Question for Daddy

[+ deej]

For questions about reviews, write to daddy@daddysreviews.com

 

You might also want to read the FAQ at http://www.daddysreviews.com/faq.php

[Guest TNT Ted]

I doubt that writing to Daddy once again will do any good. He and I have already discussed (by email) the reviews in question, and his most recent reply (more than two months ago) was something like "it'll be published soon". I'm only posting this in the Lounge in the hopes that it'll elicit a more definitive response from him. And maybe to alert other readers that Daddy can be very selective in deciding which reviews to publish.

[RockHard]

It seems odd that Daddy would ignore your reviews, especially if there wasn't questionable content. Maybe he forgot that posting reviews, especially from long-time contributors, takes precedence over site-design work. Sometimes we creator-types get all juiced up with the creating, we forget the big-picture purpose of our efforts. (Hey, big Daddy, you work for us!) Or maybe Daddy doesn't like to be pushed into doing things. I'm a Leo, so god forbid you ask me to do drop everything and do something for you. Tis much better if you wait for me to offer. (Just don't hold your breath while you wait.)

 

I have no idea what Daddy's hold-up is and I sincerely doubt I've helped here. Just thought I'd chit-chat while you wait and wait and wait. :-)

[Guest Jawnny]

Over the past 5 years that I have been submitting reviews they have

all been posted.

 

Jawnny

[Louis]

I have posted two reviews.. one about two years back, and the one about my Winnipeg disaster...neither made it onto the review board.

The one review two years ago was very positive. So its not like I post bad reviews on people. One the other hand I have posted reviews on Tony Trapp's web site, and they were all accepted. Almost all of them were positive but for one.

Louis

[Guest TNT Ted]

Between December 2005 and June of this year I've submitted five reviews to you. Of the five, you've only published one. I've tried to be fair, impartial, and informative in what I write, but it seems that unlesss the review is a rave and glowing report, I'm wasting my time. Just what is your policy? Help me understand.

[+ deej]

>I'm only

>posting this in the Lounge in the hopes that it'll elicit a

>more definitive response from him.

 

No, you're grandstanding. Daddy does not address review issues in the MC. Never has, nor did Hooboy before him.

 

>And maybe to alert other

>readers that Daddy can be very selective in deciding which

>reviews to publish.

 

That's actually true. A variety of reasons cause reviews to be held. These are all spelled out in the FAQ, and none have anything to do with content. Most involve validation.

 

A review that does not pass the validation process will be held.

[Guest TNT Ted]

"No, you're grandstanding. Daddy does not address review issues in the MC."

 

Grandstanding? In what way? And how would I know that Daddy doesn't address review issues in the MC?

 

"A variety of reasons cause reviews to be held. These are all spelled out in the FAQ, and none have anything to do with content. Most involve validation."

 

And what constitutes validation? Is approval by the escort being reviewed a part of that validation?

[JT Brooklyn]

TNT...This is a strange occurance. To have a problem with more than One Submitted Review? I have written MANY Reviews over the years also.I Have not had a problem with any of them.

 

I'm sure different reasons hold some up, But I'm sure Daddy can address whatever issues for you.

[+ Lucky]

It seems that replies number 6 and 7 in this thread have been removed. In at least one of those posts, deej was offering to help track down the missing review. Now he has a new post saying that the OP is grandstanding.

 

Why is it so much to expect that Daddy would read the message center and occasionally answer a question here? When I met Daddy last year, he demonstrated to me that he was quite familiar with what goes on in the messge center and who the posters are.

 

I stopped posting reviews a long time ago when a highly positive review I wrote of David Young was spiked. I never got a reason, but it would have followed deej's scathing review of the same escort.

[+ deej]

>Why is it so much to expect

 

Feel free to have any expectations you like. Just don't confuse them with entitlements.

 

>I stopped posting reviews a long time ago when a highly

>positive review I wrote of David Young was spiked. I never got

>a reason, but it would have followed deej's scathing review of

>the same escort.

 

Hmmmm ... the 8 other reviews of him posted since seem to have gone through without a problem. What did you do to piss off Hooboy? }(

 

And boy is your definition of scathing out of whack. I actually said he was very sweet and very attractive.

[+ deej]

>And what constitutes validation? Is approval by the escort

>being reviewed a part of that validation?

 

Those sound like questions about review processing. Write to daddy@daddysreviews.com

 

Or read the FAQ.

[uwsman2]

I've also written numerous reviews (under a different screen name) and have never had any problem. I believe that every one of the dozens of reviews I've submitted since the Hooboy site first appeared has been posted, although sometimes it seemed like I was waiting forever after submitting a review of a highly-reviewed escort. And never was any review I submitted edited by "higher powers" before it appeared, whether it was negative, luke-warm, or positive. I've had at least one review that has appeared since the changeover in operations - in fact, come to think of it, perhaps two - with no incident.

[+ ArVaGuy]

I have to agree. I have written more reviews than I can count (under a different name as well) and never ever has there been a issue. Some do seem to take longer than others to post but that's been related to the number of reivews the escort may have in the que than anything else. In addition, in my communications with Daddy I have received responses (to those messages that warranted a response) without any problems.

