- here4now
- 01-16-2013, 07:06 AM
I have had premium access on and off when aspd and now eccie has been here. The way some guys treat the ROS baffles me. What is in there that scares you so much about "prying eyes" seeing? Are you afraid of offending a provider? Well, a "no" review kinda does that already. Are you afraid she will see that while you gave her a yes,for whatever reason, you trashed her in the ROS? There are,supposedly, rules in place that keep providers from seeing th ROS anyway. People who pay for premium access or gain it by writing a review deserve the same rights as any of us to see the ROS. It seems rather ridiculous that someone who has participated in the very review they wrote wouldn't be allowed to read it.
- guest100913
- 01-16-2013, 11:19 AM
You know guys, I am amazed that this is such a fuss. I replied to a fuss with a clear explanation in the other thread and Stick has given a clear explanation here in this thread. No one has invalidated anything. Sweet Tea's female handle simply cannot be approved for PA and access to the Men's Lounge. This is not complicated.
What I don't understand is: "Why the fuss?" Sativa and Kaitlynn both can spin this in such a positive way, both in their showcases (which Sativa has never set up for some reason, why not?) and in their signature lines. They could also enhance all future ads in Provider Ads and Weekend Lineup sub-forums.
If I were Sativa or Kaitlynn, I would be drawing positive attention to the reviews of Sweet Tea. I would include in my showcase, signature line, and in all of my ads something like:
With a positive outlook, the providers could be using this software limitation to their benefit by positively commenting in their review threads (something they cannot do in the Independent Reviews sub-forum) and also by positively splashing links to these reviews everywhere.
I thought Sweet Tea's reviews were great, but I don't think Sweet Tea should be given PA to the Men's Lounge because her handle statistics indicate she is not a man.
FWIW, IMHO.
Best Regards, UF
What I don't understand is: "Why the fuss?" Sativa and Kaitlynn both can spin this in such a positive way, both in their showcases (which Sativa has never set up for some reason, why not?) and in their signature lines. They could also enhance all future ads in Provider Ads and Weekend Lineup sub-forums.
If I were Sativa or Kaitlynn, I would be drawing positive attention to the reviews of Sweet Tea. I would include in my showcase, signature line, and in all of my ads something like:
Oh, and be sure to check out my reviews from ladies too!! (click here)That would seem to me to give the opportunity to highlight the uniqueness of the reviews rather than just fuss about a software functionality that does not even exist (i.e. "approving" a review from a female handle while granting PA to ROS but not granting PA to the Men's Lounge). Now I understand that this bitching about it may ultimately result in the owners choosing one day in the future to pay for a software re-write of certain functionalities, but the fussing is all negative energy.
With a positive outlook, the providers could be using this software limitation to their benefit by positively commenting in their review threads (something they cannot do in the Independent Reviews sub-forum) and also by positively splashing links to these reviews everywhere.
I thought Sweet Tea's reviews were great, but I don't think Sweet Tea should be given PA to the Men's Lounge because her handle statistics indicate she is not a man.
FWIW, IMHO.
Best Regards, UF
- disilene
- 01-16-2013, 02:46 PM
Stick an URFriend have explained ECCIE's poicy., However, I think what you are seeing isn't a lack of comprehension of the policy. People just don't agree with the policy. Eccie can chose to change or not change, and you have pointed out ways that providers could show non-PA people their full reviews.
However, just cause something has been explained, doesn't mean people can't seek to change the rules or just talk about how things should be different (Which is always VASTLY easier than actually doing something.) If nothing ever changed we would still be huddled in caves waiting for someone to discover fire.
Don't you know rules are made to be broken and changed?
However, just cause something has been explained, doesn't mean people can't seek to change the rules or just talk about how things should be different (Which is always VASTLY easier than actually doing something.) If nothing ever changed we would still be huddled in caves waiting for someone to discover fire.
Don't you know rules are made to be broken and changed?
- Guest032514-1
- 01-17-2013, 05:15 PM
I do not give a #$)& about "policy". (Hi UF)
I do not care how many times you explain to me about what one button does and does not do and software this, bullshyte that.
