Disabled Ability to Reply to Old Topics

[RadioRob]

FYI...  we've had several new people register and reply to some really old topics most likely not catching the fact they're 5-20 years old.  

As a result, we have disabled the ability to reply to posts that have not had replies for two years.  This should not effect 99% of you, but just documenting the change.  

[+ purplekow]

Great move

 

[marylander1940]

24 minutes ago, RadioRob said:

FYI...  we've had several new people register and reply to some really old topics most likely not catching the fact they're 5-20 years old.  

As a result, we have disabled the ability to reply to posts that have not had replies for two years.  This should not effect 99% of you, but just documenting the change.  

Makes sense!

I would politely suggest (if it's not too complicated) allowing folks to bump old threads in the Deli about a specific provider.

How many threads do we need about Avi Dar, Simon Dexter, Austin Wolf, etc.? I recently had a thread about Czech Jock bumped out of the blue after 2 years of inactivity... I couldn't read it why because I have the poster who bumped it on ignore but others posted later saying they also had a bad experience with him while a new poster said he was a great masseur. 

 

 

[RadioRob]

If we find it problematic later, I can disable it in specific forums. 

The new review database will help reduce multiple records per provider also given that record will sync to the Deli and allow for things like name change tracking, etc. Ultimately we would have one record per provider period long term. 

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, RadioRob said:

If we find it problematic later, I can disable it in specific forums. 

The new review database will help reduce multiple records per provider also given that record will sync to the Deli and allow for things like name change tracking, etc. Ultimately we would have one record per provider period long term. 

 

Thank you!

[MikeBiDude]

1 hour ago, marylander1940 said:

would politely suggest (if it's not too complicated) allowing folks to bump old threads in the Deli about a specific provider.

On the other hand @marylander1940 how fresh and relevant are two year old posts about a provider? Especially if it’s already full of “bumps” and little first person information?

[rvwnsd]

25 minutes ago, MikeBiDude said:

On the other hand @marylander1940 how fresh and relevant are two year old posts about a provider? Especially if it’s already full of “bumps” and little first person information?

Not to mention ads that change names, links that become broken, etc. 

 

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, MikeBiDude said:

On the other hand @marylander1940 how fresh and relevant are two year old posts about a provider? Especially if it’s already full of “bumps” and little first person information?

Many of us have mentioned meeting providers 2 or 3 years ago. Gman for instance has a long memory and loves to recall meeting X, Y, and Z 10 years ago.

 

56 minutes ago, rvwnsd said:

Not to mention ads that change names, links that become broken, etc. 

 

or guys who create new screen names, etc. 

There have been several warnings about it and it's usually not a good sign when a provider changes his name after being criticized on here or having negative reviews. 

Again, it's simply a suggestion. 

[Buddy15]

14 hours ago, RadioRob said:

FYI...  we've had several new people register and reply to some really old topics most likely not catching the fact they're 5-20 years old.  

As a result, we have disabled the ability to reply to posts that have not had replies for two years.  This should not effect 99% of you, but just documenting the change.  

Will this apply to posts in the Legacy Gallery section?  I'm asking because I notice that sometimes an old thread will be resurrected and some great pics will be posted..

[+ poolboy48220]

I know replying to old posts bothers other people but I've never been bothered by it. Makes more sense to have one thread to me, rather than looking through multiple threads about the same guy.

[+ Lucky]

If you are talking about limiting threads about providers to 2 years, fine.

But otherwise, there is a lot of history in our older threads and they should be fair game for discussion. Anything else is an attempt to bury the past, as well as the contributions of long time members. I would rather have it looked at on a case by case activity.

[marylander1940]

51 minutes ago, Lucky said:

If you are talking about limiting threads about providers to 2 years, fine.

But otherwise, there is a lot of history in our older threads and they should be fair game for discussion. Anything else is an attempt to bury the past, as well as the contributions of long time members. I would rather have it looked at on a case by case activity.

it's nice to get a glimpse of the past and find posts by others who are no longer with us like @bigvalboy and my friend @KY_TOP among others and specially the few times @Guy Fawkes intervened. 

I do understand the reason why some threads after 2 years of inactivity shouldn't be bumped back out of the blue but what if the subject comes back to the news. 

[marylander1940]

2 hours ago, poolboy48220 said:

I know replying to old posts bothers other people but I've never been bothered by it. Makes more sense to have one thread to me, rather than looking through multiple threads about the same guy.

I enjoy when folks (including myself) search before posting. 

Agreed, that's why I think (unless is too troublesome) the Deli should be excluded from this policy. 

So far all decisions by the mgt. have been Solomonic to say the least and even when asked by PM about new ideas my reply was always "do what you want, we'll learn to deal with the new style, format, etc."

[BuffaloKyle]

My input is the legacy gallery should be excluded. If someone bumps and adds new pics to an older thread it's not really causing any problems. I am with most everyone else on the Deli as well so we don't end up having so many threads on one provider. 2 years is not really that long between replies on a provider's thread especially considering the pandemic where if someone was on hiatus and now is back I'd like to see past comments on them still. How about maybe extending the time till it's locked to 3 years? 

[+ Coolwave35]

6 hours ago, BuffaloKyle said:

My input is 

Hey Rob. Is there room to move the needle on this particular change based on us sharing our opinions on this change or is it a done deal? 

[RadioRob]

Nothing is ever "set in stone".  Anyone is welcome to share an opinion, however there needs to be a compelling case where it's actually causing a problem.  Before making the change, I pulled the stats and we're not talking big numbers of posts that would be effected.  

