Review information

[Guest squaddie]

In today's review of Billy#2 London, the reviewer claims that he discovered Billy from 'other website'. Could I ask, please, that reviewers mention the website during their review. Billy has no email address so I have to telephone him for this information. I like to look up the relevant website before deciding to engage an escort. This 'non mention' of a website irritates me and maybe others as well.

[Guest Hole_4_Hire]

>...the reviewer claims that he discovered Billy from 'other website'. Could I ask, please, that reviewers mention the website during their review...

 

Maybe I'm wrong on this but Hooboy does own and run this site. To "advertise" a competitor would be rude and inappropriate.

 

I fully understand how "nice" it would be to have that info posted here. But, I think most people don't specifically name the site out of respect to Hooboy.

 

However, if he publically states that naming other sites is OK, then I fully support your request.

[+ deej]

Actually, HooBoy has nothing against URL's for other sites. They are advertising sites for escorts, and this site isn't. There is no conflict.

 

More likely what happened is the client saw the ad on a site, fired off an e-mail and met with the escort some time later. When it came time to write the review he may not have even remembered which site the ad was on, and few people can remember a URL anyway.

 

Or some variant on that. Remember, the reviews happen after the client has been with the escort (we hope!), which may be quite a bit later than seeing the ad.

[Guest Kenny021]

That omission of address of escort websites is more the norm lately. I for one posted a review specifically stating the escort's webpage address and it was left blank when review was published. I've noticed that whenever I read a review of an escort which states that they saw his pic on the website etc and I want to go and view that website, I can't because the address is blank. It happens FREQUENTLY.

At first I assumed that Hooboy had edited that info (for whatever reason). Now we are informed that this isn't so. Whatever the reason, it would be appreciated if the info on where to find this escort were made available.

[sdg]

have to second kenny proposal! think it's important if someone goes thru the review process and lists a website, so others can view the escort that was reviewed, that this website be included. especially since the webiste the escort was found at is item that is requested during the review process.

[+ deej]

>I for one posted a review specifically stating the

>escort's webpage address and it was left blank when review

>was published.

 

Did you post a query in the Daddy's Place section about this? It's possible there's a buglet in the submission form that's gone unnoticed because nobody mentioned anything about it.

 

This is certainly the first time I've heard of this, and Daddy does not generally read this section.

 

I know the form has been changed recently because an error message that has existed for as long as I've been coming here is now gone. Perhaps fixing that broke something else.

[seeker630]

Or it could just be lack of clarity about filling in the form.

 

The 'Where did you find him' box on the form has a set of choices (which includes some sites such as 'MeetLocalMen' - but if your site isn't on the list, you have to pick 'Other...' I guess you can put the name of the site in 'Escort's Internet Address' (although I tend to reserve that for the escort's on personal site/web page, if he has one.)

*Much* further down is a box for a URL for pix - this can also be used for a site.

 

I *do* think the form could be clarified a bit.

[Guest Kalifornia]

Kenny my personal feeling is deej's opinion is just his and does not represent the site. After all he has told us many times he is simply a poster here who happens to be a moderator. His personal opinion is as welcomed as anyone else who wishes to express their views.

 

Yet till we hear from HB and that is 50/50 I tend to agree that recently the url is being deleted. The reason can only be speculative at this time. Maybe the url is in conflict with one of HB's advertizers or possibly HB doesn't want to give certain sites the press.

 

 

The fact is these url's had been posted previously and ALL (aside from those who advertize here) have not as of the past few months.

 

Deej if I am wrong please point me to a review that is in difference to what I have stated. I cannot find one.

 

Mark -Kalifornia

[+ deej]

>Or it could just be lack of clarity about filling in the

>form.

 

Yah, that's for sure.

 

I submitted a review just last week and the "where did you find him" box didn't have anything to offer that remotely matched the fact that he was a recommendation from another escort.

 

I'm waiting to see how that review shows up before I know for sure whether to complain about a posting buglet. I most certainly included a URL in the review.

[+ deej]

>Kenny my personal feeling is deej's opinion is just his and

>does not represent the site. After all he has told us many

>times he is simply a poster here who happens to be a

>moderator. His personal opinion is as welcomed as anyone

>else who wishes to express their views.

 

From the message center rules:

 

"The Moderators do NOT represent this site, they do not represent HooBoy or Daddy, the two administrators. Moderators participation in discussions are expressions of their own and should not be construed as official proclamations."

 

>Deej if I am wrong please point me to a review that is in

>difference to what I have stated. I cannot find one.

 

See above.

