Unverified Photos- Unacceptable !

[Rayden]

SAMLAD ADMITS TO NOT KNOWING EVERYTHING

In a shocking development today, well-known E-I "moderator and pontificator" Samlad admitted he hadn't got a clue what the rules regarding verified photos were on the filthy perverted pervert site he works at.

Samlad, who sleeps in an oxygen tent because he thinks it gives him sexual powers, was plastered to the wall by the online ejaculations of well-known Island Field pervert Alec Horan. In a devastating climbdown, he crawled "I stand corrected."

E-I Incorporated ("you only ISP - Internet Service Pimpery") declined to comment.

Lol'd hard.

[Forrest]

I had this discussion on another thread with Sam months ago.

The process of checking photos should not be that difficult.
Monster Monster responded very quickly to a query on an escort earlier today
and found discrepancies between different photos on a profile that were 'verified'.
If clients can do it, why can't the hired staff of E-I do it?

I can understand the reluctance of escorts to show their face in photos to anyone
even the E-I staff as images over the internet can go astray, but there has to be
some proof that the person advertising their services is the person that will be there
when a client shows up.

E-I take the stance that they are only an advertising directory and cannot be held
responsible for the accuracy of photos, but that is a kop-out. Weeding out the abusers
should be a priority as there are escorts that pay the same amount of money to have
their genuine 'verified' photos advertised alongside the, sometimes bogus, 'verified' photos.

A tiered pricing system and separate locations for the verified and unverified photo profiles
would help highlight the difference between the two types of profile.

Also, escorts that were previously shown to be genuine, and had their photos verified,
shouldn't be penalised by having them unverified if they opt out of reviews, as there is still
an option to report fake photos in the reviews chat or warning section.

Clients will invariably be tempted by an image, verified or not, but the phrase 'caveat emptor'
springs to mind. Think with your noggin, not with the 'little lad'

[ksteve]

I had this discussion on another thread with Sam months ago.

The process of checking photos should not be that difficult.
Monster Monster responded very quickly to a query on an escort earlier today
and found discrepancies between different photos on a profile that were 'verified'.
If clients can do it, why can't the hired staff of E-I do it?

I can understand the reluctance of escorts to show their face in photos to anyone
even the E-I staff as images over the internet can go astray, but there has to be
some proof that the person advertising their services is the person that will be there
when a client shows up.

E-I take the stance that they are only an advertising directory and cannot be held
responsible for the accuracy of photos, but that is a kop-out. Weeding out the abusers
should be a priority as there are escorts that pay the same amount of money to have
their genuine 'verified' photos advertised alongside the, sometimes bogus, 'verified' photos.

A tiered pricing system and separate locations for the verified and unverified photo profiles
would help highlight the difference between the two types of profile.

Also, escorts that were previously shown to be genuine, and had their photos verified,
shouldn't be penalised by having them unverified if they opt out of reviews, as there is still
an option to report fake photos in the reviews chat or warning section.

Clients will invariably be tempted by an image, verified or not, but the phrase 'caveat emptor'
springs to mind. Think with your noggin, not with the 'little lad'

Yes, but what do you do if the 'verified ' escorts themselves are happy to be lumped together with the ' unverified ' escorts ?

[Morpheus]

Clearly a hot topic!!

I'm going to swim against the tide and say I don't think anything needs to be changed on the website itself. Sure, E-I staff can be more vigilant , etc.. but I don't think there should be any change to the current format i.e. no separation of verified vs non-verified or some of the other suggestions.

There are clearly problems with the system, but no system is ever going to be perfect. And changing in accordance with some of the suggestions will create problems of it's own.

I only see ladies with verified photos. But there is a facility for this - I gate my escort search for ladies that have verified photos and allow reviews - thereby removing all others. It's up to the client to do some work here and decide what's important to him.

[Rayden]

I had this discussion on another thread with Sam months ago.

