Consider new-escort announcements

[VaHawk]

>Junior, in case I haven't made it clear yet, I don't give a

>rat's ass about you, your opinions, your ideas or anything

>else connected with you. It amuses me (at times) to provide a

>counterpoint to the hooker-centric drivel that you post here

>in order to fatten your wallet and your ego. You're not one

>of my peers, you're just my entertainment.

>

>Now go see if you can find someone who will pay to fuck you.

>Or if you can't, just go fuck yourself.

 

 

Woodlawn, you already made this clown's colors run, so do yourself a favor, and don't allow him to take you down to his level!

:o Your intellect, logic, intelligence, and over all knowledge left this dude in the dust, many, many, many posts ago!

[Bilbo]

Personally, without being asked, I swore a year or more ago that any business coming my way which found me through this site - I would give 15% of it to the site as thanks. So far, I've only found one guy who fit the description, but I was quick about it. If some of the more popular escort/masseurs would do the same, especially the twinks, that would please me.

And I think that "we" "should" charge anyone who uses the service this post is talking about, if it is instituted.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>Personally, without being asked, I swore a year or more ago

>that any business coming my way which found me through this

>site - I would give 15% of it to the site as thanks. So far,

>I've only found one guy who fit the description, but I was

>quick about it. If some of the more popular escort/masseurs

>would do the same, especially the twinks, that would please

>me.

 

Me too (I don't mean the exact percentage as the idea that escorts should get into the habit of giving something back). If my perception is correct, that considerably fewer escorts contribute to this site than benefit from it, I think that's unfortunate and short-sighted. I'm not sure why you say "especially the twinks," unless you consider them more likely to take for granted the benefits, which may well be true. But my point is that escorts have a lot to lose if what, using the term loosely, the "ecology" of this site suffers, which is why it IS our problem if clients aren't finding them useful, and we have more to lose if solutions aren't found. woodlawn doesn't have a stake in the site getting better, which is why he thinks the reviews should be eliminated. I don't know if he actually thinks HooBoy would have any interest in keeping the message center going if he shut down the reviews -- the impression I've gotten from HooBoy is that if he were going to shut down one or the other, it wouldn't be the reviews -- but I do know that we're ulimately the ones who lose the most if the site closes. "We" being the escorts who have earned a good reputation here. If the review site closes, of course, so do the monetary incentives for escorts not to go back to the habits that were presumably more prevalent before the site existed, so people who want to make life easier for scam artists across the board should absolutely rally behind woodlawn's suggestion. Whatever the merit behind charges that some of the bad reviews get suppressed, and whatever ideas people have about why, there's one easy way to make sure they all get suppressed -- stop taking reviews.

 

I think people have a legitimate frustration -- you could make a case that the reviews have hit a wall in terms of how useful they can be. But the way to change that is to look at the imbalance in the equation: escorts are held to standards, but their critics aren't. Anyone can write a review, whether he's met the escort, or IS the escort, or not, but not everyone -- by a long shot -- knows how, or has an incentive to, write a review that would be useful. You need the resources to have someone there who can, effectively, make a determination that the review is informative and can either make or demand changes that need to happen before it hits. The only way I can think of that would not cost the site money is if you had some kind of editorial "committee" of people that HooBoy viewed as trustworthy both ethically and as people who can edit reviews and do whatever fact-checking is needed -- basically kind of like the ad hoc Gaiety review committee that replaced NYObserver when he "retired" -- but we're talking about a lot of time, I think.

 

OR -- more crude but still a step up -- ideas like the one that started this thread, or the one I suggested a long time back that someone widely regarded as credible, relatively unbiased, etc -- posted a tutorial that had real-life examples of useful and unuseful reviews -- ideally one that could really break it down, show how a review evolved from bad to worse (I don't remember whether I said all this at the time; it's beside the point). Maybe you could "require" new reviewers to read it, but that's like "requiring" people to read terms and conditions. But that's a start too -- little things are what start to make the bigger changes happen. Again, it all depends on whether people believe the reviews have enough value to be worth improving and/or saving.

 

>And I think that "we" "should" charge anyone who uses the

>service this post is talking about, if it is instituted.

 

If by that you mean clients, I would strongly hope it didn't come to that. I don't think escorts benefit from having fewer people visit the site, which is, in practice, what would most likely occur if it became a pay site. Even people who don't take the reviews as something they're supposed to put their "trust" in often find our websites because of them. I don't know about you, but a lot of my clients don't necessarily remember how they found out about me before they decided to hire me (they don't necessarily see you in just one place you can trace it back to), but the overwhelming majority of them HAD been to my site, which was where I got to take my message to them directly. I understand your principle but think in practice escorts would be smart to carry more of the financial burden of making improvements to the site.

[Guest bakuboy]

RE: Send in the Clowns

 

Isn't it rich?

Are we a pair?

Me here at last on the ground,

You in mid-air.

Send in the clowns.

 

Isn't it bliss?

Don't you approve?

One who keeps tearing around,

One who can't move.

Where are the clowns?

Send in the clowns.

 

Just when I'd stopped opening doors,

Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours,

Making my entrance again with my usual flair,

Sure of my lines,

No one is there.

 

Don't you love farce?

My fault I fear.

I thought that you'd want what I want.

Sorry, my dear.

But where are the clowns?

Quick, send in the clowns.

Don't bother, they're here.

 

Isn't it rich?

Isn't it queer,

Losing my timing this late

In my career?

And where are the clowns?

There ought to be clowns.

Well, maybe next year.

[Bilbo]

I would guesstimate that 80% of the escorts reviewed here are what I would call twinks. And they are the majority of what the clients are looking for. The site is good for non-twinks but not as good as for twinks. And I know that when I was that age, I didn't think as practically as I do now about such things as advertising budgets. So, a little more reminder towards them.

 

And, no, I am not in favor of asking the clients to pay for the review section, ever. I meant the escorts who would be putting in these announcement of availability ads in the review section.

[woodlawn]

>Woodlawn, you already made this clown's colors run, so do

>yourself a favor, and don't allow him to take you down to his

>level!

>:o Your intellect, logic, intelligence, and over all

>knowledge left this dude in the dust, many, many, many posts

>ago!