Concerns with Moderator Dr-epg?

[NMrockclimber]

Originally Posted by Lefty13

Had to look up what SMDH meant, but I am there with you TBone. Geez, here's the thing. On the NM site things were a free for all for way too long. Thanks to whatever moderator or moderators that finally tossed some bad players out. But on the negative side, looking at the commentors on this string you have some very valuable and reliable contributors who are telling you in a constructive way something needs to be handled a bit differently. ECCIE should try to encourage, not discourage valuable contributors from participating. None of us like criticism, but rather than putting up a defensive wall, and appearing butt-hurt, perhaps put your ECCIE heads together, still follow your guidelines, but change your approach to make this site better. Frankly I was more or less neutral on the original issue, but the ECCIE responses (pissed me off) sure illustrate something that needs to be improved in your organizational model. I may not always agree with all the opinions of contributors who are on this string, but they make this site work. Encourage these guys, don't fire off responses that effectively run us off.

I agree and just have not been posting for some time.

[Waterpower]

I got dinged for defining squirting. something about giving details of ROS. what details did I give? I literally just defined squirting. I am kinda scared to comment and post at this point in fear of retaliation.

[An_Original_UNAME]

I bounced/only use this account for searching legacy reviews but a buddy who tries to still make it work. Looks like we lost the actively antagonistic mod but the underlying problem remains the same:


ECCIE is a (presumably) moderately expensive site to run that is pretty much constantly begging for letters from the leos. That, in turn, costs even more money. And the way sites like this make money are selling ads (and everyone has an adblocker) and selling premium.


And, like most of the review sites, people are encouraged to post reviews for "free premium". And... because this place has become somewhat antagonistic towards Providers means that we lost the back and forth that would let people actually verify those. So it mostly encourages people to blatantly lie for premium access and "free" ads from the smarter mamasans (and, in NM's case, the owner of CiCi's).


And the smarter johns quickly realize that they would be paying for premium to read a mix of craigslist and penthouse forum.


So moderation policy becomes much stricter to crack down on all the free premium for any reason possible to increase premium sales. And that makes people cranky.


It sucks (like, a really toothy suck at that) because this place used to be amazing and a lot of the older reviews are still great for helping to verify that an older provider is legit. But between policies toward providers and the like? The gals I know actively request people not even mention them on this site. And the ads in the AMP sections are, at best, useful for knowing which shacks are still in business and not much else (unless you believe that Luna/Lisa/Sandy/Whatever actually works at ten different AMPs at once...).