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any third party material on our website nor is any warranty expressed or implied by publication. We assume no responsibility and specifically disclaim and exclude all liability to any person for any loss or damage of any nature or however arising from any third party material published on this website"

There was never a case that Mark was holding EI responsible for his unfortunate lack of foresight in his choice of username, nor was he holding EI responsible for any of his posts or reviews. Im sure he stands over all contributions to this site with an open book and neither requires them doctored nor deleted. He merely requests they slip into page two.

Again this argument does not hold.

All references to Sam are not personal but merely quoting a representative of EI management.

I am concerned at this defiant standing by EI on a matter that may be considered trivial to EI management but seriously worrying to members that feel their anonymity here may be compromised, even in a little way. I cannot understand the lack of consideration on behalf on EI management on this matter, and am deeply saddened that a member of loyal standing may not be accommodated in some way to continue to enjoy what is in fairness an excellent site. I am also seriously concerned that someday I may find it necessary to request to conceal an impending discovery of identity only to be told it is against company policy to protect you. I find this to be not only outrageous but more importantly disconcerting, and makes me think seriously of my future here.

Please give this consideration EI.

Thank You….

To be honest, it's been discussed to death and the same questions keep cropping up time and time again. I'm not going to continue this debate and should we accept money for doing so, we would only be accused of cashing in on it anyway.

As I have outlined, only in extenuation circumstances can changes take place, but of course we would have endless debates as to why one person was allowed to do it and another not. As for changes that have taken place in the past, that was then and this is now and the rules are there to be fair, consistent and realistic about what we can and can't do.

[JAMESCORK]

To be honest, it's been discussed to death and the same questions keep cropping up time and time again. I'm not going to continue this debate and should we accept money for doing so, we would only be accused of cashing in on it anyway.

As I have outlined, only in extenuation circumstances can changes take place, but of course we would have endless debates as to why one person was allowed to do it and another not. As for changes that have taken place in the past, that was then and this is now and the rules are there to be fair, consistent and realistic about what we can and can't do.

This I find to be a satisfying response and reinforces my faith in the EI system. We do not require users to have the privilege to change username willy nilly. I have always seen EI management to be fair in the past, and I am satisfied that this response indicates that in extenuating circumstances rules may be bended. I trust management to discuss and deliberate individual cases and make a fair judgment thereon. It is now up to individuals to put a valid case forward for consideration.

Thanks Sam…

[samlad]

This I find to be a satisfying response and reinforces my faith in the EI system. We do not require users to have the privilege to change username willy nilly. I have always seen EI management to be fair in the past, and I am satisfied that this response indicates that in extenuating circumstances rules may be bended. I trust management to discuss and deliberate individual cases and make a fair judgment thereon. It is now up to individuals to put a valid case forward for consideration.

Thanks Sam…

Do bear in mind a few points though...

1) The case would have to be very clear cut and the reason must be petty damn good; what's not to stop anybody claiming that they have a major concern just for the sake of changing their name?

2) If we did decide for a particular reason that we would allow this, surely a) someone would wonder why that person has has their name changed and would probably start a thread about it, inevitably exposing the person protected anyway; b) this would be apparent because we would have to ban the initial username because if we didn't, people would either pick up on the fact that the user has two accounts open. Even if that person promises to not post from the first account someone would notice a lack of activity anyway. If we did ban it, people would start throwing up 'why was he banned?' threads.

3) People would feel that E-I would have a certain obligation to protect the new identity, which of course we don't.

4) Simply saying that 'the wife found out' or something similar isn't a good enough reason to change a username; firstly, a poster should have the common sense to stay anonymous; it's the nature of the business and as the T's and C's state, we are not responsible for what third parties post. The people that have claimed that they have a security issue are still posting like wild-fire anyway, so I don't get that.

5) Not wanting to be on the top reviewer's list isn't a good enough reason to want to change username. We don't allow people to review under multiple ID's for obvious reasons.