So I tried...

[Guest ScottAdler]

to become a contributing member of this community but I guess it's been decided here that escorts aren't eligible to submit reviews

Oh well.

http://scottadler.blogspot.com/2006/08/chr...odel-paris.html

[Guest deej]

>>Is there a way these fellows might be accomodated should

>they

>>wish to post a review?

>

>The are free, nay, they are encouraged to relate their

>experience in the Buffet.

So why should anyone ever submit a review? Why not post it here?

(No antagonism intended ... just curious.)

[TampaYankee]

So why should anyone ever submit a review? Why not post it

>here?

We aren't talking anyone in this thread, we are talking escorts and a forum for them to give an opinion on colleagues and competition. An interactive forum at the least provides an opportunity for discussion of the circumstances and maybe motivations of the comments. A review format offers no such opportunity.

If the question is relative to the broader membership then that is beyond scope of this thread. To be saved for another thread and time.

[Guest ScottAdler]

>Thanks for your most informative forensic analysis, of your

>own words and what you were attempting to communicate. Those

>Riverdance dancers have nothing on you Scott, when it comes to

>back-stepping and slide slipping – Congratulations to you,

>perhaps Cirque Du Soleil is still in your future.

So far per usual you have said NOTHING thus far of merit or value but that's nothing new. Where's my coffee, :: Is he attempting a point yet?

>Your breakdown of “Completely Awful” v. “Negative/Mediocre” is

>precisely why YOU in particular (but all escorts in general)

>should never have a review published containing other escorts.

>You just can not be honest about so many things you get

>yourself wrapped up into Scott. You’re making this shit up as

>you go along to try and defend your embarrassing position

>about escort on escort reviews, which you have so conveniently

>changed your stance on (your words) for the purpose of

>salvaging your face here. How sad.

When do I receive your clarification post? Conveniently changed? I got angry with someone saying that certain reviews shouldn't be posted because they lack "value." Any other spins? What "face" have I salvaged here. I didn't know my face NEEDED saving here, TY and TO seemed happy to have me and didn't appear to hold an grudges of sorts. I seem to even recall a Vegas thread pinned to the top here. Oh wait, you can't create drama out of it so you probably didn't even read that one. Oh WAIT!

"I suggest that we honor our histories and share them all where appropriate and in a civil way"

"I for one have entertained behavior on message boards that I have come to realize was too agressive and too personal for the environment in which it was housed. Not to mention taking people to task who were only simply trying to provide a medium for open dialogue. My history is important here, because I have learned from it and should not be limited about sharing it."

Let's see ... what has Cho Cho learned. To discuss matters in a civil way? ::scans page:: Hmmm no. To learn from his mistakes and keep something an open dialog without getting too aggressive or personal? ::scans page:: Nope. Now who's the backpeddling liar?

>>""A negative/mediocre review is simply (as I've been

>>told by many clients when we discuss negative reviews) not

>>worth writing because it's not worth the hassle attached.

>>Frankly from an escort's point of view, I can totally

>>understand having a bad day something similar.""

>

>Nice move Scott. Now BLAME the client for your point of view.

>How much more nauseating can you get?

I'm sorry you have trouble reading but let me spell it out. THE CONCEPT OF WRITING A BAD REVIEW WAS DISCUSSED BETWEEN CLIENTS AND MYSELF. IT WAS A MUTUAL OPINION. NOBODY HAS ASSIGNED BLAME FOR ANYTHING IT'S ALL IT YOUR DRAMATIC LITTLE HEAD.

>Do you really believe

>that “the client” could really care about the heat that you

>might take by publishing a negative/mediocre review of another

>escort, for an encounter that they were never a part of or

>could even care about?

Completely separate concepts babe. I'm talking about retaliation from another escorts. Clients are talking about the fact that they have to deal with the drama of verifying a bad review and then the response that follows that could be a personal attack on them. So like me, they feel that unless the situation was completely awful, a slightly negative experience isn't worth reporting on.

>Do you really lack the personal skill

>sets to think for yourself and to form your own independent

>set of values that guide your life as apposed to depending

>upon “clients” to form them for you?

Alright. I'm on my second cup of coffee and that was still too convoluted. Since this thread is FULL of acronyms I'll add one more..NFC. Need for clarification

>Blaming others for your failed arguments and positions in life

>will soon be a thing of the past for you Scott. As you get

>older and grow up, you’ll find that nobody gives a shit about

>why you are the way that you are. The only thing people care

>about is that you are who you say that you are. Making a cell

>call to a client in the middle of a job interview in the real

>world; asking how to answer a question is not something you

>ever want to find yourself doing. Having all the answers at 22

>(btw – HB) is like having all the answers at 92. You won’t and

>never will. So chill bro and don’t continue to think that you

>have to be everything that you’re not. The fact is, you’ll

>never know what you’re not, until somebody brings it up to

>you, based upon what you publicly declared and thought you

>already were. Nobody needs that kind of shit unless that’s

>what you choose. The spotlight was meant for a few and those

>few have paid a hefty price for it. Do you really want to

>write that check?

