Try and comprehend my research: Take for instance the lady above, Lea. When clicking her name, you get her profile page with the Reviews tab. By clicking that, I get a list of 10 reviews and a separate column of 10 YES recommendations. To know more, I could read individual reviews from there if I wanted. But, I see dates shkwing she has been more than reputable for awhile with 10 stellar reviews. That speaks for itself and is enough for me along with pictures. If she happened to not show and stiff over a few guys along the way, well, we as hobbyists have to go dig deeper to find out if she did that to others when it should be as simple as looking at her list of reviews. If you guys cannot understand that, then I'm not sure what the agenda is here other than make things harder on the hobbyist.
Originally Posted by Rzrbck
Using your research pattern, I clicked on the Lady in question. The reason for this thread in post # 1. Her reviews number 19 in total. Only 2 of the reviews have a "No" recommendation. Both of those "No" reviews are on the front page of her reviews listed. The "No" reviews are listed from March of this year and yesterday in response to this thread. While I would be interested in the "No" reviews, I also would look at the Author's reviews. Is he a serial "No" reviewer? As a side note, Neither of the "No" reviews are for a NCNS.
The sticky you mention was not mine, and was posted AFTER the decision by the Board Owners on the subject of where to post information about a NCNS. As I said before, Mods do not make the Guidelines, we monitor and ensure compliance with them.
As has been said many times before on this board; when dealing with 2 people (Hobbyist & Provider), there are 3 sides to everything:
- His Side
- Her Side
- The Truth somewhere in between
By placing the NCNS in Co-Ed, it allows the Hobbyist to present His Side. The Provider has the opportunity to present Her Side. (As has been said before Providers are not allowed to post comments in the Review sections of the board) Ultimately, the other Hobbyists AND Providers get the opportunity to glean the TRUTH somewhere in between from the information provided by Both sides.
Hobbyists can determine IF they would like to spend time with the Lady accused of a NCNS. Conversely, Providers can determine IF they would like to spend time with the Hobbyist(s) based upon their posting style and/or comments.
You also made the following comment is a previous post
BioMed - I read and disagree on almost everything. After all that the conclusion I came up with is 1) there will be disagreement. 2) do more research 3) The current NCNS problematic girls are being blamed on the hobbyists who vouch for her.
In reply to your points:
1) Agreed
2) Agreed
3) Disagree - I was not implying that the "BP Trash" as you called them was the fault of "Hobbyists who vouch for them". My statement was "
Providers need to have reviews, ads, and/or a "vouch" from a well known member of ECCIE". Thevouch from an ECCIE Member can come from an established ECCIE Provider.
At this juncture, we will have to agree to disagree. For I fear that we are just "roaring into the wind".
Be Careful & Enjoy!
Biomed1