Negative Reviews On Established Escorts

[HooBoy]

I am posting this publicly to get some feedback.

 

Recently, I have been getting negative – sometimes hateful – reviews of escorts who are not only well known but have a history of good reviews. I have been with some of these escorts and some I know personally because I just wanted to meet them.

 

What concerns me is whether the reviewer in these particular reviews is real. In almost every case the reviewer has never reviewed anyone before. In most cases, I send the escort the review (minus the reviewers email address or handle, of course) to ask them if they remember the encounter.

 

In almost every case, the escort cannot place the event, do not remember the person or situation and in some cases were not even available when a time was mentioned.

 

This is important: At the same time, I have had correspondence with people who are intent on damaging the credibility of this site, for whatever reason. We all know there are some sick and deranged people out there and this site is a magnet for them.

 

So I’m asking you for advice on how I should handle this? With an escort that is well known or has nothing but positive reviews, how much checking should I do on the reviewer?

 

I know a lot of people are saying, “HooNuts,” don’t you know the escorts are writing their reviews themselves? In some cases I'm sure a con-artist will submit his reivew. But we also are tracking reviewers and you'll notice some of them have a "thumbs-up credibility" seal and I know they are not an escort. So when I get a negative review after receiving a "thumbs-up" review, and sometimes they are filled with hateful accusations, then I wonder about the veracity of the reviewer.

 

I find it interesting it’s happening more lately, but that probably just comes with the growth we’ve experienced..

 

As usual, I appreciate your suggestions. But remember, most of the good guys get rightly very upset when a bogus review comes in that can damage his reputation. And I have to be very careful about it.

 

In many cases, I have asked for the phone number of the negative reviewer and have spoken to many of them of them on the phone. By the same token, I will call the positive reviewers as well. If a reviewer doesn’t want to talk to me, then I measure his efforts as unimportant at best.

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[+ Charlie]

It is impossible for you to verify the absolute accuracy of any review, positive or negative, even if it comes from someone who has submitted many apparently legitimate reviews and is about someone who has been reviewed frequently. I think you should continue to publish whatever comes in, with suitable flags: perhaps you could highlight the fact that this is from a first-time reviewer and is the only negative (or positive) review for this escort. You already put enormous effort into maintaining this site--it is silly to flog yourself (unless, of course, that is your scene!)over something which you really can't control. Don't be so anal-compulsive (oh, dear! did I say that right?).

[Guest JH]

I agree with Charlie. You can't verify everything and I think you're doing a good job keeping this board up and going as it is. Just post the reviews as they come in, with the appropriate flag if they appear suspect.

 

Personally I don't take too much notice of first time reviews - there have been a few suspicious positive reviews from first timers, including a banker who was barely literate!

 

On the other hand, even the most highly praised escort can have an off day and give a poor service. Pruning out negative reviews could encourage inconsistency.

[Guest regulation]

Forgive me for being blunt, but I've discerned in a number of comments you have made on these message boards a certain bias against people who submit negative reviews. The impression I've gotten is that you would prefer not to receive such reviews at all, no matter how well substantiated. I'm sure you remember a recent thread in which a number of visitors stated that they find the negative reviews on this site more valuable than the positive ones, however. That is also my opinion. I don't think that negative reviews should be rejected on some arbitrary or subjective basis, without real evidence that they are false. We all know -- and you have acknowledged -- that some of the positive reviews appearing here are false, and if you make it harder and harder for negative reviews to appear, this site will simply lose more credibility.

 

Perhaps I'm being naive, but I find it difficult to imagine that there are a great many people who attach such importance to escorts that they are willing to go to a lot of trouble to injure the "reputations" of escorts. Can that really be true? Even if it is, your practice of giving escorts the last word in responding to reviews seems to me the only precaution that is needed.

[Will]

Hoo, you make me think how the Editor-in-Chief of a major daily might feel if he had to check out his decisions with his readership, namely, pulled first one way and then another. For my part, I'd like to highlight what I see you doing here, in this thread: (1) you have an editorial problem that you've brought to the readership; (2) you've asked our advice; (3) you've sketched in the background of this particular problem and given us an idea of how you've handled similar situations in the past.

 

I'd like to say that I am full of admiration and respect for you. Not only do you add work and stress to yourself with this policy, you open yourself even further to the unjust criticism you already receive. For my part, I have no doubt whatsoever that you are a man of integrity and that you are truthful, candid, and diplomatic. Among other things, that means that I trust that what I read here is as reliable as you can reasonably make it. With all of that in mind, therefore, I offer the following suggestions in the hopes that they will be helpful.

