TampaYankee

Thanks for the heads up. I have alerted the software guys. We appreicate the feedback. It is very helpful.

I hope. I have manually posted reviews # 2 and 3 for Aaron Mark/ Las Vegas. Additionally, I have StevenDraker reviews #2 and 3 set to auto post at 6AM EDT if all goes well. THe difference between manual and auto is simply which button I click. So manual is not very manual. A better description would be 'instantaneous post'. If the auto post works well then we can close this chapter for now. I am posting reviewed escorts in the order received. If there is more than one then I post them together. So a later review for an escort might be posted with an earlier review. For now, I plan to post two a day until the backlog is depleted. We really do appreciate your patience. We wish this capability online much sooner but we move forward from here.

Please bear with us today as we work on the site software. Reviews may be down intermittently but hopefully not for very long. Thanks for your patience.

I believe that we are converging on a satisfctory procduct. I am feeling positive for the first time FWIW. The last time I made a response to queries offering my insight I was criticized for a nonresponse. Taking that clue I haven't had anything to say until there is something concrete to say. That concrete something will be an announcement that second reviews are rolling out. That will happen when they begin to roll. I am not making any promises that I can not keep. I understand the frustration and I share it, for those who care. Bottom line: I am feeling positive for the first time. Testing looks good. They will roll when I am satisfied with the quality and robustness of the product. FWIW

Steven, There is no reason I know of why this should have changed. I have asked the programmers to check this out. Until then please email me your changes at maleescortreview@gmail.com and I'll update your profile. Sorry for the inconvenience. TY

... and entitled to post it respectfully. Also, every poster is entitled to a reasoned respectful reply from all wishing to reply. Some posts in this thread have crossed the line of respect & reason. Posters that wish to contribute with respect and reason are encouraged. Those finding it difficult to post respectfully are encouraged to call it a night and come back another day when ires have cooled. Thanks for your cooperation. Management operates under the premise that everyone is familiar with the Message Center Policy.

>>We are in the business of providing information and a >>venue for >discussion. We hope the information is accurate >>but we have no way >of knowing how accurate the vast >>majority of it is. We strive to verify >what we can verify. >>That is very limited by the nature of the online >world -- >>an anonymous world for the most part. > >>Who knows where truth lies? The fact of the matter is >>that, in this >world, truth for each of us lies with our >>experience. > >TY, these above quotes by you from another thread, were two >within an explanation of why truthful information can't be >guaranteed on this website. > > I suspect that “bogus” reviews >are probably part of the reality of running a website of this >persuasion. I don’t know what mechanisms are in place to >identify bogus reviews (nor should anyone- imo) but why all >the fuss here suddenly... Threre is no sudden fuss. It has been our concern since day one. It took some time to accumulate a large enough sample on which to remark. I chose to discuss today the suprising (to me) number of bogus reviews. Simple explanation. > ... trying to identify when an escort is >being untruthful and deceptive in their presentation of >themselves to the membership? I stand by my statments that you referenced above regarding he difficulty in assessing the veracity of the statement of others. In the end each of us has to make that assessment for ourself. The site has is an obligation to the readers to try our best to see that our process is not corrupted. Specifically, that reviews submitted by reviewers are actually submitted by real reviewers, and that profiles posted by escorts are actually registered by that escort. It is only through legitimate reviews and profiles submitted by actual escorts in their own words that we can make assessments of the veracity of each. The reviewer through his track record and the escort through his presence and performance which is vetted by feedback from actual reviewers. Legitimate reviewers build credibility with a track record. Escorts gain credibility from feedback by legitimate reviewers. >When undisputed, untruthful and >deceptive information has been identified here in the past, in >an escorts profile, it has simply been coughed up to the >realities of the internet and the anonymous world we all live >in. Nothing was corrected in regard to the untruth to present >a truthful overview of the escort to the reader. So why >doesn’t the same standard of thinking apply to reviews? What’s >the difference with reviews? I’m perplexed AND befuddled. > I have not yet achieved the level of omniscience that grounds your above statements. I'm not sure when I will. In the mean time I rely on my own experience and when I cannot I give credence to some authorities on some topics some of the time. As to whether my experience or their views represent truth, well... I have to make that assessment for myself -- which is my point from the very beginning. I am reminded of a sign my third of fourth grade teacher has posted in her classroom: [em]Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see. [/em] It seems especially appropriate the cyberspace.