That is NOT the point.
Explain all you want blah blah blah blah...
Women are 2nd class on this board. That is it.
This board was originally set up that Powder Room and InfoShare were linked. Eventually that format was changed to <correct me here> either all providers or "verified" providers or whatever could see InfoShare but access to Powder Room was something else.
Sooo lets look
Women
1st Level: Register - "no access" - aka coed access. No InfoShare, no Powder Room **cant post ads**
Here I'm shaky this is either one level or two seperate levels
2nd level - "verified" provider
Don't even start on rumors and innuendo of what mods require for newbies to get verified , but there is a set criteria "offic ial play by the rules policy" somewhere. At this point you get post ads
(level 2a?) infoshare - for those who dont know this is where we report the creeps. This is the one that when Powder Room went to hell, we ladies asked - and RECEIVED - be broken off from Powder Room.
3rd Level Coed, InfoShare and UPON APPLICATION AND OK - Powder Room.
Protocol for guys:
1st Level Register
2nd Level: Pay or write 'an honest account" (ha) teh mod decides its detailed enough and...all access.
We ladies have a tiered system & No, I don't know off the top of my head whats required for Powder Room (I read it at the time of the great purge and said eh, pass and haven't missed what is no longer there).
Anyway we have a tiered system. When "possible security issues" arose - the ladies only was shut down completely was closed and we had to "apply" for powder room.
So telling me "it's software" is just Pure Bullshyte. The software is there to tier access if "provider" is checked, but the selfsame software can't do the exact same thing if "hobbyist" is selected? Bullshit.
Reviews can be set that if you write a review, you get to see reviews and new members with so many reviews or those who pay can see reviews plus have Locker Room.
ROS = InfoShare
Powder Room = Locker Room
Tier the hobbyists the same as you tier the providers.
NOW explain that button bullshit to me once more..and this time make it believable.
(Yes, stick I know - this is the diff between warnings and points but it is bullshit. It is nothing more and nothing less than pure d bullshit.)
I do not care how many times you explain to me about what one button does and does not do and software this, bullshyte that.
That is NOT the point.
Explain all you want blah blah blah blah...
Women are 2nd class on this board. That is it.
This board was originally set up that Powder Room and InfoShare were linked. Eventually that format was changed to <correct me here> either all providers or "verified" providers or whatever could see InfoShare but access to Powder Room was something else.
Sooo lets look
Women
1st Level: Register - "no access" - aka coed access. No InfoShare, no Powder Room **cant post ads**
Here I'm shaky this is either one level or two seperate levels
2nd level - "verified" provider
Don't even start on rumors and innuendo of what mods require for newbies to get verified , but there is a set criteria "offic ial play by the rules policy" somewhere. At this point you get post ads
(level 2a?) infoshare - for those who dont know this is where we report the creeps. This is the one that when Powder Room went to hell, we ladies asked - and RECEIVED - be broken off from Powder Room.
3rd Level Coed, InfoShare and UPON APPLICATION AND OK - Powder Room.
Protocol for guys:
1st Level Register
2nd Level: Pay or write 'an honest account" (ha) teh mod decides its detailed enough and...all access.
We ladies have a tiered system & No, I don't know off the top of my head whats required for Powder Room (I read it at the time of the great purge and said eh, pass and haven't missed what is no longer there).
Anyway we have a tiered system. When "possible security issues" arose - the ladies only was shut down completely was closed and we had to "apply" for powder room.
So telling me "it's software" is just Pure Bullshyte. The software is there to tier access if "provider" is checked, but the selfsame software can't do the exact same thing if "hobbyist" is selected? Bullshit.
Reviews can be set that if you write a review, you get to see reviews and new members with so many reviews or those who pay can see reviews plus have Locker Room.
ROS = InfoShare
Powder Room = Locker Room
Tier the hobbyists the same as you tier the providers.
NOW explain that button bullshit to me once more..and this time make it believable.
(Yes, stick I know - this is the diff between warnings and points but it is bullshit. It is nothing more and nothing less than pure d bullshit.)
