Review: Threesome Fun with Sativa Slims

Well, since it's not a "real review" as in, my review counter hasn't gone up.

I'm just going to take the liberty to post here and give me opinion.

Is it really that hard to change the rules? So she's a woman...and? I'm fine with being locked out of forums here because I'm a girl, I'm fine with the distinction between provider and client. It makes perfect sense.

To suggest that females simply can't be hobbyists or see providers though... and then to sort of undercut their opinion (yeah, yeah, people can see it until it falls off the forum and is lost forever because it's not showing up on my profile!) makes no sense.

This shouldn't be a "boy's club"; it should be a place for people, regardless of their gender, to review escorts. It should be a safe space for crying out loud.

How hard is it to change this rule, or even just make an exception? And this isn't even about me. I see so many people from this site who will never review me, that's fine, w/e, I don't need reviews.

It's about someone who this site was created for (a hobbyist) being told that their opinion isn't as valid because they are female.

"Well, if you're husband wrote the review..." Really, what is this 1920? How can you even tell what someone's gender is online? If Sweet Tea had never disclosed her gender, you'd have no idea. Hell, you STILL have no idea... it's the internet.

Reality check. This is going to be lost on just about everyone though.

And don't come back and tell me it's just a convenience to assume that only men will be hobbyists and only girls will be providers... get off it. It's pretty easy to tell if someone is a provider or not on here. That "view posts" button is your friend if you have any doubts.

In fact, don't come back with anything because I'm right point blank, and I don't argue with people who still use Yahoo mail.

lulz...

Well, since it's not a "real review" as in, my review counter hasn't gone up. Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

Firstly, your review counter is not the indication of whether something is or is not a review. No one said this was not a real review. In fact, the moderator explained that reviews (obviously the moderator considers it a review since he called it one) by females must be moved to Co-Ed. That is not an invalidation of the review or the reviewer, nor is it a slap to the provider.

Secondly, why not set up your showcase and include links to this thread? That is one place where you can directly link to reviews, both on ECCIE and to other sites as well (such as TER, BigDoggie, etc.).

Is it really that hard to change the rules? So she's a woman...and? Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

... and women are not supposed to have access to the Men's Lounge, which is a benefit of Premium Access when reviews are "approved" in the Independent sub-forum. (The approval is for premium access. It is not an approval of the review's worthiness to be considered a review. Since she is a woman and is not supposed to have PA, there is nothing to approve. The moderator, by not giving her PA has NOT dis-approved her review.)

To suggest that females simply can't be hobbyists or see providers ... Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

No such suggestion has been made.

This shouldn't be a "boy's club"; it should be a place for people, regardless of their gender, to review escorts. Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

Sweet Tea, regardless of her gender, has posted a review. No prohibition has occurred.

It's about someone who this site was created for (a hobbyist) being told that their opinion isn't as valid because they are female. Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

No one has told her that her opinion isn't as valid as a man's opinion.

Reality check. This is going to be lost on just about everyone though.
...
In fact, don't come back with anything because I'm right point blank, Originally Posted by Sativa Slims

Oh... ok. Nevermind.

Guys, lets stay on topic. This thread is a review of Sativa, not ECCIE policy toward ladies writing a review. When I have time I will further explain our policy. Until then - the wise sage PornoDave hit the nail on the head.

Thank y'all for getting back on topic.

Firstly, your review counter is not the indication of whether something is or is not a review. No one said this was not a real review. In fact, the moderator explained that reviews (obviously the moderator considers it a review since he called it one) by females must be moved to Co-Ed. That is not an invalidation of the review or the reviewer, nor is it a slap to the provider.

Secondly, why not set up your showcase and include links to this thread? That is one place where you can directly link to reviews, both on ECCIE and to other sites as well (such as TER, BigDoggie, etc.).



... and women are not supposed to have access to the Men's Lounge, which is a benefit of Premium Access when reviews are "approved" in the Independent sub-forum. (The approval is for premium access. It is not an approval of the review's worthiness to be considered a review. Since she is a woman and is not supposed to have PA, there is nothing to approve. The moderator, by not giving her PA has NOT dis-approved her review.)



No such suggestion has been made.



Sweet Tea, regardless of her gender, has posted a review. No prohibition has occurred.



No one has told her that her opinion isn't as valid as a man's opinion.



Oh... ok. Nevermind. Originally Posted by ufriend2912

Gee, it's all so clear now.

Thanks for the mansplination, slick.

Sativa, I made it clear that the thread is a review - not a policy discussion. I am about to answer questions and we can have a policy discussion in that thread. In the mean time - Stay on topic!!!!

I would like to know where this is going to or has been addressed because I have some input I would like to share.

Me too. Don't you worry Sativa UF is already penciled in for a whuppin in my lil black book.

FWIW (and probably not much), but I don't "get it" either.

As a verified provider, I have opted out of Powder Room. Once ECCIE finally split "Infoshare" from Powder Room I didnt want Powder Room. I wanted Alerts.

Therefore there is a functionality that can be utilized to include ALL clients. There is the capability to implement a client subforum that doesn't require "private access", just as there is a difference between Powder Room and Infoshare.

Even though Sweet took the time to write the review, I dont think I'd link it anywhere unless it was to point out the blatant inequity practiced here. I dont believe in promoting well..bullshyte.

Thank you for the review Sweet. It is appreciated.

UF is already penciled in for a whuppin in my lil black book. Originally Posted by babee

Please Babee, just give me a good tongue-lashing. I desire, err I mean, deserve it.

I am closing this because yall can't seem to keep this on topic. CLOSED