 

1. You own this site; you are the editor; you have every right to develop an editorial policy that harmonizes with your intentions for the site. You do not need to justify that policy, nor do you need to seek permission to expedite it.

 

2. Following my newspaper analogy, the reviews are a curious hybrid of daily news, op-ed, and letters to the editor. In each of those cases, the editor's job is to get the raw copy ready for publication. In the case of really bloody-minded comments from reviewers, I don't see why you can't use standard editorial marks to indicate where you've omitted or altered the copy for the sake of decency and/or clarity.

 

3. There are plenty of people out there who have serious psychological problems regarding sex, and especially regarding homosexuality. I suspect, although of course I do not know, that some of the hateful reviews have very little to do with the specific escort in question. Thus, not only is it hurtful to him personally, it is even wide of the mark.

 

4. We are not talking here about professionals who are psychologically detached from their profession. A lawyer may lose a case, or a doctor may even lose a patient, without his fearing that his whole career is at stake OR that he has somehow failed as a human being. My experience with escorts tells me that the actual human soul is extremely close behind the mask of the escort-name and escort-persona. What's more, I would hazard the guess that most of us do not seek the services of an escort with quite the same criteria in mind that we use when seeking the services of an attorney or an electrician. In other words, if I expect my Self as well as my body to be cared for by the escort, I want to be respectful of his Self as well.

 

5. One of the things I like best about M4M -- I check in each and every single morning -- is its humanity. Some of the frequent contributors I think of several times during the day, wondering how they are. Some of the escorts I read often about I wish I could know, and not just in the carnal sense. And your sensitivity to all of this, HooBoy, is what makes M4M a truly human and humane refuge in the fecund though chilled erotic jungle crawling through the internet.

 

Whatever you decide, I'm with you!

[Guest Jocoluver]

HooBoy, I think you are doing a terrific job just as you are doing. I'm sure these particular type reviews are causing you additional stress. But I think the site reflects with reasonable accuracy as long as the reader/client practices "let the buyer beware". I think your idea of telephone contact to hateful reviews of established escorts is a fine idea. I personally would welcome telephone confirmation of any review I write. And if an "out of line review" cannot be evaluated by telephone contact with the reviewer, it might had substance to reject the review or add a note that reviewer refused to discuss it with you. I am for whatever you side to do. I just hope nothing leads you to throw in the towel.

[Guest red]

I agree with "regulation" that there is a bias against guys who submit negative reviews---particularly about some of the Superstar escorts on the board. There is no question that every effort should be made to ferret out reviewers who make hostile comments for ulterior motives. By the same token, though, a genuine negative review is probably one of the most helpful tools we have when deciding whether or not to contact a given escort. Because I generally trust the opionions on this site (using a healthy dose of skepticism as a filter), I have only had one recent, marginal experience with an escort. And this was because I didn't catch the oblique references to the guy's less-than-masculine mannerisms. Already, we see negative reviewers getting trashed on this board, and comments made about their morals, personal hygiene and memory. If Hooboy starts presuming that negative reviewers are guilty until proven innocent (particularly when they dare to criticize a Golden Boy), the honest, negative reviews will stop--and this board will lose a large measure of its usefulness.Even good escorts have bad days, and we should all know about these.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

Will,

 

You never disappoint... This is certainly one time that we share a common perspective right down the line... I am especially sensitive to your point 4 regarding the proximity of the escort persona and soul (a proximity I have observed in those escorts that remain truly memorable) and to your assessment of HooBoy and his efforts to provide a forum -- a ‘human and humane refuge’ out of his hard work, his own pocket, and the help of many good and honest contributors, client and escort alike.

[Guest squaddie]

This site is of value only if the reviews are truthful. Checking by telephone those who tend to send in negative reviews is time consuming and costly.

 

Maybe a system whereby reviewers have to login (as with the message board) before they can submit a review could help. Also, although HooBoy might not want to go along this road, a first time reviewer would have to use a credit-card check-in (no charge). This system is used frequently to verify a person is of legal age in order visit an adult site. If a reviewer had to use his credit card to verify his first review, and therefore was given a code for further reviews there might be a reduction on bogus reviewers.

 

There may be fewer reviews as a result, but hopefully they could be trusted.

[Guest ProfTBear]

HooBoy, you do good and this is an example of your desire to do good.