Thanks for the Happy Birthday. The rest was like a lecture I didn't sign up for from a prof in a field he doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Guest TakeTwo]

10-4

[Guest stef]

>>While, I don't think all escort hire. I do think it is a

>good

>>idea for them to try it at least once.

>

>I agree very much!

>

>My couple of hiring experiences were incredibly fun!

For me, it was probably better than hunting for guys at the bars or on the net.

It is easy and painless if you are just looking to get off with a nice guy

I have hired probably 10 times while I was in the States (I really believe the guys are hot there) and always enjoyed it much better than hooking up with guys right out of the net or the bars.

9 out of 10 ended up being as I was expecting Really had a great time.

I reviewed some of them on M4M, only one is still active. I never asked if it was allowed at the time. I just wrote the reviews.

If an escort doesn't want to hire an other escort, then that's his choice of course, but I hope the choice was made by a good standard, and not by " Self Confidence " that he could get with anyone he wanted and did not need to hire. I have seen and heard some of that crazy stuff.

I believe the ones who hire others, show a better confidence of themselves than those who believe the contrary.

Stef

http://www.steflacoste.com

[Guest BewareofNick]

>Our policy is not to accept reviews by escorts because of

>confict of interest issues.

What's to stop an escort then from posting the review anonymously or under another handle? Wouldn't it be better for potential clients to read that Scott Adler wrote a review (and decide for themselves if there was an agenda) rather than the same review Scott might post as Myron Fellburger? Certainly an agenda driven escort (whether posting his own or another's reviews) will take this route due to the policy.

[Guest ScottAdler]

Myron Fellenburger?

Not gonna ask LOL. Mark your calendars people!!!

I'm agreeing with BoN. We should throw a party and then have a party every year to celebrate the anniversary

But yeah, obviously in this case as it's a review of Chris that's been posted so you could tell but honestly, what's to stop an escort from doing this ... particularly of themselves? At least doing it for others is more likely to not be self promotion...

[Guest FourAces]

>Myron Fellenburger?

>

>Not gonna ask LOL. Mark your calendars people!!!

>

>I'm agreeing with BoN. We should throw a party and then have

>a party every year to celebrate the anniversary

>

>But yeah, obviously in this case as it's a review of Chris

>that's been posted so you could tell but honestly, what's to

>stop an escort from doing this ... particularly of themselves?

> At least doing it for others is more likely to not be self

>promotion...

I don't know maybe the word integrity come to my mind. Something that Scott feels escorts might not possess by his mirrored question.

Obviously reviews will slip by TY's screening process as we learned on M4M isn't a perfect world. But when they do generally one or two very alert posters are quick to bring it to everybody's attention.

[TampaYankee]

>What's to stop an escort then from posting the review

>anonymously or under another handle?

Nothing. However, it is much like the difference between sending invitations to a party versus dealing with walk-ins. Walk-ins may show but it takes a increase in commitment and desire, or even the presence of mind to commit fraud.

>Wouldn't it be better

>for potential clients to read that Scott Adler wrote a review

>(and decide for themselves if there was an agenda) rather than

>the same review Scott might post as Myron Fellburger?

>Certainly an agenda driven escort (whether posting his own or

>another's reviews) will take this route due to the policy.

Possibly if this were the only concern. There are other concerns too. Rather than start from scratch and present a tailored response I'll post broader response adapted from an email that I sent to the other escort who offered a review last week. Hopefully this will adress your questions and maybe some of Scott's that might have been unasked.

[em]

"It would be easy for you to post a disclaimer that states the reviews have been written by other escorts--it's highly unlikely that anyone is going to be filing a slander/defamation suit. You could include the stipulation that the majority of the content has to be about the subject escort and not the author escort."

[/em]

Yes, the reviews could be earmarked with a software change and the contributing escort duly instructed.

[em]

"You could also ask the author escort to include a number of details that the subject escort to has to corroborate to establish the validity of the review".

[/em]

This would not overcome my basic objection, that of appearance of conflict of interest, although it would mitigate some score-settling attempts. But what of a legitimate complaint?

[em]

"While I don't take offense at having my credibility called into question,"

[/em]

I didnt call your credibility into question. ... I stated a general policy for a community. The same reason we pass laws against bank robbing -- not everyone is considered a candidate bank robber but there is a sufficient number to make the law. We shouldn't feel personally targeted.

