Militant review censoring
I have been a member of this website for many years now, I don't really post on the forums, the reason I am here is to contribute reviews for sources and to make decisions on which ones to use myself based on other reviews.
I have had two reviews for the same source censored by the same moderator recently, and I am no newbie or dumbass. My reviews are quite thorough and well written. One review was censored for narcotics chat, but I was only talking about a prescription medication (just like SERMS and AIs) that happens to be used for pain relief as opposed to AAS related reasons, I hardly think this constitutes "narcotics chat"
The other review was censored as far as I can see because I didn't mention specific numbers of gains made, although I did mention to the presence of side effects was in accordance with the products expectations. I am really baffled about why these two reviews have been so militantly censored when I see some of the other rubbish that goes by unchecked as legitimate reviews, but that being said I am perfectly happy to amend the reviews, if I could just figure out a way to do it. There appears to be no way to make a reply comment to the moderator who censored me, or edit my review from the source page or my own account reviews section.
Please someone point me in the right direction as to how to rectify this. The source reviews are at the heart of eroids and think while moderation is obviously highly necessary in a community such as this, and while I mean no disrespect to any of the moderators on here individually I get the impression more than a little overmoderation is going on with people who enjoy exercising power over others.
Just my two cents, a little help here to continue to contribute to the community would be much appreciated. The link to the source page if i'm allowed to post it is here
AND ITS A RULES VIOLATION TO POST SOURCE NAMES, LINK AND BRANDS. I EDITED THIS AS WELL.
RH
- Bookmark
- 0
- 0
It isn't about "narcotics". If you guys would look a little bit closer this wouldn't be an issue. Discussion of Scheduled 1 & 2 narcotics is prohibited! That includes reviews by the way. AAS is a schedule 3 narc. Not on the list of forbidden here
Ok, there is certainly no confusion about what constitutes narcotics chat, I won't make that mistake again. Does that mean that my experience of the source counts for nothing and is not relevant to contributing to eroids for other members to make judgement calls on source reliability? If so, I guess that's just the way it is.
As for my other review, i can see now that my speficis of product quality were weak. I've still not been told how to fix this, do I just write a whole new review? If you wouldn't mind PMing me a full version of the flagged review I'd be happy to just repost a new amended one if editing the old versions isn't possible, but approach seems a little strange and would lead to cluttered review pages
Of course not. But why not provide a complete review.
Are you advocating that you'd prefer to read 10 "source experience" reviews for every 1 review on gear? That's how the "rule" came to be. We members asked for it. Rules evolve here. They are not dictated from on high. You should know that, you've been around long enough.
Unfortunately flagged reviews can not be unflagged (system issue, not policy).
Did you read my post below? I'm just waiting on you.
Unfortunately that particular review was for an order in which only "narcotics" were purchased. So a complete review would involve mostly narcotics chat. As for the other review, I shall repost an amended version, that PM you mentioned would be much appreciated. Thanks
RustyhookerThank you sir!
When you discuss ANY perscription medication that relieves pain, that IS narcotics chat....
Granted, my friend Tyrone probably doesnt sell them on the corner, but you can be assured that they will peak the interest of any self-respecting law enforcement agency.
We would rather not become the Silk Road of the athletic world.
You put great detail in the ordering process and service. And it did appear to be forthright and unbiased.
But when it came to the product itself, you fell flat. Rusty was correct in Flagging it.
What are your experiences exactly? are they like mine? what side effects did you expect? were they worse than other times? what were tha given dosages? for how long? how much weight did you gain? did you gain any size? How and when did you use the HCG?
If you understand why it was flagged and want to ask me in PM I'll be willing to copy the bulk of your review and send it to you.
To be clear, any drug that can also be considered a recreational drug and/or addictive, will be considered a narcotic no matter what the intended use.
RustyhookerHere's a copy of the rules by BFG.
http://www.eroids.com/rules-and-guidelines
RustyhookerI FLAGGED BOTH SINCE YOURE OBVIOUSLY NOT AWARE OF SITE RULES. NARCOTICS TALK WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED. AND FOR ALL YOUR SKILL, THE SECOND REVIEW WAS PISS POOR. I ALSO CLEARLY POSTED TWICE, A SUPER BASICALLY FORUM TO EXPLAIN YOUR ERRORS.
http://www.eroids.com/forum/general/general-talk/how-to-post-a-review-fo...
Ask any member on here what is wrong with reviews and everyone agrees that gtg, fire, feels great does not tell whether or not the experience was good.
Hard to tell as it's obviously been flagged but From the little I can see it seems like you reviewed the source and not the the quality of products e.g product quality and effectiveness, pip, weight gains, strength increase, sides, dosage, length of usage etc etc are all things to include in a review once you have fully used the items receive. Where as things like your opinion on prices and such are not really as important and at best should be secondary to the product review.