 

Yes, anyone can have an off day and receive a negative review, and IMHO the review should be posted. However, you specifically said "hateful" reviews. A totally different story! Trash em!

 

There is no reason when reviewing to be hateful. If the liason was a good investment of time then say so. If it was bad then say that. Reviewers shouldn't get bitchy and hateful. This is not an avenue for revenge. Besides it just ain't worth getting your panties in a bind over. Say the escort was bad and be done with it. Relax. Enjoy life. Remember an exceptional time! Take your nitro! : )

 

As to first time reviewers, I rarely pay much attention to them, especially when they are contray to the rest of the lot. By now, we have all figured out the tell tales that the review is an attempt to boost business or to trash a rival. I pay more attention to understatement (both bad and good) then I do extremes. (An A+ means more than an AAAA+++++++, since there is no such grade.)

 

Whiners - go away. Just like the real world, we can do without your complaining. Don't like this site? Then open up your own. You'll probably find things to whine about there too. I can only hope that experience will teach you and change you, but somehow I doubt it.

 

Thanks again Hooboy for all you do here. Both for the escorts and the clients. I am sure you have biases - hell, who doesn't. Personally, I hope you enjoy them - a lot!! : ) Wish I could as often as you do! LOL

 

OOppss got a lot of my chest eh? (too bad it fell to my stomach and stuck.) : )

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-26-00 AT 02:15PM (EST)[p]HooBoy,

 

Mother Nature in her wisdom has seen fit to invest diversity in our species, at several levels, as the mechanism for improving the stock to enhance survival. Unfortunately Mother Nature not being perfect herself, not all of these attempts accrues to the good. This just points out that dealing with hateful and hurtful people is just part of the human landscape, although an unpleasant one with which to deal.

 

Not only is it unpleasant to deal with but it also is difficult. Whatever you ultimately choose to do I’m confident that you will continue your practice of being fair to both the reviewer and the escort. Legitimate negative reviews of any escort should be posted as long as the reviewer’s existence can be adequately verified. And the escort should get the opportunity to respond. And it may be necessary for certain factual information to be obtained by you in order for the escort to make his rebuttal, i.e. date, time place etc. so that the knows the incident in question or whether it even occurred. (I know this is time consuming but these circumstances are hopefully rare in occurrence.)

 

Hateful comments do not constitute a legitimate review. In this instance ask the reviewer to modify the review to remove the offensive material and just submit the facts of the situation. (YOU SHOULD NOT DO THIS YOURSELF.) If he has a legitimate gripe to inform the community about he should willing to undertake editing the review. On the other hand if he just wants a forum to harass and defame an individual, this should take some wind out of his sails because he won’t be able to engage in the vitriolic diatribe he is intent upon. Of course he may take it to the message boards, but it soon becomes apparent in the give and take of that environment that there is a definite agenda involved. (These guys invariably shoot themselves in the foot.)

 

 

>What concerns me is whether the

>reviewer in these particular reviews

>is real. In almost

>every case the reviewer has

>never reviewed anyone before.

 

This is a valid concern. It is far too easy for a hateful individual to create an identity and submit a negative review targeting the object of his ire. Thus you have good reason to follow up with the reviewer to verify his submission. Another possibility is to establish a cross reference of reviewer handle and IP address.

 

One other possible consideration is to identify unknown reviewers, e.g. people with two or fewer reviews. (Ebay uses a pair of dark glasses as an icon do designate a new member with less than 30 transactions, to indicate that he has not yet created an established track record.) This is not a negative indicator, just one that no track record has been established. I always look for the reviewer identity and number of reviews when reading reviews and have often wished for an icon to easily recognize the new reviewer.

[Traveller]

The stats are the most important info in the reviews (which is why I'm taking a tape measure to Munich in a few days - I couldn't have been that far off). Everything else is subjective and dependent upon the chemistry between the two (or more) involved. Two minutes on the phone in the initial call will give you a pretty good idea about how that will turn out.

 

The negative reviews are far more valuable than the positive ones (or warnings like DickHo and JH gave me about Jason under the Aussie Ben thread in here) - they tend to flag misrepresentative photos or stats, or wacko conduct. Although again, the first two are much less subjective than conduct - in which case you've usually gotta read between the lines.

 

Later.

[+ deej]

>Recently, I have been getting negative

>– sometimes hateful – reviews

>of escorts who are not

>only well known but have

>a history of good reviews.

 

The hateful part should set off flares in your head. Many of us also post on other boards where a stalker has been known to go to great lengths to discredit well-known escorts.

