Escort Reviews - An Update

[Patricia]

I dont accept this. If some explicit material slips through it is a simple matter for the escort to point this out and the review rectified

You are looking at this theoretically not practically though. In reality escorts often don't contact us at all when they have a concern about anything.

[Patricia]

Can we assume that this all stems from your recent change whereby escorts have to allow reviews in order to have verified photos? Can we further assume that some escorts are unhappy with this and threathening to move to pastures orange? This will not help any of us.

You are entitled to your opinion Diver, but no that is not what this is about. The is about getting more escorts into the reviews system. The change whereby escorts have to allow reviews to have verified photos got more into the reviews system, but I want to get more still into it. And I think getting more escorts into the reviews system would be very helpful to clients.[/quote]

I have not seen much explicit material in reviews recently but i may have missed something. Can you post links to a selection of reviews that are considered objectionable and the same for reviews that are considered acceptable. The kernel of the matter is to see if agreement can be reached on what will be allowed.

In this situation anything that says the client had sex with the escort is explicit. This is not about graphic possibly offensive sexual reviews vs more tasteful sexual reviews - That is another issue but not the one relevant here.

[Patricia]

https://www.escort-ireland.com/3367/...ck/review.html

?
Peter.

Bad language removed Peter - thank you. Or were you looking for me to judge it fake? The IP it was posted from doesn't match up with any we have on file for an escort or anyone else, so we have no proof it is fake.

[Patricia]

I think only people who write on this board and have a minimum number of posts under their belt SHOULD be able to post reviews!!! This would dramatically reduce the number of fake reviews! We could trust what is said MUCH more. Just now it's way too easy for people to create a profile and write just about anything!

Good idea and I have already considered this in my head. Only issue I saw with it is that (a) Not every genuine punter that writes reviews likes to take part in the message boards also and (b) will it lead to fakers posting rubbish on the message boards as well as rubbish reviews just to get past it? Would be interested in the views of others on this issue.

[ber]

as for a partial review system where it will be just putting a tick in a few boxes can u surely not see this will be totally abused the only winner here will be the internet cafe i would much rather the girl had no reviews because then at least u would have no expectations and would go in with eyes open.
also i think if a girl falsely advertises there should be some sanction such as a footnote saying she has done so in the past

[Patricia]

as for a partial review system where it will be just putting a tick in a few boxes can u surely not see this will be totally abused the only winner here will be the internet cafe i would much rather the girl had no reviews because then at least u would have no expectations and would go in with eyes open.
also i think if a girl falsely advertises there should be some sanction such as a footnote saying she has done so in the past

Thank you for your feedback. Regards sanctions against escorts that have advertised falsely in the past, unfortunately we have no means of making this work... They just get a new name and phone number and photos and take out a new ad every time they want to start again.

[punterminator]

I have a few thoughts here.

1. It isn't up to Patricia to sanction escorts for false advertising/reviewing. She is running a business for herself, not a charity for punters. I think the effort that she already makes in policing the reviews is utterly sterling and well above and beyond the call.

2. I believe that the amount of escorts opting out of reviews because they are genuinely not fond of the explicitness is quite small compared to the amount that are opting out because they know they will get bad reviews because they are crap. The opt-out'ers who are genuine are all well known by us and get a good rep on the message board (Honey/Alexi D is one that instantly springs to mind).

3. Personally, if I see a lady who is relatively new on the scene and is not allowing reviews then I have pretty much made up my mind that not only is she crap, she knows she's crap and that tells me far more than any "tick the boxes but don't open your mouth" reviews.

I'm still not sure if it's a goer or not Patricia, but I really do appreciate the fact that you are at least talking about it and involving us in the process..

[mailman]

I agree totally. There are escorts over on IIE that are no more than average and yet they often get 10/10 by clients sucking up to them

Its simple, these guys are clueless. If they even stopped and thought about it then they'd realise they are muppets. If the girl is not 10/10 then why say it.

There are only 5-7 girls that are 10/10 tops, how people can say otherwise is crazy.

[mailman]

Just one point, if there is going to be a {unhappy, quite unhappy, not bothered, quite happy, over the moon) type rating is it possible to make it 7 or 8 options. With five options you'll still have muppets using the top one all the time but it'll be easier to identify and discount their reviews if there are more options.

This is important aspect in my opinion. The wording of the top one should nearly be preventative for punters to select it because its so staggering, that way you'll know its either [1] a complete goddess, [2] a complete muppet punter or [3] a very bad escort who should really rethink about what she is doing.

I really think this will go pear-shaped, but there's one thing for sure. I wont be getting caught any more even if this goes ahead. Unless its a regular girl who i know is good, then the girl would really want to have an excellent personal description where you can see she has a personality with some character before i'll visit her.

Sweetie, i know you have your motive for this and its well intended to be fair, but the main objective for reviews is actually to spot scammers/fakes, its not to hear how great a girl is. There are enough means of communicating this available to girls already to convey this if they choose to use them.

The primary function is to get rid of scammers.

Put it this way, have you ever seen any indication from any of the agencies that they intend to improve the quality of their service in an effort to simulate more business to the point they intend to change punters mindsets, and change attitudes to agencies? I'm guessing no is the answer.

So why reward them by facilitating them in scamming punters?

A few independents and touring girls are great, its actually a good experience visiting them, they do put a great deal of effort into their work. They are the other end of the scale, polar opposites yet a flawed review system does them an injustice.

[diver]

You are entitled to your opinion Diver, but no that is not what this is about. The is about getting more escorts into the reviews system. The change whereby escorts have to allow reviews to have verified photos got more into the reviews system, but I want to get more still into it. And I think getting more escorts into the reviews system would be very helpful to clients.

I am not getting on your case here just trying to understand why you are doing a Don Quixote. On the face of it, most escorts are in the review system and there does not seem to be much explicit content.