Feedback would be appreciated...

atlcomedy's Avatar
In a perfect world this would be a great addition. More perspective so members can make informed choices. Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world.

I think this would be a disaster in practice. You are setting up a situation where your paying customers can have their reputations impacted by some subjective/YMMV items.

If anything I would reinforce what an "okay" means & put some rigor around it. That is maybe the bar for the positive is raised, but you aren't introducing a negative.
atlcomedy's Avatar

If anything I would reinforce what an "okay" means & put some rigor around it. That is maybe the bar for the positive is raised, but you aren't introducing a negative. Originally Posted by atlcomedy
Just to build on my "no negative" point a bit:

Are you familiar with the social/professional networking site LinkedIn.com ?

You can visit the site for more, but you add friends called "contacts," like you would on say Facebook. The central premise is that you actually know your contacts and you might not give all of your contacts the highest recomendations (or if you were a hiring manager even hire them yourself), but you would at least have enough regard for them that you would help facilitate an introduction. (Call it an "okay")

In addition you can have others write recommendations for you. What you can't have are negative dings ("That Gina is awful")

Point is, no matter what they say, your paying customers don't want to see potentially negative things about them.
From MY experience, it's ALL a YMMV sort of thing. Gentleman A sees provider A and there is a problem of some sort. NO matter how small or seemingly insignificant, it goes on the feedback list. Then the next person is either okay with it or not but it MIGHT prevent a lovely meeting. Does that make any sense at all?

On the other hand, you could TRY it for a bit and see what happens. I tend to say it may not be the best idea but what do I know?

GOod luck in whatever you decide! --v
chipper's Avatar
Gina, I think you should do what makes the most sense to you. I like the idea of having some input into your site. I certainly don't mind the Ladies having input since I do not plan on having any problems.
Leave the ratings to the review boards.

Do what you do best with P411. Screen to make sure the members are legit and not a threat to other members.

Add an option to remove an okay and/or replace it with a not okay. Sometimes people behave and other times they do not. That would remove that chore from you if providers could do that on their own. other providers could see the "not okay" and contact that provider for more info if needed. A certain amount of not okays would raise a flag for your attention or removal of an account.
Leave the ratings to the review boards.

Do what you do best with P411. Screen to make sure the members are legit and not a threat to other members.

Add an option to remove an okay and/or replace it with a not okay. Sometimes people behave and other times they do not. That would remove that chore from you if providers could do that on their own. other providers could see the "not okay" and contact that provider for more info if needed. A certain amount of not okays would raise a flag for your attention or removal of an account. Originally Posted by cpi3000
X2
Good idea CPI. Keep the grading system between Provider and Hobbyist.
lets see how Gina considers this as an option! She (Gina) still needs to remove herself from the minor complaints and focus on the P411 value.
MS
Chevalier's Avatar
Up until now, I've tried to handle issues behind the scenes... with very good results finding resolutions or removing problem clients or providers. The thing is that the volume of complaints is becoming unmanageable, and the vast majority are extremely minor situations... and I mean EXTREMELY minor. Originally Posted by GinaXXX
Off the top of my head . . . [sit down, this make take a while]

There seem to be at least three different concepts involved here: (1) resolving conflicts/disputes resulting from a session, where one of the parties was unhappy with the other (rather disputes about P411, e.g., giving an OK or not, or what rating is given under the system you're contemplating); (2) identifying clients or ladies whose behavior is so egregious that you would not want them as members; and (3) allowing the exchange of information that someone contemplating a session would want to know.