 

This individual has more id's than Sybill, and went so far as to steal one escort's ICQ address book to do mass mailings to everyone in it. It's been going on for a couple of years, and has recently flared up again. He is suspected of sending one guy on a ton of bogus calls while he was in Boston recently.

 

If an escort has a string of great reviews and suddenly gets a hateful review, tread carefully. Particularly if the target is a member of the group targeted by this loon who slips off his meds from time to time.

[Guest gr8guy]

The only negative review that I have noticed so far was posted about Bruce Warren in San Diego. I know that Bruce is a sincere, honorable guy and I was very surprised to see a negative review of him.

 

You then allowed him to post a reply that I think quite effectively refuted this review.

 

That policy seems fair. It allows the reputable escort to defend himself while still allowing an accurate negative review to be posted.

 

Of course, if you can personally verify each review that would be best, but seems to be impractical due to your time constraints.

 

I join the other regular posters in our appreciation of all of your efforts.

[Bilbo]

Will is right, as usual. Or to put it another way, you might think of this site as HooBoy's work of art. Art by committee is just never as good as personal art. So I go with Hoo making his own decisions about what to edit out of here. There may even come the time when Hoo has to edit just for length, let alone content.

I agree with the dark glasses, or other flag, and with the excising of nongermaine material with an editor's mark indicative that that happened. I also fairly much agree with the credit card check in for new reviewers. I do not agree with Hoo, overworked and close to the wire as he often is, having to do a lot of telephone chasing of people who might turn violently negative on his ear. (Of course, I am also advocating extra work in the removing of the dark glasses once the reviewer is established, but that hits me as a lot easier, calmer, more fun ...)

[Guest tradecraft]

Best Remedy

 

The best remedy for troublesome speech is more speech, not censorship. Funny how everybody is in favor of free speech and against censorship until they encounter some speech that affects their particular situation, then suddenly censorship doesn't seem so terrible to them any more. But it is always the wrong thing to do.

[Guest Jake]

The only thing that really surprises me about your post, HooBoy, is that it took so long for the spewers of hate to start their engines. We've seen this with our political figures, our movie stars, our VIP's - build them up and then knock them down. Why would escorts be treated any differently? It seems to me that unhappy people hate it when someone attains a certain amount of public acclaim. Albeit, escorts are not necessarily to be regarded on the same level as a presidential candidate, but the principle holds true all the same.

 

I admire you tremendously for even trying to deal with this. I'm sure I would've thrown up my hands and moved on long ago. On a practical level, I tend to agree with regulation, red and traveller: the negative reviews are awfully important in assigning credibility to this site. To just arbitrarily ban them would be to do a disservice to the users. Perhaps something like Squaddie proposes is possible - at least some measure in place to make it less likely that a fake reviewer would take the time and effort to post false evaluations.

 

Thanks for dealing with these issues and for keeping us informed. My regard for you and for this site continues to grow.

[Guest jeejer]

> My experience with escorts

>tells me that the actual

>human soul is extremely close

>behind the mask of the

>escort-name and escort-persona. What's

>more, I would hazard the

>guess that most of us

>do not seek the services

>of an escort with quite

>the same criteria in mind

>that we use when seeking

>the services of an attorney

>or an electrician. In

>other words, if I expect

>my Self as well as

>my body to be cared

>for by the escort, I

>want to be respectful of

>his Self as well.

 

Wow, I agree that you have done it again Will. I have been feeling very similar things about an escort that I have seen recently, but have not been able to put it into words. I now have a much better handle on what has been floating through my Self. Thanks. I too have been known to think about some of the persons from this website, yourself included.

 

Hooboy, I think that you already have in place a way for the escort to challenge the reviewer. I do know that some escorts do not read this as much some of our regular ones that I look forward to hearing from. But I think that most of them would be alerted to a bogus review by their regular clients. I have found that an escort repsonding with clarity and focus to a bad review will actually get him a better standing with your readers.

