Q for the Mods: Sharing my own reviews?

There's no discrepancy...there's now an exception...

Under the rule as written, Blowpop and theCFE were both guilty of a violation...under the new exception, Blowpop isn't guilty of a violation, but theCFE still is...

I'm never in favor of arbitrary exceptions to the rules...especially when they allow leniency for for one side and punish the other...but now that they've done it, they better change the forum guideline quick...

There's no discrepancy...there's now an exception...

Under the rule as written, Blowpop and theCFE were both guilty of a violation...under the new exception, Blowpop isn't guilty of a violation, but theCFE still is...

I'm never in favor of arbitrary exceptions to the rules...especially when they allow leniency for for one side and punish the other...but now that they've done it, they better change the forum guideline quick... Originally Posted by Wakeuр

It seems there are really TWO exceptions: One that spares BP because the provider in question was the one he gave ROS info to, and one that punishes theCFE for revealing not CONTENT of ROS, but merely that she'd seen it. (I haven't seen the original thread, so I'm just going off of BP's and others assertions). Following the language of Rule 20, I don't see that as a violation.

I understand the first exception, because it's logical to me. The second one, I admit, does leave me confounded.

There's no discrepancy...there's now an exception...

Under the rule as written, Blowpop and theCFE were both guilty of a violation...under the new exception, Blowpop isn't guilty of a violation, but theCFE still is...

I'm never in favor of arbitrary exceptions to the rules...especially when they allow leniency for for one side and punish the other...but now that they've done it, they better change the forum guideline quick... Originally Posted by Wakeuр

I'm not trying to be a WK here. I've never seen theCFE BCD, but what did she do to violate the rule "as written"? The rule says you can't reveal content. AFIK, all she did was acknowledge she had seen it.

Big take away. Ladies don't acknowledge any information from a review, ML, or private tags that you acquired through a gent or your male handle The one exception is when a gent reveals contents of ROS with out placing them in private tags which happens all the time.

I hate to keep repeating myself, but apparently it is necessary. Wakeup is playing dumb for some reason.

I didn't share ROS with anyone. I wrote the provider an e-mail, sharing my opinions with her. I later released some of these opinions to Eccie in the form of a review.

Reasonably, I wasn't penalized for sharing my thoughts with the provider. (Thank you, mods, for confirming what seems obvious to everyone but WU.)

Unreasonably (In my opinion) the provider was penalized for admitting that she read my email. She didn't access any unauthorized information on Eccie.

That seems to be the state of things now. I'm sure Wakeup will now try to make things more convoluted, so we can all pay attention to him.

The ban is even more insane then the previous discussion.

TheCFE received an email. She acknowledged that receipt. IF there was any real privacy on this Board, then she would have no way of knowing if the email she received was ACTUALLY the same as the ROS that was submitted. She did not state the content of the email (as that would have been a violation of something), and then after 15 pages of confusion by all the Houston Mods who put up their 2 Cents, the Rule is clarified and TheCFE gets banned based on the clarification.

And I thought the other Board was fucked up.

Will you start a list of chicks you helped get banned?

LMFAO

Man, all these "wanna be" Mods kill me

Some of y'all should put in a request to ownership to help out...or in some cases, a second request

Man, all these "wanna be" Mods kill me

Some of y'all should put in a request to ownership to help out...or in some cases, a second request Originally Posted by DickEmDown

Makes 2 of us..... the explanation, in detail has been given..... Seems some can't see the forest through the trees a bit on this one..... but so it goes I suppose.....

Will you start a list of chicks you helped get banned? Originally Posted by trey

Man, all these "wanna be" Mods kill me

Some of y'all should put in a request to ownership to help out...or in some cases, a second request Originally Posted by DickEmDown

I'll remind you that I got 1 vote...but it was a big one.

I'll remind you that I got 1 vote...but it was a big one. Originally Posted by boardman

Yes, but "self votes" were not recognized

But self love is..... ijs....

Yes, but "self votes" were not recognized Originally Posted by DickEmDown

Um...Lest you forget it was St. C himself that voted for me. Hell I voted for TG. I thinck.