With respect to #1, if it's not serious enough to fall into category #2 -- and you indicate the vast majority are not -- well, in your shoes I'd tell the complaining party "That's not my responsibility; work it out on your own." They may want to report it to so others thinking of dealing with that person will be aware of it, but that's category #3. (And if someone doesn't like the online rating given him, again, "That's not my responsibility; work it out with him/her.") [*]

With respect to #2, I would think it would be best to continue to handle that behind the scenes, rather than anything online. You're really talking about maintaining the fundamental integrity of your site -- not allowing a lady who is a cash-and-dash for example, or a client who consistently shorts the envelope a non-trivial amount or physically threatens the ladies. Some people you just don't want associated with your site. But something this serious should be handled manually behind the scenes rather than an online rating because it's serious enough that you would want to investigate it before taking any action (including information being shared publicly). But it should be feasible because it sounds like it would be very low volume.

With respect to #3, I'm not sure you need that for the clients to rate the ladies. That's what we use reviews for, and there are already a lot of review sites out there. Not to mention that clients will likely not rely solely on the type of thing you describe anyway; we would still wind up checking out review boards. [**] Unless you want to break into that market full bore, I would suggest skipping it. But a way for the ladies to rate the clients, behind the simple "OK" or not, might be valuable, because short of alert-worthy problems, there's little available to help the ladies that way. They can get it by calling around to the other ladies who've seen him, but the whole point of P411 is to simplify some of that process.

I'm not sure what all factors the ladies would like to see including in a rating of the clients. Your list strikes me as a good one. Some factors might be rated on a scale, others a more binary "yes/no" vote -- what would it mean to be "excellent" at timeliness?

The primary problem you face is whether the ladies would feel comfortable giving the same type of information they would want to receive from others. You know what the typical fragile male ego is like, as do the other ladies. Unless it was a guy they wouldn't see again, would they feel comfortable rating him with less than the highest possible rating in a category, if he can see that she gave him that rating?

Not letting the client see who gave him that negative rating isn't an optimal system either, though. That limits accountability and would allow some abuses. On the other hand, for some things accountability may not be that important. If one lady (anonymously) reports that Client X has some minor hygiene issues or was 20 minutes late to the appointment or has inaccurate information in his profile . . . it may not be the type of thing he can, or needs to, refute. Will some or even most of these factors be serious enough that it will impede his ability to P4P without several corroborating reports? Some may be the type of thing that a lady would like to know about ahead of time but won't prevent her from seeing him. Best to ask the ladies, rather than the clients, about that.

I'd like to see something like this work, as I suspect it's information that would be very helpful to the ladies. I'm just not sure if it's feasible, given the potential reaction by the clients.

Good luck.

---------------------------
[*] There's a reason that a lot of P4P boards don't try to be the "P4P police," refereeing off-the-boards disputes between lady and client. And there's a reason that a lot of P4P boards don't try to referee disputes about the accuracy or fairness of reviews.

[**] OK, maybe not, for some of the guys who want to check out some possibilities online and have the girl show up 20 minutes later. So you would need to think about whether you want to serve that market in that way. Maybe not, because they might be relying more on P411 than you're comfortable with. Do you want a client to decide whether to see a lady solely based on that rating in P411?
I like TC's suggestion!

The only other thing I would add would be about the NC/NS....on both sides.

All last year I had no problems with p411 guys, but this year, several have contacted about appt. times then no further contact, or have set an appt up and last minute rescheduled several times. The world is changing.

Kisses, Lace
atlcomedy's Avatar
I like TC's suggestion!

The only other thing I would add would be about the NC/NS....on both sides.

All last year I had no problems with p411 guys, but this year, several have contacted about appt. times then no further contact, or have set an appt up and last minute rescheduled several times. The world is changing.

Kisses, Lace Originally Posted by lacensatin
The only caution I would have relative to Lace's point is don't confuse "window shopper," "time waster," "rude" or "pain in the ass" with NC/NS

Her examples are poor form but not NCNS. The reason many on both sides view NCNS as inexcuable is because it really is: you have a confirmed appointment, you don't show but worse don't bother to call. Lace's offenses are not NCNS. Let's no throw all of them in together.
I always contact the most recent ladies who have given an Okay on a client (Jane's idea of "okay" may not be my idea of "okay"), so an option to read their comments wouldn't make much difference to me; if they have anything positive or negative to say to me about him, they have an opportunity.