We don't always have a new review to post each day as you may have noticed. That is partly due to being the new kid on the block and partly due to being the new kid on the block in the shadow of the 500 pound gorilla. Both of those are to be expected. It is also partly due to our delay in getting our software suitable for the processing and display of multiple reviews for escorts. We have several of those in the queue, all by trusted reviewers. We hope that is remedied soon. We seek honest reviews from members with verified email addresses. We state clearly in the submission form that at least minimal information content must be provided and that escorts may not review themselves What you don't see are the reviews that we have declined -- a higher percentage than I ever would have anticipated. A couple have been declined for insufficient information. Several more have been declined on the very strong suspicion that they were submitted by the escorts themselves or by a 'friend' that is not an actual client. I won't go into the details about how we vett each review. I cannot promise that some will not get through. There is only so much we can do. Not every review submitted by an escort has an admission of that fact -- though that has occurred too. Nevertheless, we strive to separate the wheat from the chaff. Bogus reviews have been discussed before in other venues. Specifically the escort business announcement review. Some escorts are looking to advertise their services through a 'fictional review' that touches all of his bases. Of course, one problem is to differeniate this 'informational' review from the deceptive review. We provide escort profiles for the escort to put forth his services in his own words with his own stats. We cross reference a review with a profile and vice versa. However, this doesn't provide a 'satisified customer' word-of-mouth flavor. I guess that is why these bogus reviews persist. That and an infusion of publicity as they appear periodically in Latest Reviews. In previous discussions some took the position that the business announcement review is not objectionable as long as it is not abused. Others strongly disagreed and take the position that is should never be allowed. I thought I would open the topic for discussion here with one twist. What if the probable escort-supplied review was identified prominently as such in the review by the Admin. Would you want to read such reviews? Would you vote yea or nay? Factor in the possibility of wrongly tarnishing a review on occasion -- a strong negative for this proposition. If this was implemented would it cause a decrease in the bogus submissions or an increase in the response to reviews? FWIW, I don't forsee our policy changing but it is always good to take the sense of the membership on issues like this. What do you think?

We are making progress on the software but it is not yet ready for prime time. We appreciate your patience which has been stretched way too far.

I haven't been flying lately. :-(

You betcha!!

You are reading our minds... We just put in a change request for that yesterday. It was a minor annoyance or us too. Thanks for speaking up.

From BBC News online: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4811030.stm Czech MPs approve gay rights law Parliament overturned a veto on the law by President Vaclav Klaus The Czech Republic has become the first former communist country in Europe to grant legal recognition to same-sex partnerships. The vote was passed in parliament by the absolute minimum needed to overturn a veto by President Vaclav Klaus. He had argued the legislation amounted to excessive regulation by the state of people's private lives. The law will give gay couples rights to inherit a partner's property and raise children, but does not allow adoption. The BBC's Rob Cameron in Prague says Czech society is one of the most secular and sexually liberal in Europe. Homosexual campaigners appear to have the Czech public on their side, he adds. 'Defeat for family' Although the lower house of parliament approved the legislation in December and the Senate in January, an absolute majority was required to override the presidential veto imposed in February. The proposal had strong backing from Social Democrat Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek, who said it was key issue ahead of general elections in June. In a statement released after the vote, Mr Klaus said the result was not a personal defeat but rather "a defeat for all of us who believe that the family in our society is fundamental, unique, unrivalled". Martin Strachon, a spokesman for the Gay and Lesbian League, told AFP news agency the vote meant gays and lesbians were now recognised as "normal members of society". "The law is a compromise," said leading gay rights activist Jiri Hromada, quoted by Associated Press. "It will harm no-one and will make many happy." Parliament has turned down similar proposals four times in the past.