 

The FAQ provides clear instructions (to me at least) on the review submission process. It's also clear (to me at least) that not every review is 100% guaranteed to be posted. These same policies exist on other web sites as well.

 

Looks to me as if the stars are coming into alignment for a new flame war to errupt over the management of this site. Perhaps some folks are just bored and need a little entertainment. Consequently the issue will go round and round with no resolution like it has time, after time, after time....

[augustman]

I have to agree with the majority. I have never had a review not get posted and I think I have over 20 of them now. I have had review that has come on line since the service switch. I would also agree instructions for submittion of a review is very clear and your best hope of resolving a specific question, is through communication to Daddy directly rather than on a message board. To the best of my knowledge the only reasons reviews are not posted is if the contact information to the escort or yourself is incorrect or that review itself is from a suspect source.

 

I do not understand the relevance of bringing up the fact that a moderator's review getting posted and someone else's review did not in this case. I believe Daddy will even consider posting an older review if you explain the situation. So if you did get the confirmation and its been over thirty days I would contact Daddy and I am sure he will respond. To be honest I have seen Daddy respond quickly when he needs to. My email address was inadvertantly listed as my handle in a review posted. Fortunately it was changed in less than a day after he was informed and no harm done.

 

I would hope we continue to keep criticism constuctive not belligerent

or nit picky. This site is still free.

[KY_TOP]

I have submitted over 80 reviews between the Hooboy site and this one. I've had every review I submitted posted but the main difference since Daddy took over from Hooboy is the time to get a review posted. With Hooboy I'd see my review up in 3-7 days, even when he had one of his notorious computer issues. At first Daddy was posting my reviews in about 2 weeks. Just before the switch over, that had stretched to 6-8 weeks, and then after a couple of e-mails asking about the review. It is very frustrating to spend a good deal of time to write a review and then see it take weeks to appear or never appear, as in your case. As many keep saying, this site is free but the review content that is given to this site also is free. My last review submitted here took about 2 weeks to be posted.

 

The 2nd change I've seen is what others have noted, an appearance of less review of the review by Daddy. With reviews that say almost nothing being posted and reviews by the same reviewer of the same escort whitin short time frames that would seem to violate the sites own rules, Benjamin Nicholas and Harlow being examples. I think this is due to Daddy automating part of the review process. I know automating part of the process was his goal, I assume he succeeded. But I do know he at least reads a few of the reviews because I've received e-mail comments from him about a few I have submitted.

[+ Lucky]

Well, deej, at least in this thread we can see that you like to rewrite history since your status as manager of the message center allows you to delete your own posts and reinsert new ones. Your review of David Young is no longer available, but I don't doubt that you called him sweet and attractive, because he is. But you cannot deny that your review was meant to be devastating if not "scathing." That's why it is the only review of him labeled "negative." I won't go in to David's side of the story here because I do thnk the last word should be that he is "sweet and attractive." And, it seems, retired.

[+ deej]

>Well, deej, at least in this thread we can see that you like

>to rewrite history since your status as manager of the message

>center allows you to delete your own posts and reinsert new

>ones.

 

In this case, I got moderated by the owner. You could easily have checked with the ACTUAL manager before jumping to incorrect conclusions based on incorrect assumptions, but we know that isn't your style.

 

>Your review of David Young is no longer available

 

How convenient for you to rewrite history around it.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Question for Deej

 

So now you aren't a manager here? This is what you said the last time the subject came up:

 

"I've been an admin since shortly after Hooboy's death because someone was needed as backup and I had the necessary tech skills and a history with the site."

 

Now that's a direct quote. So are you now saying that an "admin" is not a manager? As far as I know, Daddy is the other "admin" and he chooses not to participate in the MC. That would leave you the manager. Good for you!

 

Now I am sure you kept a copy of your review of David Young so why not post it and let history write itself.

[+ deej]

RE: Question for Deej

 

>So now you aren't a manager here? This is what you said the

>last time the subject came up:

>

>"I've been an admin since shortly after Hooboy's death because

>someone was needed as backup and I had the necessary tech

>skills and a history with the site."

>

>Now that's a direct quote.

 

Thank you. You've made my point. Admin is an administrative role in software programs. It has nothing to do with management. I am the backup admin should Daddy be unavailable when the moderators need to have an action performed.

 

You seem to want the world to fit your imagined model, and it just doesn't. Boo Fucking Hoo.

 

>Now I am sure you kept a copy of your review of David Young so

>why not post it and let history write itself.

 

History did its job five years ago.

 

Should the "Hooboy Archives" ever see the light of day, so be it. I'm not stepping into that ownership dispute, but I can summarize what my review said: he's wildly attractive, very sweet, has a great place, and nothing happened.

 

In your mind, that's scathing. In my mind, it's honest.

 

And yes, I've heard David's version(s) (three of them) from various sources. The most humorous was the one where I had a disfigurement causing a limp. I thought I left that at home that day.

 

You still haven't answered my question. What did you do to piss off Hooboy?

[+ Lucky]

RE: Question for Deej

 

Hooboy and I got along just fine. We weren't bosom buddies but that was never my goal.