And I'd prefer to have any comments ABOUT me be left to reviews -- if he needs to either rant or rave or just go "meh, it was okay" about his experience, that's what reviews are for.

However, if you do implement something like this, I'd strongly prefer the providers' comments on clients be kept hidden from clients. I don't think you'll get much honesty from the ladies otherwise. I have mixed feelings about whether or not I'd want clients comments on the ladies public or not.

Perhaps this should be an "opt in" feature...
Yes, I agree! But what does TCB stand for ... ?

G Originally Posted by GinaXXX
TCB=Taking Care of Business. Excellent skill here include quick communication with hobbyist, quick screening, attention to detail, professional all the way. Hobbyist always knows where he stands.

Poor TCB skills=failure to call back promptly, failure to contact the day of the meet, especially if there is a 2-call system in place, failure to confirm time and date. Any one of a number of things that can make things go wrong. Hobbyist is never sure if things are going to work out.
Cpalmson's Avatar
If it is simple with no comments allowed, I can see a usefulness behind the idea; however, I don't think P411 should be in the review business. We already have tons of sites that do that. I've been on P411 for a short period of time (thanks Gina) and I see it as a matchmaking tool for clients to find providers. The one good thing I've found out about P411 is that the providers are going to be top-notch and most likely won't need to screen me if I'm a P411 client. I like that. I just don't want to see it become a board where someone flames another. Gina, do what you think is best, but be prepared to pull the plug if there are unintended consequences.
I like TC's suggestion!

The only other thing I would add would be about the NC/NS....on both sides.

All last year I had no problems with p411 guys, but this year, several have contacted about appt. times then no further contact, or have set an appt up and last minute rescheduled several times. The world is changing.

Kisses, Lace Originally Posted by lacensatin
The only caution I would have relative to Lace's point is don't confuse "window shopper," "time waster," "rude" or "pain in the ass" with NC/NS

Her examples are poor form but not NCNS. The reason many on both sides view NCNS as inexcuable is because it really is: you have a confirmed appointment, you don't show but worse don't bother to call. Lace's offenses are not NCNS. Let's no throw all of them in together. Originally Posted by atlcomedy
The point I was trying to make with the last sentence of my comment was that the atmosphere on there is not what it was last year, not that those were all examples of NC/NS. Thank you.
I think it's not needed Gina. I also mail the most recent okay's for references. I was not aware that p411 was in any way liable for how a date went or for individual idiosyncrasies? p411 is the best verification site out there. It's not a review site, it is a portal.

I know I had a recent problem where a client member was sending me crap through p411. I hated asking you to deal with it, but the mails kept coming from p411 - not from his actual email. You and your staff handled it like you do everything - quickly and professionally.

After that, my only suggestion would be a block or ignore feature. Something where we can select certain people to not have access to our p411 page - so they can't use p411's mail server to harass/stalk.

You know what they say;

"If it ain't broke....."
swwaustin's Avatar
I'd hope it wouldn't open the door to "he said, she said" situations Originally Posted by uncle buck 50
I think it would be a terrible idea. Originally Posted by Fast Eddie
I think that you would be asking for trouble implementing a new system like that. Originally Posted by Tiffany Cums
I think this would be a disaster in practice. You are setting up a situation where your paying customers can have their reputations impacted by some subjective/YMMV items. Originally Posted by atlcomedy
Leave the ratings to the review boards.

Do what you do best with P411. Screen to make sure the members are legit and not a threat to other members. Originally Posted by cpi3000
It's not a review site, it is a portal. "If it ain't broke....." Originally Posted by babee
As a P411 member I like the simplicity of the system. It is a tool that I use paired with other review boards. I like that the main purpose of P411 is to establish legitimacy of its members, and leaves the often drama created ratings to back channels or review boards.