Jesse, I'm curious if the mentioned how you came to their attention?

KYTOP, Very sorry to hear that things are going slowly for you. I'll pray that the action picks up before your departure. Good to see that you are keeping a stiff upper... um... lip through it all. What do you in Rio and a fish in water have in common? ;-) Best wishes for continued swimming during your remaining time in paradise. TY btw, I've been in contact with your daughter and mentioned that a bed with traction hardware might be in order. Oh... I said it was all the heavy lifting. She said you should take less luggage. :7

It would have been nice to see your concern posted much earlier in this thread. It certainly would have been appropriate then. Nevetheless, the comment you referenced was uncalled for, as were some others earlier. We are still in a startup period where some of us are getting reacquainted after a fashion and learning to reforge our posting style to fit this community. In addition, it seems there is a need for some to have one last revisit of a bit old business before they put it behind them. Hopefully this will pass and we move on to fresh topics and issues. The management will apply the rules to whomever when it becomes necessary to resolve our problems. We are not a court of law -- don't look for us to dispense justice and equity. If your want that then find 12 men tried and true and a judge to hear your case. It would take that at a minimum. We are more akin to our model Pub. Pubs don't tolerate fights on the premises. The try to defuse situations before that arises. If they cannot then they remove them. Pubs cater to those that don't brawl.

>This just goes to support my long time theory that if you keep >the likes of SouthernMan, Conway and Straycat locked in the >basement with their chew toys and sniper comments; adult men, >can engage in adult conversations and interactions with other >adult men. Oh sure, the frisky rascals will always find a new >way out, but that’s what makes them so endearing I suppose. > From post #40 with a simple word replacement... [em]You effectively made your point prior to after this paragraph. This unnecessary and incendiary personal characterization added nothing but the back of your hand. Keep personal exchanges OFF FORUM. [/em] Apparently people are not reading post #40, comprehending the post or understanding that it applies to all even if a response to one. My request was simple, plain spoken. Hopefully this clears up any confusion or uncertainty. Another comment in that post about a slipperly slope seems unappreciated. The Message Center will not go down that slope. >adult men, can engage in adult conversations and >interactions with other adult men. This is what we are about and we have gotten off to a pretty good start. We intend to observe the adult etiquette that gives this atmosphere legs. We hope that everyone is onboard. Keep personal characterizations and exchanges OFF FORUM.

>I'm just curious what the status is of getting second reviews >up on escorts is. A client of mine submitted a review awhile >back and told me that through email he was told that there >were problems posting more than one review per escort on here. > Any news on what's going on with that? Good question. The answer is long overdue as is the fix. I apologize for that. I have to accept responsibility for the delay. I have had a fix in my hands that I have partially evlauated. Preliminary inspection indicates that we are not quite ready. I have been unable to follow up for completetion due to continuing severe computer problems complete with periodic system crashes. I have had a lot of down time in addition to offline troubleshooting exercises. My priorities have been site oversite and maintenance, processing first reviews and profiles as they come in and responding to emails. Next, investigation of my computer ills and dealing with attendant system issues. I fear that I have to move beyond system repair issues to a disk reformat in my near future. I hope to finish the mutiple review fix before that as system reinstalls are open ended blood orgies. Not only that, but all items not verifiably clean will have to be trashed. I will try to complete this next week if my system permits. TY Why don't they make a simple effective sheep dip for laptops?

>And, finally, we're tired of hearing you two boring old drones >go on and on about it forever. You've made your point. Now >kindly shut the hell up. You effectively made your point prior to this paragraph. This unnecessary and incendiary personal characterization added nothing but the back of your hand. Keep personal exchanges OFF FORUM.