- Wiley64
- 01-17-2013, 06:14 PM
Babee tell us how you really feel.....
Last time I checked Stick and I are not policy makers. We merely enforce the current rules and try and keep order when possible.
"Don't even start on rumors and innuendo of what mods require for newbies to get verified "
Please do share on what is required, as last time I requested VP status I merely asked for a board ref, website, or review. I've always been respectful to all regardless of gender or orientation and I'm 100% sure that Stick has done the same.
While I'm very sure that higher ups will see this thread here. I suggest someone like yourself post in National area with constructive ideas on how to improve this particular situation.
Last time I checked Stick and I are not policy makers. We merely enforce the current rules and try and keep order when possible.
"Don't even start on rumors and innuendo of what mods require for newbies to get verified "
Please do share on what is required, as last time I requested VP status I merely asked for a board ref, website, or review. I've always been respectful to all regardless of gender or orientation and I'm 100% sure that Stick has done the same.
While I'm very sure that higher ups will see this thread here. I suggest someone like yourself post in National area with constructive ideas on how to improve this particular situation.
- guest100913
- 01-17-2013, 06:18 PM
Hi darlin'. I love how you don't hold anything back! LOL
- guest100913
- 01-17-2013, 07:32 PM
"Don't even start on rumors and innuendo of what mods require for newbies to get verified "This is most likely in reference to http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=637549
Please do share on what is required, as last time I requested VP status I merely asked for a board ref, website, or review. I've always been respectful to all regardless of gender or orientation and I'm 100% sure that Stick has done the same. Originally Posted by Wiley64
- Guest032514-1
- 01-18-2013, 07:11 AM
Blame UF Wiley. Call me at 11:30 pm on my damn dime and talk about some damn button. Is this a magical button? made out of diamonds, platinum plated et al?
Is this button in a steel box with copper wiring somewhere in Ft Knox? What?? We're not talking a physical button that cannot be reconstructed? Oh! It's not even hardware...it's software?
Software. As in code? An if/and string of characters? And it cannot be changed? Bullshit.
Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.
Give female hobbyists ROS. Keep the reviews in the review sections where they are searchable with all other reviews.
"Separate but equal" is bullshit. No way anyone can argue that particular policy works. How about ECCIE honor January 21 by abolishing this outdated, insulting, morally corrupt policy?
Is this button in a steel box with copper wiring somewhere in Ft Knox? What?? We're not talking a physical button that cannot be reconstructed? Oh! It's not even hardware...it's software?
Software. As in code? An if/and string of characters? And it cannot be changed? Bullshit.
Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.
Give female hobbyists ROS. Keep the reviews in the review sections where they are searchable with all other reviews.
"Separate but equal" is bullshit. No way anyone can argue that particular policy works. How about ECCIE honor January 21 by abolishing this outdated, insulting, morally corrupt policy?
- stavinChain
- 01-18-2013, 10:31 AM
Yep. This board is slanted toward the guys. No doubt about it.
The ladies are free to start their own website. The Internet is a mighty big place.
The ladies are free to start their own website. The Internet is a mighty big place.
- justatoy61
- 01-18-2013, 01:59 PM
- skeeter
- 01-19-2013, 07:35 AM
Yep. This board is slanted toward the guys. No doubt about it.No offense SC but that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard ....
The ladies are free to start their own website. The Internet is a mighty big place. Originally Posted by stavinChain
If the ladies started their own board , this one would die because as great as you and most of the guys are ..... We ( the men ) are not here for each other ..,, we're here because the ladies are ......
If they leave so do the men ..... Then we would go to a board that they are not only worshipped at but that they control .....
You know kind of like being at home if you're married ... You pay for everything ..... She gets it all and you have to wait on her ......
- LarryLegend
- 01-21-2013, 06:47 AM
The White Knight is here!!!
- skeeter
- 01-21-2013, 07:05 AM
- here4now
- 01-21-2013, 12:20 PM
If the ladies get to see the ROS, do we get to go to the powder room? Just curious.
- Sativa Slims
- 01-23-2013, 03:04 PM
