Would this be allowed or appreciated?

[seductrix4u]

Hi all, ladies are always having to ask gents who reach out to us for references.

If a man wanted to list his references within his Signature line, so that they would always be there for a Companion who might want them, would that be allowed? If he's gotten permission from the Companion to list her as a reference?

It would certainly cut to the chase if a guy is providing his references upfront. I would have no problem with him putting my info in his Signature line as long as it has been no longer than 6 months since he's seen me.

What do you think of this idea, guys? Would this makes things easier for you? Would you be comfortable having a static display of your references? Ladies, would you like to have a feature like this when you're looking at the member's profile?

[Guest041919]

No because if a guy saw me doesn't mean I'll vouch for him. Guys dont know the difference. They'll crap on someone's review then ten minutes later say oh yeah I saw so and so.

[bilbobaggin]

Lots of ways this would go south. Like Kinder said just because I guy thinks he has a reference, doesn't mean you actually does. Not to mention guys putting on fake references. I wouldn't be comfortable putting out my references to everyone.

[Fsn57]

I think what you're looking for is something similar to the P411 OK system, which works well. But for something like that to work here, the lady would have to provide the OK for the client to put it in a signature line. I don't know how that would work here.

[Dances007]

I like it! I disagree with the comments about a guy using a fake reference because they could just as easily do that today under current method. Let me try to explain like this....Scenario 1 ( currently used method. At least I think it is from my very limited experience. I'm pretty new to this): Client contacts provided > provider replies asking for refs > client sends refs > then either option A, provider contacts refs and verifies client. Or Option B, provider doesn't contact refs. Here, option B is no different than providing fake refs in signature. If provider doesn't check them out, that's on them. Either way, it's a no-verify and fakes won't be caught. Also, the downside to current state is it can require an extra step. If client doesn't send refs in initial contact, then provider has to ask for them and client has to reply. At this point, all that and we are really now at scenario 2. Scenario 2 (seductrix option): client contacts provider but doesn't include refs > provider looks at guys signature and sees refs, and possibly knows one of them well > easily contacts ref and done. Clients verified. Even if the provider doesn't know the refs, they can still contact them without having to ask client to provide. For me and my limited experience, this would have made life easier. I see no downside as option 1 will always still be available.

[seductrix4u]

Originally Posted by Dances007

I like it! I disagree with the comments about a guy using a fake reference because they could just as easily do that today under current method. Let me try to explain like this....Scenario 1 ( currently used method. At least I think it is from my very limited experience. I'm pretty new to this): Client contacts provided > provider replies asking for refs > client sends refs > then either option A, provider contacts refs and verifies client. Or Option B, provider doesn't contact refs. Here, option B is no different than providing fake refs in signature. If provider doesn't check them out, that's on them. Either way, it's a no-verify and fakes won't be caught. Also, the downside to current state is it can require an extra step. If client doesn't send refs in initial contact, then provider has to ask for them and client has to reply. At this point, all that and we are really now at scenario 2. Scenario 2 (seductrix option): client contacts provider but doesn't include refs > provider looks at guys signature and sees refs, and possibly knows one of them well > easily contacts ref and done. Clients verified. Even if the provider doesn't know the refs, they can still contact them without having to ask client to provide. For me and my limited experience, this would have made life easier. I see no downside as option 1 will always still be available.

Bingo, we have a winner! You are a guy who understands what I'm trying to do. Simply provide all that reference info in one tight spot that the guy can have readily available, and update as needed. Then the lady doesn't have to keep doing the back and forth with the reference request process.

Thank you for your concise input!

[seductrix4u]

Originally Posted by Kinder Caress

No because if a guy saw me doesn't mean I'll vouch for him.

Hey lady, I agree! I would not want someone to use me in their Signature line as a reference unless they knew I was cool with it. 99% of my clients are going to get a glowing reference from me. The remaining 1% have already been informed to not use me as a reference so there's no surprises.

[FranklinBash]

This is a great idea. Here is a modification that will keep the simplicity you are after but keep the ability to fake referrals locked out.

The signature line placement of a client's referrals is on point. But it shouldn't be a list of names. It doesn't scale well and loses the context of the provider. Instead of a list of references, use a "Provider Referral Score". Not unlike the provider review system clients contribute to and share, a referral system facilitated by the providers and clients that creates a verified account viewable only "Provider Referral Score". Not a number of reviews posted but a common database populated with simple ask/answered communications. The workflow might be like this:

Client sends message to a provider: "Thanks for sharing available evening! I still can't see the color green and I feel like I'm waking a for above the ground! Will you please give me a referral?"

Provider: *receives message & replies* "Sure thing Hun! You were the best. *Clicks client name and opens referral dialog* *enters date of their meeting and checks box for "positive referral".
The date would allow the referral to automatically expire and fall off the grade system. This would keep referrals fresh and would encourage consistent current "participation" in the community. The provider will still be able to see who they referred even after the referral expires. This helps with house keeping and simplifies referral management.

A client could forward the link to their profile which contains their referral score to a prospective provider. Using their upgraded provider accounts, they can readily see the number of provider referrals, the age of the referrals and any possible negative referrals. The requesting provider could then reach out to a recent referral provider for further confirmation.

This might also send itself to IDing "time waters". A lopsided ratio of positive referrals to referral requests would indicate a client asking providers for appointments, going through the vetting/referral process, setting up a meeting and then bailing out.

Any thoughts?

[seductrix4u]

Originally Posted by FranklinBash

This is a great idea. Here is a modification that will keep the simplicity you are after but keep the ability to fake referrals locked out.

Any thoughts?

Wow, I really love all the thought you put into your response. Thank you!

But speaking strictly for myself, I would not participate in a rating system like that just because of the time factor involved. It puts a lot of the burden on the companion.

Honestly, you're lucky if you find companions classy enough to provide references! I see ERs on certain companions so you know they're responding to guys' correspondence. But as a companion, I can send text/PM/email to them, requesting a reference, and get crickets.

[FranklinBash]

I would think my suggestion would actually take much less time than supplying a reference. How much time does a it take now to provide a reference via the current methods?

[yourdesire]

I agree a system like this could be helpful, I guess if they post reviews we do sort of have a list. I'd like to see some sort of a BIO on the guys as well sort of like P411 now has.

[Guest030219]

Who cares and why does certain threads keep getting pushed to the top of the page when they just need to fade away.

[Zippo65]

Take a look at who started the thread.