 

I have, as I said, observed that the posting form has been modified and I'm willing to allow that there may have been a bug that crept in. But since nobody is complaining in Daddy's place, it'll probably never be investigated. I guess everyone would prefer speculating about conspiracies.

[Chuck50]

Maybe HOOBOY is taking the URL's off until he tries all the guys. Just kidding HUGS Chuck

[Guest Kalifornia]

>

>

>I have, as I said, observed that the posting form has been

>modified and I'm willing to allow that there may have been a

>bug that crept in. But since nobody is complaining in

>Daddy's place, it'll probably never be investigated. I guess

>everyone would prefer speculating about conspiracies.

 

Don't you believe that HB would notice that only his advertizers url are posted (most recently)? Common sense would tell me if he is the person reading the reviews and uploading them each night/day then he is the one deleting the url. If their is a bug as you suggest I would think he would have noticed it by now.

 

I hope he reviews his own site

 

As for being concerned about this information missing or not, I do not really care. I do not use this site to "find" escorts. I am simply pointing out what others have and adding to their view.

 

Mark -Kalifornia

[seeker630]

I just looked through the last few days' reviews - Haus Weston, Jon Dean & Rod Hagen all have web sites listed under the 'Internet site' and Haus has a URL in the ' URL for pix'.

[Guest Kalifornia]

>I just looked through the last few days' reviews - Haus

>Weston, Jon Dean & Rod Hagen all have web sites listed under

>the 'Internet site' and Haus has a URL in the ' URL for

>pix'.

 

Seeker630 I believe those are all personal web sites you mention. We are speaking of commercial site

 

Mark -Kalifornia

[+ deej]

>Don't you believe that HB would notice that only his

>advertizers url are posted (most recently)? Common sense

>would tell me if he is the person reading the reviews and

>uploading them each night/day then he is the one deleting

>the url. If their is a bug as you suggest I would think he

>would have noticed it by now.

 

So in your view, HooBoy is supposed to omnisciently know that a blank field in a review was not meant to be blank? He's supposed to somehow intuit that the poster actually typed something there?

 

Frankly, I doubt he actually cares.

[Guest Kalifornia]

>So in your view, HooBoy is supposed to omnisciently know

>that a blank field in a review was not meant to be blank?

>He's supposed to somehow intuit that the poster actually

>typed something there?

>

>Frankly, I doubt he actually cares.

 

By looking at this thread apparently not. Though since you do not represent him your assumption that he doesn't care is just that, your assumption.

 

Mark -Kalifornia

[+ Lucky]

Well, I'll be goddamned!!! You actually had to telephone the escort to get the web site?

You know, some of these reviewers just aren't thinking when they write!!!!!

Something has got to be done!!

[Guest DickHo]

A few weeks ago, I sent an email to Hooboy asking this question. He responded that the URL's are no longer being included in reviews because it is too hard to keep them current...or something to that effect.

 

I disagree. I prefer an occasional outdated URL than no URL.

[+ deej]

>A few weeks ago, I sent an email to Hooboy asking this

>question. He responded that the URL's are no longer being

>included in reviews because it is too hard to keep them

>current...or something to that effect.

 

In that case, I apologize to all.

 

Now I'm off to read him the riot act in private about it. x(

[seeker630]

There are actually 2 places on the Review form that can be used to indicate a web site where pix can be found - the 'URL for pix' at the bottom of the review and 'Escorts's internet address' near the top. The latter could be used by the reviewers to at least give the name of any web site with pix - e.g. wwww.London-lads.co.uk - assuming the site isn't on the pull-down list of 'where did you find him'.

[Guest Kenny021]

>"A few weeks ago, I sent an email to Hooboy asking this

>question. He responded that the URL's are no longer being

>included in reviews because it is too hard to keep them

>current...or something to that effect.

>

>I disagree. I prefer an occasional outdated URL than no URL."

 

I also disagree. And...if indeed they are no longer being included, then change the review form. The escort who is being reviewed undoubtedly wants potential clients to go to his website to view his pics, see info about him, etc. Why is it too hard to keep them current?...I would think that anyone who wants to view the website goes to the last review to find the address. If it isn't current then so be it..it's the escort's responsibility to inform us of current address but omiting the address is NOT to the benefit of the escort or the client.

[CT Dick]

There is also no option for an escort hired through an agency that does not maintain a website.

 

It seems that this option could be added in the "Where did you find him" choices and the name of the agency could be put in the magazine/publication box.

 

Dick

[Guest squaddie]

Lucky, you must be a prize twit.

If you read my original message I make it clear that I like to be as well informed as I can be BEFORE I telephone the escort. The reviewer stated he obtained his information via a website. I am asking so that I can do the same. I only telephone the escort when I'm certain I want to hook up with him.