The process of checking photos should not be that difficult.
Monster Monster responded very quickly to a query on an escort earlier today
and found discrepancies between different photos on a profile that were 'verified'.
If clients can do it, why can't the hired staff of E-I do it?

I can understand the reluctance of escorts to show their face in photos to anyone
even the E-I staff as images over the internet can go astray, but there has to be
some proof that the person advertising their services is the person that will be there
when a client shows up.

E-I take the stance that they are only an advertising directory and cannot be held
responsible for the accuracy of photos, but that is a kop-out. Weeding out the abusers
should be a priority as there are escorts that pay the same amount of money to have
their genuine 'verified' photos advertised alongside the, sometimes bogus, 'verified' photos.

A tiered pricing system and separate locations for the verified and unverified photo profiles
would help highlight the difference between the two types of profile.

Also, escorts that were previously shown to be genuine, and had their photos verified,
shouldn't be penalised by having them unverified if they opt out of reviews, as there is still
an option to report fake photos in the reviews chat or warning section.

Clients will invariably be tempted by an image, verified or not, but the phrase 'caveat emptor'
springs to mind. Think with your noggin, not with the 'little lad'

Not sure that they would be trustworthy to do that job tbh.

[ChiefHandker]

I had this discussion on another thread with Sam months ago.

The process of checking photos should not be that difficult.
Monster Monster responded very quickly to a query on an escort earlier today
and found discrepancies between different photos on a profile that were 'verified'.
If clients can do it, why can't the hired staff of E-I do it?

I can understand the reluctance of escorts to show their face in photos to anyone
even the E-I staff as images over the internet can go astray, but there has to be
some proof that the person advertising their services is the person that will be there
when a client shows up.

E-I take the stance that they are only an advertising directory and cannot be held
responsible for the accuracy of photos, but that is a kop-out. Weeding out the abusers
should be a priority as there are escorts that pay the same amount of money to have
their genuine 'verified' photos advertised alongside the, sometimes bogus, 'verified' photos.

A tiered pricing system and separate locations for the verified and unverified photo profiles
would help highlight the difference between the two types of profile.

Also, escorts that were previously shown to be genuine, and had their photos verified,
shouldn't be penalised by having them unverified if they opt out of reviews, as there is still
an option to report fake photos in the reviews chat or warning section.

Clients will invariably be tempted by an image, verified or not, but the phrase 'caveat emptor'
springs to mind. Think with your noggin, not with the 'little lad'

Good post. To be honest with the way the system is now, I wouldn't even consider visiting a new escort until I see reviews from familiar names, saw her posting or read some genuine feedback. That a new escort's photos might be "verified" by EI is irrelevant to me atm since there's so many cases of verified fakes on here r.e Hubba hubba

I think Lucy made a good point, if new profile photos were Tineyed by EI staff before being published it'd make new profiles far more reliable.

[akasomeoneelse]

I got bored of the bitching after page 4 so forgive me if this has been posted already. Can you not just ban the ip address of those who (repeatedly) post fake pictures? I recall one escort who posted a lot of fake pictures over the space of a few weeks. That should calm things down a bit....... unless they travel



**edit** I just noticed there is a thread about this https://www.escort-ireland.com/board...ad.php?t=69887

[Forrest]

Yes, but what do you do if the 'verified ' escorts themselves are happy to be lumped together with the ' unverified ' escorts ?

If the escorts are happy to be 'lumped' together, then there's no need to 'lift and seperate'

Not sure that they would be trustworthy to do that job tbh.

Another conspiracy theory, Ray.

Clearly a hot topic!!

I'm going to swim against the tide and say I don't think anything needs to be changed on the website itself. no system is ever going to be perfect.

I agree, no system is perfect, but systems can be improved in any business, not just E-I.

Tin Eye, as Lucy suggested, and some clients are already using, could be utilised by E-I staff.
I'm sure Sam will say they already have enough to do, but there is no shortage of unemployed
people at the moment who would jump at the chance to work on a project like that.