[em]

"I am disappointed for taking the time to write a review..."

[/em]

I understand your disappointment and frustration. However, I have to manage a larger community with some members that aren't as principled as you .... I have to deal with issues in-the-large of perceived honesty and fairness. Some people sieze on issues just to create drama, turmoil and controversy. Lord knows you have seen plenty of that.

I will never be able to please all of the people all of the time. Sometimes the community has to consider the least common demoninator in making broad community rules -- like bank robbing laws.

[em]

"I could have just as easily created a new account, left out the part about another escort being there, and reviewed xxxx like that".

[/em]

Yes you could and some do.... Some I catch, others get by.

[em]

"Would that review have been posted? It seems so, given the current policies you've detailed in your e-mail. Just keep in mind, it would have been a lie.

[/em]

Yes, it likely would have been posted... Yes it would have been the same information submitted under a pretense. I regret that. Your argument hinges on the fact that you are an honest honorable guy. I accept that. I also know that some are not. Some have agendas or scores to settle or a distorted sense of fun. If everyone was honest and honorable and of 'normal' attitude then this site would be run differently -- a hell of a lot easier for me. Society's laws usually aren't fabricated for the mentally healthy, honorable law-abiding majority.

Should we lend our facilities to an escort that completely savages another? Or damns another with faint praise. Whose word do I take? Do we only take nice reviews? Or only from people that I approve? The view of many on the outside call that favoritism.

So one escort gives another a rave review because the guy needs money but is not really into what is reported. Or because he wants to ingratiate himself with the other guy because he has the hots for him?

Who calls the balls and strikes considering the umpire is essentially blind folded and has to ask the players what it was? Do I really want to insert myself into that scene? The headaches, the drama, the just plain bitching email exchanges.

What is the real damage? Who is hurt? The hurt is to credibility. Our credibility is our currency. IF we make up reviews it will hurt us, as it should. Yes, others make up reviews. We try to perform quality control screening. Are we 100% successful? No and we never will be. But the fact that we fail some of the time should dictate that we throw open the doors and let anything go? Of course not. The issue always is and has been: Where do you drawn the line? Is is bright and easily measured.

One bright easily measured line is recognizing that escort-on-escort reviews are inherently an appearance of conflict of interest, notwhithstanding that there are some honorable agenda-free instances. Trying to pick and choose escorts that deserve a platform to review colleagues from those that do not is a murky thankless process for the reasons I gave above.

And the plain fact is that process is inherently pregnant with potential abuse. There is much more potential incentive, in the large, for escorts to abuse their competition than there is for clients to abuse escorts, exceptions notwithstanding. Escorts as a group have a potential financial agenda by the nature of the population of competitors. Clients as a group don't have an inherent negative agenda because they are not in a competitive situation. Client abuses reflect the aberrations of individuals. Again, these comments are meant for populations not individuals where there are plenty of honest and honorable men.

...utimately, our position must be based on dealing with the diverse characters we find in our community, not on individual-based interactions. We don't want a reputation, deserved or not, for favoritism, the headaches of umpiring fights between escorts and catching unending slings and arrows from the client base.

[Guest TakeTwo]

WOW! I can’t think of another admin (let alone a semi-quasi type moderator, with review access and questionable control) that would spend their Sunday afternoon ensuring that his membership/readership fully understood the position and reasoning of a subject matter that certainly carries a number of varied and differing viewpoints; simply to ensure clarity, understanding and unquestioned point of view. I can’t think of one other. Most, from my experience, are enjoying their Sunday off.

With that said, my hat is off to you Tampa Yankee. Many in the past have chosen to respond with their personal arrogance when differing opinions were presented for discussion (or lack there of). What you have demonstrated here, this very day; is that no superior site (in the making) takes a day off because most others are enjoying it. There are no days off when you are building something from scratch or from your heart.

So Kuddos to you TY. You just demonstrated the difference between “an arrogant, power-seeking, rude, hateful and out of control techie type guy and someone who entertains credibility and honesty, in what they do.

I’d stand up and light a flare to the sky right now in this celebration, but I just had the most excellent Mexican dinner and well, I’m probably a bit explosive right now.

Nice job TY.

[Guest BewareofNick]

>Myron Fellenburger?

I thought everyone knew Uncle Myron?

>I'm agreeing with BoN. We should throw a party and then have

>a party every year to celebrate the anniversary

Everybody come to Swinging Richards here in the ATL. We'll get Scott to work the "VIP" room all night

[Guest BewareofNick]

Take Two,

I couldn't agree more. I visited several message centers today. In one, a regular poster came in to seek advice about something and the admin basically called him a liar and did not take a potential serious issue very seriously at all. it was shameful.