Re. New lady Ebony at La Maison Bury

[Baggieboy]

Just wondered if anyone has had the opportunity yet to see this new lady at La Maison in Bury or even seen her in the reception area and if so, can you provide any early feedback

External Link/Members Only

[Iloveoral]

Just wondered if anyone has had the opportunity yet to see this new lady at La Maison in Bury or even seen her in the reception area and if so, can you provide any early feedback

External Link/Members Only

Is there a reason you’ve stopped contributing reviews in the last 2 years please?
You are obviously active

[Baggieboy]

I’ve not been particularly active in over two years  because of major health issues, not that that is any of your business and nor was I aware that I had to justify my level of activity or reporting to you or anyone else on here, nor was I aware of any stipulation to report on every punt.

[Iloveoral]

I’ve not been particularly active in over two years  because of major health issues, not that that is any of your business and nor was I aware that I had to justify my level of activity or reporting to you or anyone else on here, nor was I aware of any stipulation to report on every punt.

I’m guessing you haven’t read the site rules?
You agreed to these when you joined.

We used to ban members that stopped contributing a few years ago, now we question members to find out why, and often give non-contributing members a second chance, so it is my business to ask you.

27 Lurking / Dormant Accounts
Members who do not contribute Reviews or whose accounts have become dormant may have their membership revoked.

I saw Jade about a month age, she was pleasant enough

This was one of the reasons I questioned you, which shows you have been active and not contributing

[chrishornx]

27 Lurking / Dormant Accounts
Members who do not contribute Reviews or whose accounts have become dormant may have their membership revoked.

does that rule apply across the board to everyone?

[daviemac]

does that rule apply across the board to everyone?

Yes.

[TomTank]

I saw Jade about a month age, she was pleasant enough

I’m guessing you haven’t read the site rules?
You agreed to these when you joined.

We used to ban members that stopped contributing a few years ago, now we question members to find out why, and often give non-contributing members a second chance, so it is my business to ask you.

27 Lurking / Dormant Accounts
Members who do not contribute Reviews or whose accounts have become dormant may have their membership revoked.

This was one of the reasons I questioned you, which shows you have been active and not contributing

I realise the rules say members have to contribute reviews, but he is kind of contributing, even if it's just a comment, and might be of help to some of us?

[daviemac]

I realise the rules say members have to contribute reviews, but he is kind of contributing, even if it's just a comment, and might be of help to some of us?

So you think this ↓ is a reasonable reply to a moderator asking a valid question?   

I’ve not been particularly active in over two years  because of major health issues, not that that is any of your business and nor was I aware that I had to justify my level of activity or reporting to you or anyone else on here, nor was I aware of any stipulation to report on every punt.

Unfortunately for him he does have to justify his level of activity on here. A reasoable reply would have got a very different response from ILO as per the example below.

It's been nearly 8 years since you posted a review mate, is there a reason for that?

Been away for a while mate. Only restarted recently. Will restart posting reviews again.

Thanks for the reply, we look forward to your future contributions.

[TomTank]

So you think this ↓ is a reasonable reply to a moderator asking a valid question?   

Unfortunately for him he does have to justify his level of activity on here. A reasoable reply would have got a very different response from ILO as per the example below.

No, I wasn't commenting on his reply, that's a different matter.

[daviemac]

No, I wasn't commenting on his reply, that's a different matter.

His reply caused the issue, read ILO's post again. -

Is there a reason you’ve stopped contributing reviews in the last 2 years please?
You are obviously active

A perfectly reasonable and politely put question and one we are expected to ask of anyone who hasn't reviewed for a while, to which he replied -

I’ve not been particularly active in over two years  because of major health issues, not that that is any of your business and nor was I aware that I had to justify my level of activity or reporting to you or anyone else on here, nor was I aware of any stipulation to report on every punt.

Had he replied in the civilised and reasonable manner I was replied to (and ILO has been in the past) he would not have been put on the clock.

[TomTank]

Sorry, I should have edited the formatting in ILO's comments - the bit

question members to find out why

wasn't put in red by me, and I didn't mean it to look like I was replying to that.

I was referring to the active and not contributing comment and just putting out there the thought that people can contribute without necessarily doing frequent reviews. Just a general point, not defending this poster, or ILO's right to pull him up on lack of reviews.

