I have recently had a thorough review rejected due to a bad website (the young ladies ad expired). I have also had to bulk up several reviews to ad more details, although I thought the necessary details existed. This is all fine, it is good to have standards, although I don't agree with all of them.
That said please look at the below review:
http://theeroticreview.com/reviews/ShowReview.asp?Review=314774&user=336771
This is not meant to criticize the young lady, who has several strong reviews, or the gentlemen, this is his first review. However, this review is pretty much worthless, there are no details. Looks like she just danced, but was given a 10 for performance. How can a 10 be given for performance when none of the TER requirements for a score over 7 were met. Maybe I am missing something here, but I keep seeing reviews that don't meet TER's requirements or are obviously inside jobs, while I hear about solid reviews from long time contributors being nit picked.
Following is a link to the main review page, as you can see this review was approved with a bad website (wish I knew how to do that!):
http://theeroticreview.com/reviews/show.asp?id=13848
-- Modified on 11/11/2004 7:15:53 AM
hey JC..
well, lets see.. she's been in the biz since 2002, yet has only 7 reviews? All of them super high..
She has no website, yet scores high, so the logical reasoning is some TER reviewers simply accept everything without looking and others are more into details..
Certainly, having things rejected for less than obvious reasons while other reviews sail thru is just one of many ambiguities in this business!
--JB
Yeah Joe, I guess I am just whining a bit. But this review was just posted yesterday and if someone was not a vip member it would be completely misleading. Seems there should be a minimum amount of screening, especially for first time posters giving 10 and 10. Often these 10 and 10 one time posts end up being inside jobs, which is definitely not the case here.
Her other reviews are great. As I mentioned my post was not meant in any way to criticize her service, just used one review as an example.
Following is a message that I posted a week or so ago, that may be a better example. This young lady had no reviews and the poster had no reviews, yet he was able to give her a 9 for performance with everything covered, no kissing and no details:
Was looking at todays reviews and saw that a local girl got a great review (10 and 9). The link only takes you to a small picture, where there is little information. That page includes a link to the no-Limit agency.
Before jumping I would warn guys to collect information. There is only one review and it is the only review submitted by that person. In addition the review alludes (sp?) to a lot of great things but does not state specifics, although first page indicates no kissing and cbj...(the reviewers always require me to state specifics?) A girl could do very little and meet the reviews standards.
The young ladies name is Lissa, no-limit has a tall blonde named Lisa. This is not meant to disparage the reviewer, Lissa or Lisa, but we really need more information.
http://theeroticreview.com/reviews/show.asp?id=49595
-- Modified on 11/11/2004 7:49:49 AM
-- Modified on 11/11/2004 8:11:40 AM
This outfit (Erotic Occasions) is a PV kind of thing. Mostly, it is dancing. She used to be an escort but no long is. When she was, she was very good and why the ratings were very high. As for this most recent post, it does not seem to comply with TER standards since it is more a PV session. The previous website was
http://www.eroticescortfinder.com/escort_details.asp?escortid=163&NavStateCode=DC&NavCityID=
http://www.eroticoccasions.com/ladies/sonic_kiss/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SonicKiss/
By the way, the phone number is not hers on escort site. Hope this clears up some of the confusion.
I must agree with jc on this one as I see several reviews with less detail than my reviews. I caught up on some past due reviews last week. Of my 8 reviews 3 were held back for "not enough specific details".
I emphatically agree with you on the performance scoring. If she doesn't offer the services laid out on the criteria page then the review should be rejected or the score should be modified by the powers that be. As long as the rules are what they are then they should be enforced. But read the fine print, as long as a girl offers those services she can get the 9 or 10, just because you don't ask for them doesn't mean the score has to be discounted.
As for the bad website: Sometimes the website goes bad AFTER the revies have been published. That happened to one of mine and has happened to some of my "wishlist" the best approach is to contact the provider and have her update the info via the report a problem protocols.
Scampr - Thanks, both of your points are correct. However, in this case I am not sure if either applied. If I remember correctly this guy was begging and willing to pay anything for more and struck out. The web site could have gone bad after the review, but when I checked the web site was dead the same day the review was posted.
Alright, I have to quit whining. Have an interesting session lined up for tomorrow. Hope to post a glowing review soon.
I have had reviews kicked back because of bad websites too. Especially with those EROS.COM "Asian" sites. The girls change on a weekly basis and it is only a stange quirk of fate if you get one of the girls pictured and named on the sites.
...for giving me this VERY timely opportunity to vent my LATEST review "war story". I JUST got a new review approved on a dominatrix. As I understand it in the review guidelines and criteria, dommes don't have to do the same things as GFE's to be considered as going the "extra mile". Reason? Almost all serious dommes never even perform nude, muchless provide any sex acts. Hence their grading criteria (out of necessity) must be different than a GFE's. The domme which I reviewed is arguably one of the best in the country by almost all established criteria. I gave her a performance rating of 9. Considering that she is a domme, I thought that the specifics of my review more than supported that rating. However, TER knocked it back two whole points to a 7 "nice time". For a domme of her stature, that is almost a "slap in the face". If she sees my review, she will almost certainly think I was disappointed in her and her performance since she has previous TER reviews which DO give her "9" ratings.
So, this is sort of what some others have talked about on this thread, IN REVERSE. As jeep said, talk about INCONSISTENT. In this case, why review if TER is only going to change the review to something quite different from what the actual reviewer intended? Seems like if they make a change of that magnitude (and they weren't even WITH the provider and didn't have the experience), the review ceases to be MINE and essentially becomes THEIRS. Since they weren't there, what gives them that RIGHT?? IMHO, the TER screener didn't pay attention to the fact that he wasn't screening a GFE, and that dommes must be graded differently. Again IMHO, I feel he BLEW it!
So now what? You tell me. With everybody else's track record with disputing TER calls on reviews, what's the use in my contacting them to try to get it changed back? Seems to me, little or NONE. Talk about the height of frustration and the pits of exasperation. Seems like these guys need to be "sent back to review screening school". They've assumed such power, it has "gone to their heads".