We are not in the business of punishing members or nonmembers for their offsite activities. We are in the business of providing information and a venue for discussion. We hope the information is accurate but we have no way of knowing how accurate the vast majority of it is. We strive to verify what we can verify. That is very limited by the nature of the online world -- an anonymous world for the most part. Our philosophy is to present all sides of an issue if rationally and respectfully put forth. Escorts provide informational profiles to advertise their services. Reviewers provide information about an encounter that is, at best, colored wholy by their experience. We don't know most of the escorts that list. We are not present at the encounters that reviewers post. Who knows where truth lies? The fact of the matter is that, in this world, truth for each of us lies with our experience. Experiences differ thus there are many potential truths to be told. The global truth is seldom glimpsed my most of us. All we can really rely on is our experience versus what we understood we were given to believe by the individual, not by third parties. (The image of real-world resumes comes to mind here.) All the rest is hearsay. As individuals, we may choose to believe hearsay or not. As a site, we strive for an even-handed level playing field for clients and escorts alike. To repeat, we present all sides of an issue that are rationally and respectfully put forth. Sometimes we make the assessment that information is suspicious depending on what and how it is presented. The history of the internet is replete with stalkers and vendettas. Other times, legitmate issues are pressed way beyond reason, crossing a line that makes one wonder how personal the motives are. We won't lend out the site for the purpose of vendettas. We are in no position to promulgate our opinion as truth, to substitute our opinion for the reader's opinion. We feel the reader should make the judgement about all information, be it reviews or profiles. In the end this business is strictly caveat emptor. A separate thought to all... This comment is inspired by this thread but it is presented with future threads in mind as this thread seems to have run its course. I received some interesting comments regarding this thread from a few members. To put forth the essence of these comments I will combine and paraphrase into the following... [em]Even though the primary character of this thread has been hashed and rehashed adnauseum over the last year, and even though I have made up my mind about this individual, to my suprise I found the discussion of the different points of view an interesting read rather than the previously usual and always boring ad hominem exchanges. While I don't agree with all that is stated, each side has legitmate points for discussion worth following....[/em] The point is there is no need to be disagreeable in order to have interesting discussions. In fact, that gets in the way of interesting discussions which soon fall by the wayside as personal exchanges take over. This thread seemed to wander onto that slippery slope as characterization of individuals started to creep in. If posters want to keep readers interest then stick to your guns -- argument guns that is. If you want to engage in personal exchanges then please take the exchange off forum. We provide private messaging in addition to the email possessed by all members. Keep personal exchanges personal. Thanks.

Welcome back Allen.

I am not the person to answer this question becauseI haven't been involved with that aspect. With that disclaimer... I believe hits refers to page hits. The counters were not working properly at startup and, frankly, we had bigger fires to fight. As to the current status, I believe they are working as intended. For exactly how that is , Oz is your man. He has had other issues to attend to this week. Hopefully, he will see this query and give you a more definitive response.

Yes, BG. Thanks for jumping in. I was curious along with Leap Year. You responded before I could pulse the our guys. You are a wealth of information about a number of the tech things too. That hadn't gone unnoticed by me over the long term. Maybe IE 7 will remove that limitation. However, I won't be the first guy on the block to have the beta version. In this area I prefer to let others pave the road, I'll drive behind.

>Thanks guys for the feedback. > >We provide the forum for the benefit of our members, so if you >cannot effectively and conveniently use it then it serves >neither you nor us, the management. So far so good. I am >heartened -- for the first time. > Update: I have heard from a few guys that they are having trouble logging in and/or encountering a 'session expired' message. We are investigating. I wanted to post this so they would know there responses and been received and we are investigating. Keep the feedback coming please. Remember we need a little information about the failure: your browser and version, error messages displayed, what page the error occurred on and any unusual behavior noticed. Thanks again.

Thanks guys for the feeback. We provide the forum for the benefit of our members, so if you cannot effectively and conveniently use it then it serves neither you nor us, the management. So far so good. I am heartened -- for the first time. We hope others will respond too -- the larger the sample the more accurate the assessment. Thanks again. TY