Even before TER went dark providers disputing reviews has been an issue. More often than not it was a low review and for the Top 100 list i.e. providers wanting to maintain 10/10. More recently I met a provider in my AO and had a good time with her, I just checked and she got a new review which was less than glaring and I also ran across a bad review of her that I read that she disputed. I can say that she was very transparent with me while in the session and everything I thought she'd be, so I was happy with selecting her for a session. I do understand some ladies have "off-days", but no matter what I try and give the most honest review of what happened during my sessions. On the other side of the coin I get that there are trolls out there that just like to be negative and some write negative reviews just for the credit of VIP. I've ran into a ton of girls that I would like to see that have one or two negative reviews and normally the reviewer has only written just that one review, or on the flip you see an honest not so flattering review from a credible reviewer followed by an influx of flattering high marked reviews with that one provider being their lone review.
When I was an active duty senior enlisted we received Fitness Reports (FitReps) but to combat personal differences/dislikes the writer of the FitReps had to establish a profile prior to those FitReps counting towards whomever he/she was reporting on. So as a new Staff NCO you wouldn't necessarily be viewed negatively for an inexperienced reviewing officer. My point is, is there a way for TER to pause said reviews until the reviewer has built a legit track record of writing reviews, say a minimum of three reviews before said mongers review can be credited/published? IMO this would eliminate one-off negative reviews that may be nothing more than trolling or payback for a provider passing on a session with whomever.I'm trying to remember how things work, de facto. I think that first time reviewers' first review are held up until there is some sort of corroborating review by a more experienced member with a track record -- or is that only for new reviewer's review of a NEW Provider? It's something like that ... somebody help me out here. So, there is, sort of, a two review minimum before a "new" reviewer becomes a "regular" reviewer.
Not that I have seen. I always check the new review section for my AO for reviews and often there are reviewers that have only written one review. I tend to stay away from those providers until I see a few more reviews to get a good summation of what the session will be like. I've also written a couple of first reviews for some ladies and then checked back once it was moderated
It used to be the case that one's first couple of reviews would be given a bit more scrutiny until you showed you did understand the rules/policies for the reviews. That was true for both the reviewer and the reviewee as I recall. That was well before TER went dark in 2017 though.
I did make the suggestion earlier in the year that perhaps TER should impose a training period for new reviewers -- and possibly not post any reviews until the new reviewer could submit at least 2 reviews in a row that did not contain any problem/policy violation.
The goal was two-fold. First, it would eliminate the one-time fake/hit reviews we all know exist. Second, it would help to standardize the scoring as TER would be able to discuss the grades and why each level would make sense. As it is now everyone pretty much writers their own scale and then readers have to figure out how to translate that to their own scale.
Also feel that when a provider disputes a review and this site posts the provider disputes this review that if TER is their so called proof des idea that the review stands the terms “‘provider disputes this review should still remain”
In one case have seen “proof “! From a provider that she could not have had the session -especially when claimed by reviewer and they allowed to stand - provider now no longer on TER