The restriction on Mini-Reviews reads to be based specifically around nomadic providers. It appears to be the view of the author that the singular valid purpose of a mini-review can only exist where the provider is nomadic and will disappear in a few hours. It is also described there that a "local" provider never would merit mini-reviews, because she will be here next week.
1) She may be in Europe for the summer, starting tomorrow, local or not.2) The Mini-Review is not for the provider, it is for the prospective client to vet her for safety and relative quality. Any delay in making a normal review available after it is posted following the actual session is time other people are looking at that ad wondering if that girl is safe, or fake, or a rob, or has a penis. The mini-review from a trusted source lets people know she is worth a shot and probably not going to feed you to her pigs. Restricting mini-reviews to nomadic providers only arbitrarily removes this safety net, the client's version of the reference check, for potentially days, on a whim. Safety is not a whimsical matter, and the ability to traffic this information is the stock and trade of a board like this, it is the purpose. We do not always have a week to wait until somebody approves a review, we have this block of time right here.
Allowing mini reviews on local providers would litter the regional boards with shills. That would encourage lazy hobbyists to put up mini reviews and not post a full review as required.
As far as fakes, penises and ROBS, they can already be posted on the regional boards and they do not fall under the mini review category.
BTW, nomads don't usually have homes. Touring providers do.
The policy as it stands allows for mini-reviews of Nomadic providers. Yes, I said Nomadic again, because I have watched the faces, the names, the area codes and so forth for years, and there are a great many girls who never seem to spend a majority of their time in any specific place. They might own land, a trailer, a dollhouse, an unemployed X-box welded grunting dependent who used to be a boyfriend might live there, but that doesn't matter from this end, does it? Of each thing ask, what does it do? They move around. Nomadic, and often, in packs.
In regard to the policy being sound, as I noted, it makes an exception for non-local providers. You posit that the policy is sound and prevents a flood of shills and the avoidance of review writing. How is there any difference whatsoever in the amount of shills or review writing avoiders between the guy who visits the girl at Motel 6 in the 707 area code from the 619 area code or the 415/510 area code? If anything, the pimp is going to write the shill in that case, like a form letter, as they move through areas. The policy as it stands does not serve to prevent the most obvious promotional agent, but instead, promotes him to elite status. It favors the "manager/promoter" of ill-repute at the expense of honest joes sharing timely safety and quality information so that honest janes can feed their cats, kids and whatever else attacks her when she falls through the door at the end of the day.
Rather than this outsiders only approach, why not simply explicitly limit the format to a specific length or set of details, or better yet, make a modification so that they exist only long enough for a review to clear and become visible.
... "arbitrary" seems to be the name of the game when it comes to site policies around these parts. I share your consternation.