 

My goal is to have fun here. As your old friend* woodlawn used to say, when posting here ceases to amuse me, I'll stop posting. In the meantime, I'll say what I have to say and you can read it or not. I can live with you being an admin and having that sexy yellow icon. Since daddy is the only other person to have one, I will continue to consider you as the manager of the message center, true or not.

 

*Okay, that might be re-writing history!

[+ Lucky]

RE: Admin Defined

 

Here are some definitions of admin offered from the contributors to the Urban Dictionary. No doubt some are tongue in cheek, but, not being an admin, I wouldn't know!

 

 

1. admin 27 up, 9 down

 

administration: some guy/girl in charge of a system normally computer.

Im on about the gaming admin:

1: good admin:

fair just and make good comments. kick team killers but if it was under very bad circumstaces will let you off.

Bad admin: kicks everyone that kills him, kicks somone with a just reason or point.basically kicks

oh and makes sure he has admin mod so that if somone kills him he can be invincible or smack them or something gay like that.

also have a habit of when a map is voted in byt 90% of the players will change it because he doesnt like it.

dont insult them though, hell kick and ban you

somemof them are horrible liers aswell claiming they work for valve and will have you arrested for swearing

 

<<GLA>> HoLsTeR_SmAsH: admin u gey fck learn to pay and quit with the grav screwing

 

<<GLA>> HoLsTeR_SmAsH was kicked.

 

by alex weeden May 19, 2004 email it

permalink: del.icio.us

Send to a friend

your email:

their email:

 

 

 

2. admin 16 up, 1 down

 

An administrator of a computer system, an online forum etc.

 

Stop it or I'll email the admin!

 

by Krazy Kraut Jan 18, 2004 email it

3. admin 18 up, 6 down

 

Short for administrator.

Someone who performs administrative duties on a network, server, forum, etc

 

Admins are known to use their powers for acts considered unsuitable after they gain them. Similar to a dictator. Admins often give administrative privlidges to their friends who are also morons and will also abuse the power.

 

This has created the situation we now have where there was once an admin who was okay but then he turned bad and turned his assholes friends into admins and they turned their assholes friends into admins etc

 

Therefore Every Admin is very much likely a moron and abuses their powers similar to a dictator.

 

Try and prove me wrong but every admin is a corrupt abusive jerkface

 

by jeromerr@hotmail.com australia May 4, 2005 email it

4. Admin 14 up, 3 down

 

Entrusted person, given responsibilities by the codemonkey

Also see responsible, mature and smite

 

All deserving in their own rights!

 

Admins are the police of Project Rockstar. Just nicer and fairer!

 

by colin miles Feb 24, 2004 email it

5. admin 10 up, 5 down

 

The operator of a server. normally bnet or cs servers

 

<<Mk.YuRi kills teammate>>

<<Mk.zOmbIE dies to teamate>>

Mk.zOmbIE: OMG YOU FUCKING BS LOSER LEAVE BEFORE THE ADMIN BANS YOU

 

<<Mk.zOmbIE kicked>>

<<Mk.zOmbIE banned for 693 days>>

<<Mk.zOmbIE IP checked and banned>>

<<Mk.zOmbIE user deleted>>

 

Mk.YuRi: fucking knob

 

by G[r]ey Dec 17, 2004 email it

6. Admin 8 up, 4 down

 

The word admin, or administration can be used to describe tedious or time consuming tasks.

 

 

Beer admin, Girlfreind admin, porn admin, parent admin.

 

by Ninja Jul 18, 2003 email it

7. admin 7 up, 10 down

 

Admin: Also known as Administrator.

 

A person who pwns you at everything. No matter how much you try, an admin will always win.

 

I am teh admin, and i will pwn joo.

 

by Ash Hender Lancashire, England, United Kingdom Jul 10, 2005 email it

8. admin 14 up, 23 down

 

a loser who spends too much time defining words on the urban dictionary, has little or no life. basicly a one minute man, with a vagina deeper than a golf bag. likes to get on his knees and smile like a donut. will tell girls anything to get into their pants, which has never and will never happen.

 

haha, look at that 'admin' trying to pick up those girls, he has NO chance.

 

by Zach Feb 24, 2005 email it

[+ deej]

RE: Admin Defined

 

> My goal is to have fun here.!

 

Will you be starting any time soon?

 

So far, all you've done is hike your leg on Daddy, TotallyOz, TampaYankee, Ace Bannon, Butch Harris, and everyone else who has ever operated a website.

[Guest TNT Ted]

I'm the one that started this thread and guess what? I just got an email today (not from Daddy) telling me that the one published review (out of the five that I submitted to this site) has now been pulled. See http://www.daddysreviews.com/area.php?loc=62926&who=tom_palmsprings. Mine was review number 4 which, to my knowledge, had been there for the last several months

 

I've obviously pissed somebody off.

 

To Daddy: I still haven't heard from you by email. I still don't understand what policy I "refuse to follow". Would someone please enlighten me?

[IceFireWizard]

I'd suggest two things:

 

First: Get over it

Second: Move on. Life is too short