Bad Review Blackmail
- Thread starter YouVantOption
- Start date
Over the past 10 years, I have been extremely fortunate to have had only a few encounters that I would have given a bad review to. Unless there is a compelling reason to mention it on the board, I just forget about it.
I know that negative reviews provide valuable info in cases where there is a clear ripoff or an SP is so outrageous that you can't let it go. For me, one was an SP who smelled so bad that I could not even complete the act. (This was years ago...no one current). I did post about that; if an SP and I don't click, I give it the benefit of the doubt and keep silent.
As for review blackmail, that's horrible.
I know that negative reviews provide valuable info in cases where there is a clear ripoff or an SP is so outrageous that you can't let it go. For me, one was an SP who smelled so bad that I could not even complete the act. (This was years ago...no one current). I did post about that; if an SP and I don't click, I give it the benefit of the doubt and keep silent.
As for review blackmail, that's horrible.
Yes
Yes. Think it thru.
Does joining one board mean you HAVE to join another. Does advertising on one board mean you HAVE to advertise on another?
Reviewer decides he does not want to be linked any longer with another board and pulls his review. So be it.
Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:
Yes. Think it thru.
Does joining one board mean you HAVE to join another. Does advertising on one board mean you HAVE to advertise on another?
Reviewer decides he does not want to be linked any longer with another board and pulls his review. So be it.
You REALLY want them at your house for a full month? 24/7, day-in, day-out? Remember, they're both woman so, probably both have a "nagging" tendency and both have PMS...bumfie said:Yes, one more thing, Jessy. Either send Janet and Claudia to my house for the next month, free of charge, or I will say terrible, terrible things about you....
Just kidding... I'll take the same combo, but only 1 night. More would kill me!
Simple....
Anyone with at least two braincells understands what benefit providers get from reviews.
That being said, the whole process of reviewing, by definition, belongs strictly and addresses itself strictly to clients. It's like a consumer review, end of story.
As stated earlier, clients are under no obligation to make publicity for providers.
Anyone with at least two braincells understands what benefit providers get from reviews.
That being said, the whole process of reviewing, by definition, belongs strictly and addresses itself strictly to clients. It's like a consumer review, end of story.
As stated earlier, clients are under no obligation to make publicity for providers.
His business. He's under no obligation to provide justification. Clients don't owe more to SP's than the agreed donation, respect and courtesy, neither do they have to be associated to both boards or any board at all.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:
Last edited:
Agreed!....and if a client writes a review and then later deletes it, its his right and his business. Why would he have to justify it?ZM said:
I dont review everyone I see either...and to say that I need to be a credible reviewer is absurd!!
I've written reviews on the boards that providers have copied and used on their personal websites. They didnt ask permission or even notify me that the reviews would be used. I guess its public domain once its posted.
On my last trip I stopped calling one agency because I did not like the way the sessions were going with their SP's. It was obvious that they were being told that I was Banger, a merb reviewer. Though the GFE services were there, I could tell that the session was a programmed one for their review....ah....no thanks!
I called another agency and I had much more natural, better encounters with their SP's...cause they didnt associate me as Banger on merb and were more focused on having a good time with me than the review they wanted to get....
Members who use their board handles to get better mileage are fooling themselves if they think its helping them have a better session...Calling an SP is a "sure" thing....all you have to be is polite , clean, and respectful and most Montreal providers will make the session enjoyable. How much eaisier do you want it???
I write reviews to re-live the moment, entertain with a good story, a ego boost, and as a thank you to the providers to promote other respectable clients to see them. Also I've gotten many tips from other reviews on merb and its a way of giving back to the community and encouraging other members to share their experiences.
Banger
Last edited:
Nothing impressive about stating the plain truth, I know.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:ZM,
(1) You use to impress me much more ...
To some extent you did, by asking reviewers to justify why they would remove a review.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:(2) And who said differently ?
It has to do with a misconception that is being propagated on this thread. Moreover, I'm not convinced that there's much to remember in this specific instance.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:(3) What this declaration as to do with the main subject of this thread
We are talking about blackmailling, you know about the malicious
manipulations of this business, or have you forgot about these already ?
Finally, I already expressed my views on the issue of blackmail; not yet convinced that there's something to write home about. Also pointed out that the premises, as expressed by the thread starter, who's asking readers to accept his summary of the evidence, left his stories open to interpretation: I submitted a likely scenario.
It's an expression, Jessy, don't get all bent out of shape.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:Hold on, maybe you are trying to tell that these exist only in our ...
2 cells brains
Pielfiering, thieving, or whatever you prefer calling it, provided that there are formal agreements between competitors that regulate and sanction such practice, otherwise it's just business as usual. Nothing new nor specific to the escorting business.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:Maybe you can tell this to the lady part of my team that was approch by
someone from the board and proposed her her glowing first review in the
business if she was moving to another agency
Laugh it up sweet pie.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:Where that one was leading from ???
However, we both laught at this one !
Not sure I got this one.Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:P.S. Oups ! Just for the form, I forgot to mention he would
have still get his rights the write the review ...
Banger,banger said:Agreed!....and if a client writes a review and then later deletes it, its his right and his business. Why would he have to justify it?
