Concerns with Moderator Dr-epg?

[NMrockclimber]

Originally Posted by Lefty13

Had to look up what SMDH meant, but I am there with you TBone. Geez, here's the thing. On the NM site things were a free for all for way too long. Thanks to whatever moderator or moderators that finally tossed some bad players out. But on the negative side, looking at the commentors on this string you have some very valuable and reliable contributors who are telling you in a constructive way something needs to be handled a bit differently. ECCIE should try to encourage, not discourage valuable contributors from participating. None of us like criticism, but rather than putting up a defensive wall, and appearing butt-hurt, perhaps put your ECCIE heads together, still follow your guidelines, but change your approach to make this site better. Frankly I was more or less neutral on the original issue, but the ECCIE responses (pissed me off) sure illustrate something that needs to be improved in your organizational model. I may not always agree with all the opinions of contributors who are on this string, but they make this site work. Encourage these guys, don't fire off responses that effectively run us off.

I agree and just have not been posting for some time.

[Waterpower]

I got dinged for defining squirting. something about giving details of ROS. what details did I give? I literally just defined squirting. I am kinda scared to comment and post at this point in fear of retaliation.

[An_Original_UNAME]

I bounced/only use this account for searching legacy reviews but a buddy who tries to still make it work. Looks like we lost the actively antagonistic mod but the underlying problem remains the same:


ECCIE is a (presumably) moderately expensive site to run that is pretty much constantly begging for letters from the leos. That, in turn, costs even more money. And the way sites like this make money are selling ads (and everyone has an adblocker) and selling premium.


And, like most of the review sites, people are encouraged to post reviews for "free premium". And... because this place has become somewhat antagonistic towards Providers means that we lost the back and forth that would let people actually verify those. So it mostly encourages people to blatantly lie for premium access and "free" ads from the smarter mamasans (and, in NM's case, the owner of CiCi's).


And the smarter johns quickly realize that they would be paying for premium to read a mix of craigslist and penthouse forum.


So moderation policy becomes much stricter to crack down on all the free premium for any reason possible to increase premium sales. And that makes people cranky.


It sucks (like, a really toothy suck at that) because this place used to be amazing and a lot of the older reviews are still great for helping to verify that an older provider is legit. But between policies toward providers and the like? The gals I know actively request people not even mention them on this site. And the ads in the AMP sections are, at best, useful for knowing which shacks are still in business and not much else (unless you believe that Luna/Lisa/Sandy/Whatever actually works at ten different AMPs at once...).

[TheHolySong]

The NM section is essentially 12 dudes that keep it afloat so if any newcomers arrive or visitors arrive they have some data points. On the topic of being antagonistic towards providers I'd say it's warranted to a degree depending on the situation. Some are blatantly lying, scamming and being racist. Since we are men we don't really have insight into their bubble and how they rack and stack mongers. The only real difference is we are trying to censor and police ourselves from saying the obvious truth and that obvious truth gets us hit with infractions and or bans.

It's to the point where reviewing just outs good providers and they get turned and burned and lose their flavor which makes dudes gatekeep on a review board (Cici). I'm pretty open about my dissatisfaction because I refuse to lie about the quality of providers and won't pretend it's good value monetary wise. I don't know much about the moderation team because they are pretty irrelevant if you're not getting got with infractions since they operate in the background.

One thing for certain is over and under moderation is a hard thing to get right. I don't think censoring folks for speaking their minds is the way even if it is inflammatory. At the end of the day we should all be grown men and women and be able to have a tiff or two and go about our business.

[HDrider18]

Ok seriously Dr. Moderator you can not be serious with your last ding on me bro like WTF are you doing accept personally picking bro!! It was private with no info !!!

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by HDrider18

Ok seriously Dr. Moderator you can not be serious with your last ding on me bro like WTF are you doing accept personally picking bro!! It was private with no info !!!

I got dinged for giving the definition of an acronym. Ridiculous.

[TBoneFkr]

Just got an infraction for asking if Candy might be Grace! See AMP thread. This guy is out of control. Can nothing be done about this? SMDH...

[biomed1]

That the Terms of Service that you agree to each and every time you log in to Eccie states that you agree to and will comply with the Guidelines

• https://www.eccie.net/misc.php?do=tos

The Various Forums are Moderated by the Staff Members of Eccie.

Each Staff Member has an established record complying with and understanding the Guidelines.

In most cases, they have been the person in their "home" forum that other Members talked to when they needed a little guidance before they made a post that might cause them to receive a Warning or an Infraction.

The Guidelines in their entirety can be found at the link below

• https://www.eccie.net/announcement.php?f=5

To directly address some of the points raised in this thread.

• Explaining something from the Private portion of the Forum in the open form is Revealing Premium Content.
  • When talking about the ROS or anything in Private Tags, your post MUST be in Private Tags. - See Guideline # 19
• Staff disrespect is not something that will be tolerated.
  • Calling the Staff out in the Open Forum or talking down to them is not acceptable.
  • Sending a PM to the Staff Member and having a civil discussion of the issue is generally a better way to resolve questions, present your point and even have the possibility of having the Warning or Infraction reversed. - See Guideline # 3
• Many of you refer to the New Mexico Forums as having been the Wild West. Even the Wild West was reformed or civilized (Your choice) over time. Each Moderator has their own style of maintaining order in the Forums. They Differ from Staff Member to Staff Member, but their actions are Based on the Guidelines.

• Eccie changed after the last "blackout" in September 2019 after FOSTA - SESTA were enacted. Due to changes in State Laws, Forums were removed to protect our Members and Eccie. This also requires some changes in the manner that the New Mexico Forums operate.
• Part of the problem has been some inconsistency in Moderation of the Forum. As Unique_Carpenter mentioned, he took over the Forum when he joined the Staff. UC was present in the Forum very regularly. His replacement has not been as present in the Forum as UC had been. Currently, Dr-epg has been a regular presence in the Forum and has been following the instruction from the Owners to reign in some of the wildness of the New Mexico Forums.Reminding Members that the Forums need to change for a variety of reasons is the Staff's job.

Each of you should feel comfortable to PM Dr-epg and ask for help with a topic, understanding why he issued a Warning or Infraction. If not, you can send a PM to me or one of the other Staff Members seeking an answer. You can expect an honest answer in reply.