[RadioRob]

Also to understand how this works… it looks at the LAST REPLY date and if it’s greater than two years, it does not allow a reply. The topic can be from 20 years ago, but as long as there is at least one reply every two years, the thread will remain “open” indefinitely. 

[mike carey]

I applaud this initiative. I'm not entirely convinced that two years is the right gap but that's a detail. Most topics that are general or not linked to a specific event or time will probably generate more comments within the time limit. For the most part, I don't find revivals too much of a problem but more often than not there is no continuity in the discussion between the old and new parts, so nothing is lost by starting a new thread. What irks me is those comments that revive a ten or more year old thread as if the previous comment was made the day before. If the history in an old thread is important to the new comment someone wants to post they can always start their new thread with a link to the old one.

I started a thread on Australian elections about five years ago and there is usually something that happens that will prompt me to return to it every year or so (I try to limit my new comments to things that are likely to be of interest to others here, or which point to a difference in political systems and attitudes between Australia and the US). As virtually no one comments on it except shortly after I have posted, I'll just make sure I keep it alive until it ceases to serve a purpose. As there's a federal election between now and next May it probably has two and a half years of life left in it.

[rn901]

How far back will we look at name changes? For example, a provider may have had a different name back in the days of men4rentnow or rentboy but then changed several years later while on rentmen? Is that old name still to follow them? Reviews for old names from men4rentnow/rentboy were not carried over on Daddy's Reviews for profiles with new different names on rentmen. This also poses the question, should a provider still be judged for some client's experience from 8 years ago when they were under a different name? A provider may be a completely different person than they were several years ago, as we all mature and reach new wisdom as we develop through our 20's. Someone at 32 is not the same person they were at 20. Furthermore, they may have had some outlier client experiences from years ago that don't come close to resembling the experiences of their clients today or there may be information left out from that outlier experience that happened years ago. Studies have looked at demographics of providers in this kind of work and found that the overwhelming majority don't last more than two years, at least half probably don't last a year. The data on this site seems to confirm such a timeline of a provider if the data suggests two years is an appropriate threshold. Two years of no activity on a thread seems plenty sufficient, three years wouldn't be a terrible compromise either. Personally, I believe if someone has been doing this long term they shouldn't be judged by complaints that occurred years ago under a different name and especially if such complaints were not met with a response from the provider at that time to offer their side of the story. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by rn901

[KeepItReal]

3 hours ago, rn901 said:

How far back will we look at name changes? For example, a provider may have had a different name back in the days of men4rentnow or rentboy but then changed several years later while on rentmen? Is that old name still to follow them? Reviews for old names from men4rentnow/rentboy were not carried over on Daddy's Reviews for profiles with new different names on rentmen. This also poses the question, should a provider still be judged for some client's experience from 8 years ago when they were under a different name? A provider may be a completely different person than they were several years ago, as we all mature and reach new wisdom as we develop through our 20's. Someone at 32 is not the same person they were at 20. Furthermore, they may have had some outlier client experiences from years ago that don't come close to resembling the experiences of their clients today or there may be information left out from that outlier experience that happened years ago. Studies have looked at demographics of providers in this kind of work and found that the overwhelming majority don't last more than two years, at least half probably don't last a year. The data on this site seems to confirm such a timeline of a provider if the data suggests two years is an appropriate threshold. Two years of no activity on a thread seems plenty sufficient, three years wouldn't be a terrible compromise either. Personally, I believe if someone has been doing this long term they shouldn't be judged by complaints that occurred years ago under a different name and especially if such complaints were not met with a response from the provider at that time to offer their side of the story. 

I agree with much of this. Many companions change names over time and some of them even mature into great companions. But in my experience, most of them don't change all that much. And I would rather know going into a meet. It is also important to me who provided the comment on the provider - there are known and trusted frequent posters whose judgment I have grown to trust. Knowing more is better than being ignorant of past behavior.  It is up to me to decide if I want to meet with the companion and take into account that people may change over time...but I would like to make an  informed decision. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by KeepItReal

[rn901]

Then we shouldn't be shocked that most leave the business around two years or less. Such short retention also means a decline in overall quality long term. In any other job, one wouldn't want to have complaints from several years ago used against them permanently. Who would want to stick around for that?

Edited October 13, 2021 by rn901

[+ Lucky]

12 hours ago, RadioRob said:

Nothing is ever "set in stone".  Anyone is welcome to share an opinion, however there needs to be a compelling case where it's actually causing a problem.  Before making the change, I pulled the stats and we're not talking big numbers of posts that would be effected.  

Then why enact a new rule? There is no problem to fix.

[+ Coolwave35]

37 minutes ago, Lucky said:

Then why enact a new rule? There is no problem to fix.

I affectionately blame my dear real life friend @JoeMendoza for this lol 

in the same vein that I blame Obama when my ice cream man is late. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Coolwave35

[+ MysticMenace]

8 minutes ago, Coolwave35 said:

I affectionately blame my dear real life friend @JoeMendoza for this lol 

in the same vein that I blame Obama when my ice cream man is late. 

[+ MysticMenace]

Okay, fine. I may have been known to have revived 10-year old, heck, 20-year old threads, and I see nothing wrong with that. I also don't see anything wrong with putting some things in place to prevent reviving potentially outdated threads. At the least, it would make me think twice if I actually want to reply to that really old thread, or just to create a new one and just reference pieces of or a link to the old thread.

Change can just bring about different kinds of reactions, but I say don't knock it till we try it. Let's see how this new feature pans out, and I'm sure the topic can be revisited if the majority still feels some kinda way about it.