 

thanks for your work

[Guest Hanover]

There is much good sense in many of the replies you have received. ("Charlie" and "JH" being particularly noteworthy.) I have little to add that is original, but if you are keeping score of the options, here are my thoughts, humbly offered:

 

1. Operating a business always entails unavoidable risks that come from bad publicity, even (especially) when it is untrue. That is just something that escorts have to accept in a less-than-perfect world. (Which isn't to condone unfair reviews.);

 

2. Trying to edit reviews in order to maintain the credibility of your site, although admirable in its intentions, may have the perverse consequence of undermining it, as all such attempts are bound to provoke howls of protest (as we have recently seen) over what are essentially contestable standards and impossible ideals. Best to just post the reviews as they come in, with the occasional flag in extreme cases. Also, I fear that if you try to follow up too many reviews by telephone, you will jeopardise what you have so far achieved here--which is considerable--through exhaustion, stress and exasperation;

 

3. Your wise policy of allowing the escort to have the last word goes as far as you reasonably can to balance unfair reviews. (And fair ones, for that matter.);

 

4. I am among those who have benefitted immeasurably from this site, and commend you vigourously for your tireless efforts to maintain it. It is pretty close to as good as can be attained, all things considered.

[Guest farside]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-27-00 AT 06:52AM (EST)[p]Each client is going to have a different experience with an escort. Your remarks concern me deeply. Is your mission to censor reviews because YOU don't feel they should be published? Is your intent simply to do what you want because it is your site? Is your concern for the escort maybe going a bit overboard, isn't it the clients who keep this site alive? Do you not feel that a reader on your site can determine for themselves a bogus review from a legit one? What makes you so sure that the escort who claims not to remember the situation is telling the truth?

 

You have created this problem yourself. You have made many statements that have contradicted your actions. I feel that combined with the growth, that you point out, are the main factor's for your current concerns.

 

Sure this is your site, and currently you receive many hits. Yet if the creditability of the site is at the will of any one person, including you, then this like many other sites have, will lose their value.

 

You know there was this guy in China who was chairman something and he wrote this little book... and a guy in Germany who decided what ethnic backgrounds should remain on this planet... do I think you are like these two men, not at all. Do I think what you are doing is 'like' censorship, absolutely!

 

Obviously this concerns you or you would not have posted to the board. Yet in reading the replies so far you have many that feel you should upload any reasonable review, negative or positive. I think only balance can give one true insight into a escort's background and abilities. What makes you feel that because they are 'established' should give them a free ride? Hey, Ford is established, Firestone is established, an escort established because of a few reviews posted on the Internet that cannot be verified, please. Where is Ralph Nader when one really needs him.

 

I vote NO on censorship. And you can call me anytime you want at your expense regarding any review I might submit in the future.

[Guest bluboy]

Post it, flag it and allow the escort to respond..blu

[Traveller]

Hoo,

 

Live by the golden rule: Whoever has the gold makes the rules. You're running this site, dude, most excellently. Keep doing it as you have in the past. You make the call whether to run the review or not. I think with all of the vetting you say you do, you're entitled to make the final call.

 

Whose rules?...Hoo rules.

 

Later.

 

PS. The above is, of course, predicated on the condition that you continue to post my reviews within 15 minutes without edits.

 

PPS. Max (NY), somewhat new on rentboy.com, was a lot of fun. Review to come.

[+ deej]

>Live by the golden rule: Whoever

>has the gold makes the

>rules. You're running this

>site, dude, most excellently.

>Keep doing it as you

>have in the past.

>You make the call whether

>to run the review or

>not. I think with all

>of the vetting you say

>you do, you're entitled to

>make the final call.

 

I agree. Having now seen one of these negative reviews and HooBoy's handling of it, I'm more convinced than ever that this site is in good hands.

 

The reviewed escort is a regular of mine (reviewed here) who called me to ask what to do.

 

The review itself bothered me a lot. In addition to outright LIES about his physical appearance, it was written in a generally hateful tone with just enough bits of truth sprinkled in that it's clearly him.

 

It was clearly written with malicious intent.

[Guest dandday]

Hateful negative reviews? There have been many hateful escort responces to a negative review. Could part of it be that the reviewer knows he will be trashed as the escot gets the last word on the experience, so that is starting to set the tone of the reviews?

 

I have alway felt this site leaned more toward the protection of the escorts reputation. To not post these reviews (with flags, alerts, etc.) will do all of us a diservice.

 

And to all of you, but Hoo mostly, this is not ment in any way as an inditement of this site or how it is ran. It's a great site and keep up the great work you do.

[Guest regulation]

Dandday, good point. I recently read a response to a review from L.A. escort "Rex Valen." One of the remarks that he addressed to the person who wrote a negative review of him was that that person "should smell themselves, maybe they stink." If HB finds it acceptable to post that sort of comment from an escort about a client, then what exactly would he consider to be out-of-bounds from either an escort or a client?