What Can A Provider See in our Reviews?

[Tannfit]

Can providers see the "Rest of the Story" portion of our reviews? I don't want to be overly critical of a provider if I plan to see her again.

[rockerrick]

Some can, it's against the rules, but some have male profiles.
Ones following the rules can only see above the ROS section.
And you can share your ROS with the provider you are reviewing before you press submit, once you submit it's Eccie property, and you will be revealing private material.


Write your review truthful, let the chips fall where they may.
Your word is the only thing of value you own.

[Tannfit]

Thanks, Rockerrick
Tan

[TravelingTex]

In a way, it might be better if providers saw their negative reviews' details. (don't pile on, hear me out) If a guy writes a negative review, all that the rules-following providers see is the final No. If the guy wrote, "...except for her TCB (or misadvertising, whatever), she would be a Yes." and that provider and other providers knew the reason, it might help the provider herself and give some context for the others.

It's true that too many No reviews will cause other providers to ask why in screening, if indeed they even go that far with a guy. That's happened to me, where I've been asked why I wrote No reviews. I'm glad to explain to the screening provider the details so she can see I've got darned good reason for all three of my No's, and ROS-reading guys agree.

So let the chips fall where they may. There's nothing worse in review responses to a No review is a guy or three chiming in to say, "I could have told you that she's a sack of sand, but I never wrote a review." Gee, thanks, dudes.

[ck1942]

TT makes some cogent points above.

I will add that, no matter what is said in ROS, replies to the review often either repeat out loud, so to speak, or imply, and reinforce both negatives and positives.

imo, virtually every reviewer has the capacity, if not the will, to be candid and frank, not cruel.

If there are discrepancies, say, from a provider's showcase, those should be highlighted.

If there unexpected plus factors, those also deserve notice.

There are gents who appreciate certain activities, say kissing, or cbj vs. bbj, for example. Glossing those over, or omitting them in a review denies researchers critical data.

Ditto for smoke filled incalls, obvious physical issues and obvious environmental issues.

All of us are here to have fun; so are most of the ladies, with the added benefit$ of income.

[Tannfit]

Thanks to all for your comments!

[Eraserman]

This is a very interesting thread. I've enjoyed reading it.

AFA overly critical, one would have to determine if the trait/mannerism is something important to hobbiests or something that may only be important to you.

For example, there's a certain nationality of woman with certain facial traits that I find ugly. I never see women with that look. The fact is though, those women are NOT ugly, not by a longshot, many guys go crazy over that look. That's just my personal quirk. If I found myself in a session with such a woman who had her face hidden in her pics for privacy reasons I would never mention I was turned off by her looks. That would be unfair to her and deceptive to hobbiests.

Know thyself, know why you would want to mention what you're thinking of mentioning, then do the right thing.

E