I dont review everyone I see either...and to say that I need to be a credible reviewer is absurd!!
I've written reviews on the boards that providers have copied and used on their personal websites. They didnt ask permission or even notify me that the reviews would be used. I guess its public domain once its posted.
On my last trip I stopped calling one agency because I did not like the way the sessions were going with their SP's. It was obvious that they were being told that I was Banger, a merb reviewer. Though the GFE services were there, I could tell that the session was a programmed one for their review....ah....no thanks!
I called another agency and I had much more natural, better encounters with their SP's...cause they didnt associate me as Banger on merb and were more focused on having a good time with me than the review they wanted to get....
Members who use their board handles to get better mileage are fooling themselves if they think its helping them have a better session...Calling an SP is a "sure" thing....all you have to be is polite , clean, and respectful and most Montreal providers will make the session enjoyable. How much eaisier do you want it???
I write reviews to re-live the moment, entertain with a good story, a ego boost, and as a thank you to the providers to promote other respectable clients to see them. Also I've gotten many tips from other reviews on merb and its a way of giving back to the community and encouraging other members to share their experiences.
Banger
You're raising a valid point.
My own experience confirms that there's little to nothing to gain and sometimes a bit to lose from disclosing the client's handle. Nonetheless there is a difference, one perhaps that can be felt as a pressure to perform, i.e. to execute such and such sex act in succession (a bit like figure skating
).I rarely disclose my handle but sometimes I do for practical reasons and other times the SP is able to make the connection by herself. In any case, the impression I described above grew stronger as my handle gained visibility on the board.
Last edited:
ZM said:
Hello all,banger said:Agreed!....and if a client writes a review and then later deletes it, its his right and his business. Why would he have to justify it?
I dont review everyone I see either...and to say that I need to be a credible reviewer is absurd!!
I've written reviews on the boards that providers have copied and used on their personal websites. They didnt ask permission or even notify me that the reviews would be used. I guess its public domain once its posted.
On my last trip I stopped calling one agency because I did not like the way the sessions were going with their SP's. It was obvious that they were being told that I was Banger, a merb reviewer. Though the GFE services were there, I could tell that the session was a programmed one for their review....ah....no thanks!
I called another agency and I had much more natural, better encounters with their SP's...cause they didnt associate me as Banger on merb and were more focused on having a good time with me than the review they wanted to get....
Members who use their board handles to get better mileage are fooling themselves if they think its helping them have a better session...Calling an SP is a "sure" thing....all you have to be is polite , clean, and respectful and most Montreal providers will make the session enjoyable. How much eaisier do you want it???
I write reviews to re-live the moment, entertain with a good story, a ego boost, and as a thank you to the providers to promote other respectable clients to see them. Also I've gotten many tips from other reviews on merb and its a way of giving back to the community and encouraging other members to share their experiences.
Banger
I am not jumping in here much because ZM and Banger seem to be saying just about all I can think of myself. With all due respects to Jessy XXX, you know I love you sweetie, they are generally right on as far as they go. I don't think reviewing belongs strictly to the client. I understand the angle ZM is trying to focus on, but because of the effects of the review the truth is broader than that. I think there is also an obligation to be as fair and considerate of the SP as possible without losing accuracy and avoiding both favoritism or prejudice. And Banger: his last paragraph couldn't say it better.
As for stealing SPs, yeah, ethically it smells to high heaven. So what do you think the "profit-motive" does, especially in the hobby which doesn't have the same legal support as other businesses. Wrong or not, stealing ladies is the color of this business. All any owner can do is make working for them preferable.
Good luck,
Korbel
Last edited:
ZM said:
Ah ha, ZM's identity revealed,,, Garner Ted Armstrong (who fell from grace) the son of Hebert W. Armstrong.
Readers (and there were many - The Plain Truth, peaked at a monthly distribution of more than eight million) will recall the overuse of the exclamation mark in the articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Plain_Truth
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/armstrong.htm
What.................
Perhaps we do not have any doubts.
Please refer to my "so-so review" and my bad experience. None was ever posted. Please reference or retract.
Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:Come on, who else will try to tell me I don't get that
the reviews are use to provide some occupation.
You really think I am st**** or what ?
I do agree with ZM and banger, Eastender is most likely
the only one who admitted had a bad experience
cause he did a so-so review.
Perhaps we do not have any doubts.
Please refer to my "so-so review" and my bad experience. None was ever posted. Please reference or retract.
Jessy,Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:With all due respect to you-us, not much are understanding
a single word of what the subject is about. Read the thread
and you will just understand what as to be understand ...
about blackmailling people
We are still talking on subject...we're just not attaching the "blackmail" word to it....
You cant accuse a member for using his handle for leverage or "blackmail" when the agencies reveal to their own SP's a members handle and reviewer status. Its a two way street....we're both using the "review" to gain an advantage.
Banger
Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:With all due respect to you-us, not much are understanding
a single word of what the subject is about. Read the thread
and you will just understand what as to be understand ...
about blackmailling people
Hello Jessy,
Yes, many have responded on that issue. But as with all threads there are always branches on the issue that members divert into. I put my two cents into the main issue long ago.