[daviemac]

Sorry, I should have edited the formatting in ILO's comments - the bit

wasn't put in red by me, and I didn't mean it to look like I was replying to that.

I was referring to the active and not contributing comment and just putting out there the thought that people can contribute without necessarily doing frequent reviews. Just a general point, not defending this poster, or ILO's right to pull him up on lack of reviews.

I really don't know what else I can say but members who haven't posted a review in a while get reported by other members so we ask if there's a reason why.

Any reasonable explanation put in a civil manner is accepted and no further action is taken, if they don't reply or reply as in this case then they are put on the clock.

Post history is always taken into account and looking at Baggieboy's it's a mixture of asking questions and saying who he has seen though he hasn't reviewed.

Had his reply been just -
 

I’ve not been particularly active in over two years  because of major health issues,

and not the 'not your business' part there wouldn't have been a problem.


Members using the site and ignoring the rule about posting reviews is the biggest complaint we get.

[Baggieboy]

“This was one of the reasons I questioned you, which shows you have been active and not contributing”

The moderator here seems to have very selective reading since if he read properly the opening sentence to my response to his question he would have noticed that I wrote I have not been ‘particularly’ active in recent times and that I did not say I hadn’t been active at all.
So the clock has been put on me now to ban me, fine, if I get banned for not posting a review in the next 29 days then so beit. Should I see some WG in that time and I feel compelled to post about the experience then I will do so but my decision to do so or not won’t be governed by any flashing red banning warning hovering over me and obviously if I don’t see someone within that time frame then the powers that be here will undoubtedly ban me anyway and that will be that but it won’t change my life and I don’t expect I will lose any sleep over that banning  decision. Whatever will be will be.

[Iloveoral]

You had a meet last year but didn’t contribute a review by your own words?

So I assume you are active and question you.
Had your response been different, as Davie has mentioned, you wouldn’t have a clock now. Your attitude still hasn’t changed so I won’t remove the timer.

If you are punting, why not review?
It’s a sharing community, give and take, it’s how it all survives as you can appreciate

[Baggieboy]

I have reviewed and shared info on this forum, you seem to be suggesting that I have to write something about every punt, like I have already stated, I have hardly punted in recent times, predominantly for reasons I don’t wish to go into here and also because I’m pretty specific over the type of lady I choose to see and have been tempted by very few. I saw a girl regularly a few years back who I reviewed and certainly commented on a number of times but she has long since gone and when I have occasionally punted since, for various reasons at the time I haven’t felt compelled to write about those particular experiences.
If I decide to see someone during the time period I am on your equivalent of Death Row with a clock on me then I might write about the punt but if your putting the clock on me is an attempt to bully me into reviewing then it actually serves more to have the opposite effect. If you cut me loose in however many days then so beit and if I see someone and I feel I want to write about the punt then I will do and I guess then I will get to live a little longer here.

[daviemac]

I have reviewed and shared info on this forum, you seem to be suggesting that I have to write something about every punt, like I have already stated, I have hardly punted in recent times, predominantly for reasons I don’t wish to go into here and also because I’m pretty specific over the type of lady I choose to see and have been tempted by very few. I saw a girl regularly a few years back who I reviewed and certainly commented on a number of times but she has long since gone and when I have occasionally punted since, for various reasons at the time I haven’t felt compelled to write about those particular experiences.
If I decide to see someone during the time period I am on your equivalent of Death Row with a clock on me then I might write about the punt but if your putting the clock on me is an attempt to bully me into reviewing then it actually serves more to have the opposite effect. If you cut me loose in however many days then so beit and if I see someone and I feel I want to write about the punt then I will do and I guess then I will get to live a little longer here.

You are totally missing the point mate. To try and explain it again.

It was your attitude in response to the valid question that ILO asked that got you put on the clock. It isn't rocket science had you replied in a civil manner your reason for not reviewing would have been acceptable.

Let me try and explain further. Members don't like people using the site and not reviewing so they report it, the mods then look at it and ask why then take any action deemed necessary. That action is in line with the way the site owner wants the site run and who expects us to ask the questions we do.

If you can't accept the rules, that the site owner sets, or the way the site owner runs the site then that is your issue and you won't be here long.

A civil response when we ask a question is all we expect, bearing in mind whatever we do ask is our business or we wouldn't ask.