I for one make a concerted effort to be a good client, and am grateful for the karma given to me. And pros have told me that they felt more comfortable booking with me specifically because other pros said I was a good client. I personally wouldn't want that to change.
I feel the less convoluted the better. The current system is straightforward and uncomplicated. The more user friendly the more likely it will be used
@TD1964RGK It's an interesting idea, except that as an enthusiast I would also like to see what others have said about the person. So a system where only pros can see the reviews of other pros would then not allow me to see if there had been a problem with this person in the past. Or to confirm that at least there have been a number of people to confirm I'm not about to walk into a murder den or worse (cause, yeah, there's worse).
I agree the system isn't perfect for a number of reasons but we can't do away with the transparency or the access.
If there is a lot of karma, I at least know that folks made it out alive and (at least mostly) well. their 5 star review might be a little embellished, maybe it didn't go as well as they say it did, but they are alive.
That might be dark, but it's something I have to consider when I'm meeting up with a new person each and every time.
@TD1964RGK .......I thing your suggestion is excellent...a database only available to PROs and MODs.. a database for client to MODs to report issues..leaving the Existing KzARMA data base visible to both part Ies for positive comments
Except that part of the point of pro karma for enthusiasts is so that other enthusiasts can get some reassurance before planning a meet. If only pros can see what other pros say, the karma is worthless for any enthusiast who wants to move on to other enthusiasts.
Please note with three seperate databases..the karma database would remain for only positive comments visible to client and pro
Suppressing negative karma defeats the point of karma. And three databases for the same info would be overcomplicating things.
This is why it's important to define exactly what the problem is. Solving the wrong problem only creates more problems.
I enjoy the current karma system. It can also be a nice way to get positive feedback from someone in how comfortble they were to meet a stranger and be in their home for the first time.
As a host I'm most concerned with creating that atmosphere, anything to help offset initial fears.
That just seems like a whole lot of hoo ha for the sake of hoo ha to achieve the same exact end point
I believe if you reread everyone of my postings..no where will you see me advocating for the dissolution of the ability to report bad behavior...I actually find it offensive to even suggest that was my intent!
Once again..nothing forces one. to read this post..there are plenty to chose from
Respectful disagreements welcome!
It’s a 2 way street. I would never see a pro or enthusiast who had no or little karma. My safety as a man matters as well.
@Morpheus Good point.
@dennis22554 Not sure I understand. What does "the karma database would remain for only positive comments visible to client and pro" mean?
I wish all people were doing. If a client is safe, The karma should let others know. This is a risky gig. I really wish people would put the experience in the karma. There are so few accounts that have anything on it.
@ladybug7 Partly because people that actually connect with other people here are fairly rare.
@ @WriterGF..three partitions .3 interfaces.........the two bad behavior partitions..one for the client..one for. The pro would be visible to the moderator who could mitigate compliants idependently.......the karma interface would be reserved for positive karma. Visible to both client and pro
How is making only good karma viewable in any way a good thing? The point of karma both good and bad is so that others will know if someone was appropriate and safe. Forcing only good karma to be viewable makes it very easy for unsavory people to go under the radar. You are already able to report users there's not a need for any of this multiple panel stuff. Making things complicated doesn't help. The current system isn't perfect but this is all very convoluted and not needed. I don't know if this is an example of wanting to force positivity at all costs but if it is it's not a good idea. Some things are not positive for a reason. Bad karma needs to be viewable by everybody and transparent.
Exactly. Hiding bad karma is almost as bad as preventing people from reporting bad behavior. Not all offenses warrant an immediate ban, especially without proof such as a recording of the session which most people won't agree to. I'm guessing very few reports would result in an immediate ban, so hiding bad karma puts people at risk
Maybe I should start a reading class......but why waste my energy......ill be sure to post about puppies tommorow..
If multiple people don't seem to understand what you're trying to say, the problem is probably not their reading comprehension.
I have no problem understanding his posts actually. I read them objectively.
@dennis22554 I notice constantly that people may not be carefully reading your posts or maybe jumping to conclusions that you didn’t state - inserting their own agenda. But anyway I think karma is helpful as it is, there are other resources for Pros specifically to get better info on a potential Client - the Pro forum. I do feel the current system works as is, for Enthusiasts/Clients. I have never thought of Karmas as rewards. I take time to understand your POV stated in your posts.
I actually thought I understood what problem he was trying to address. It looked like it was about retaliatory karma. But his proposed solution of not allowing bad karma does not address it in any good way. All it does is allow bad people to get away more, which will get more people hurt.
@g_w_t_w I thought I had misunderstood what he was talking about, which is why I asked for clarification. His answer indicates the idea is bad karma would be visible to the mods. Positive karma would be visible to everyone.
One possible problem here is that if only the site is seeing negative comments, and they are not available to enthusiasts, it puts the complete onus on the site. As it stands now, if you see someone has bad karma, you have the ability to choose whether or not you proceed with them. If you don't know there's bad karma, only the site does, you can't make an informed decision. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like blocking members from seeing that information could increase the site's legal exposure if something happens. As it stands now, CC disavows any legal liability ... it's strictly a caveat emptor situation.
Best analogy I can come up with is Angi. If only the site could see negative reviews of contractors, then how can a potential client make an informed choice? And if the contractor you hire scams you and the site hasn't shared the contractor has been accused of that before, how is their potential liability not increased?
Bottom line, IF I am understanding the idea correctly, it puts way too much on the shoulders of the mods and is too risky for the site in general.
If I am misunderstanding what's being suggested, please let me know and I will edit or delete this post.
I have no problem disagreeing with my suggestions...I at least try to offer a suggestion for fixing a known problem..people may have better ideas but at least trying to address a problem and not just throwing my hands up
@dennis22554 You raised an issue. You suggested a solution. That's pretty much the limit of what you can do.
@mark @gary are the only ones who matter in terms of whether or not they agree with you because it is their site and their design. If you are wondering whether any of this is even practical or realistic, or even good or necessary, they are the ones to ask.
@dennis22554 What problem are you trying to solve? I assumed it was retaliatory karma based on what you initially said, and you never disagreed with or corrected that. But I also know your aversion to clarifying what you mean, which results in people answering something other than what you intended.
Maybe an alternative could be a simple pass/fail system. I feel really awkward rating and reviewing clients, especially because sessions are supposed to be confidential. What makes more sense is maybe just giving the client a green check mark to verify that they are safe to work with.
@IronLemon Agreed. I'm having a bit of trouble following the progression of thoughts. He remarked a while back about starting a reading class, which I assume was a snarky way of implying we don't have adequate reading comprehension. I'm graduate-level educated and I know plenty of people here are intelligent enough to hold a conversation. Sometimes it helps for a person to consider that maybe the real issue is working on one's communication skills.