There used to be a rejection reason of "Too Explicit." Used mostly to avoid connecting names to specific acts.
The current adjudication list (below) excludes that. Curious if it's still a thing?
Spam / Advertisement Fake — Not a Genuine Visit Too Short / Not Enough Details Not a Review — Belongs on the Listing Discussion Board Incoherent or Poorly Written Offensive / Personal Attack Wrong Listing Not in English Appears AI-Generated
Replies (3)
Listed or not my policy is not to get explicit with a dancers name. Why should I share a good thing? I only use a dancers name if she is a ROB in my opinion.
My take is it's common sense and it still applies. Just because it's not listed doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't use it as a reason to deny a review. Founder can't list every possible reason for review denials but my guess is that he just missed that reason when he was laying out the new format and it wouldn't surprise me if he adds it now.
@440viking - Yeah, I kind of figured it might have been inadvertently left off. But now if wanting to reject an explicit review, not quite sure which reason to pick. Tuscl forces a choice, so if there's no other reason to reject, I guess "Offensive" might be the closest option, paired with a brief explanation?
Join the conversation
Sign in to reply to this discussion.