I would be surprised if it weren't allowed, although admit I haven't read rule (and confident WU has them memorized). BUT, common sense tells me the rationale behind disallowing disclosure of BCD/ROS is the expectation of privacy others posting are "assured." (tongue>cheek).
What possible basis exists for disallowing one from retelling that which HE has posted? He's the only one with an expected right of privacy.
True, the aftermath & resulting questions about replies might ensue, but who are we to discourage those benevolent souls. In the name of Tebow, I beg of you - encourage them to continue on this noble path. The freedom to acknowledge these acts should never be discouraged.
Edit: BP & CB have the cajones to tell us they send review to the lady first, criticism of the malcontents notwithstanding. Anyone else big enough to step into their shoes?
Originally Posted by TexasGator
Thanks, Gator. I miss the old days, and am glad that at least a few of the good guys are still around.
As I recall, ASPD actually used to have a rule against sharing your review with a provider, inane as that sounds. I found a simple way to circumvent this within the rules - I sent her the review first, then later posted it. I don't think Eccie has anything so silly.
I see no downside to sharing a review with a provider, especially if I have suggestions to make the session better. Of course, I understand the concept of tact, and can give constructive criticism without being a jerk about it. For some of the "gentlemen" here, that might be an insurmountable challenge.