Regards,
Korbel
A little further........
Jessy,
Just guessing here but I think the point Ziggy and Banger having been trying to put across to you is that to discuss the idea of blackmail in reviewing is meaningless unless you define clearly the concept of reviews and reviewing. The problem starts when clients pervert the process or predicate when it is clearly unwarranted. By this I mean that reviews and reviewing by nature must have the following in order to qualify as a review:
(a) a complete lack of obligation on the part of the client to disclose their dealings, neither in general terms nor in reference to specific providers.
(b) an understanding by the agency, sp or independent that reviews must be independent of all external influences.
Any expression of an encounter which transgresses (a) or (b) above ceases to be a review and becomes, let's call it, a “shill with benefits” subject to negotiation or coercion just as one might expect of any business arrangement. Your point seems to be “So what! Yeah I knew that! Big deal – review or shill with benefits. What's the difference?” There is a big difference. Talk about advantage and you are not talking about reviewing anymore. You are talking about a totally different animal. The conclusion is inescapable then. If a client or agency has perverted the process there is no review, period. This helps to define the problem more clearly. What you are dealing with now is shilling (let's call it what it is), with its corollaries: recruitment to shill, shills for sale, coercion to shill. That's it. Agency raiding I think just clouds the issue but perhaps a line or two is crossed here also.
Now you may not feel it is worthwhile to make this distinction but I will say that if this were clearer in the minds of all members and kept in mind in all discussions on this board, we just might see a greater value attributed to members who become known as true reviewers. At least it defines the ethical boundaries for all of us.
Jessy,
Just guessing here but I think the point Ziggy and Banger having been trying to put across to you is that to discuss the idea of blackmail in reviewing is meaningless unless you define clearly the concept of reviews and reviewing. The problem starts when clients pervert the process or predicate when it is clearly unwarranted. By this I mean that reviews and reviewing by nature must have the following in order to qualify as a review:
(a) a complete lack of obligation on the part of the client to disclose their dealings, neither in general terms nor in reference to specific providers.
(b) an understanding by the agency, sp or independent that reviews must be independent of all external influences.
Any expression of an encounter which transgresses (a) or (b) above ceases to be a review and becomes, let's call it, a “shill with benefits” subject to negotiation or coercion just as one might expect of any business arrangement. Your point seems to be “So what! Yeah I knew that! Big deal – review or shill with benefits. What's the difference?” There is a big difference. Talk about advantage and you are not talking about reviewing anymore. You are talking about a totally different animal. The conclusion is inescapable then. If a client or agency has perverted the process there is no review, period. This helps to define the problem more clearly. What you are dealing with now is shilling (let's call it what it is), with its corollaries: recruitment to shill, shills for sale, coercion to shill. That's it. Agency raiding I think just clouds the issue but perhaps a line or two is crossed here also.
Now you may not feel it is worthwhile to make this distinction but I will say that if this were clearer in the minds of all members and kept in mind in all discussions on this board, we just might see a greater value attributed to members who become known as true reviewers. At least it defines the ethical boundaries for all of us.
Miss Jessy xxx MtlSexCity said:Oh la la ! That one, you pulled it out of a hat !
Just forget all about it.
Goodnite and good luck !
Well don't get mad. I wasn't taking a shot at you. If you disagree with how I interpreted the following then read my comments and give me your take on it. This is what I was getting from this statement:
So what I get from this is that a few in the business are redefining how everyone should review. Is this correct?
Also:
That difference is what I have been trying to point out here and I think a couple of the guys. The concept of blackmail may be how the thread started but perhaps the answer lies in how we define reviews and reviewing. Look, you can go round and round on the topic of coercion in the business. You can talk about agency raiding and threats to ensure customer loyalty but unless you take this discussion further like into defining reviews and reviewing the whole thing is simply going to turn into a big venting session. You aren't going to make a dent in it. That was my point and I think, theirs. By defining reviews and reviewing in the context which Ziggy did then the concept of blackmailing in reviews can be seen more clearly for what it actually is. It's not an answer to the unscrupulous practices engaged in by some members and agency owners but at least it brings a little more light onto the topic.
Last edited:
It happens and will continue to happen.
When I first became a member here and did not have any reviews a senior well respected poster (who has long since left the board) had asked me for a discount in exchange for a positive review.
I told him that my rates were already reasonable and that I would prefer an honest review than a bribed positive one. People will try to save money. Some people are vindictive. Other people are not. Some reviews are written too soon and there is the rose coloured glasses effect. Some are written so long after the memory of the details is less than perfect.
All reviews must be taken with a grain of salt.
Ronnie,
Naughtylady
When I first became a member here and did not have any reviews a senior well respected poster (who has long since left the board) had asked me for a discount in exchange for a positive review.
I told him that my rates were already reasonable and that I would prefer an honest review than a bribed positive one. People will try to save money. Some people are vindictive. Other people are not. Some reviews are written too soon and there is the rose coloured glasses effect. Some are written so long after the memory of the details is less than perfect.
All reviews must be taken with a grain of salt.
Ronnie,
Naughtylady
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
- Poll
