Who think's some of us inflate the appearance portion of the review when we receive outstanding service and vice versa.
I know that this business is hard and we don't want to do damage to someone's way of making a living.
However, I felt that I was tricked by fellow reviewers when I met a provider that is just plain and average and is rated 8 and above.
I think a provider can be a 6 in looks and a 9 or 10 in performance just like someone can be a 9 or 10 in looks and 2 or 3 in performance. It should be rated as such if that is the case.
Performance is more subjective and a function of YMMV. There is no way an average or plain looking provider be objectively rated 8 or 9 even accounting for different taste for different people.
Let's face it: a lot of us aren't exactly hunks -- that may be one reason why we do see providers (we either aren't getting laid, or we want to get laid by somebody more attractive than our "station", so to speak). Because of that, we don't feel comfortable rating somebody's looks, and the ranking ends up being relative -- which is useless. And of course, not being laid very often gives you something very similar to beer goggles when it comes to the bedroom partner.
This isn't a "YMMV" case, though that is what people will say. If you take the person that you find the most attractive in the world, and put the reviewee up against them, would you say they are "90% as attractive"? No way, but you feel guilty pointing that out.
That's why I prefer visual descriptions (height-weight estimations, body type, etc.), and even better yet a picture (yeah, I realize we won't see too many faces, but you can get a general idea about body type from a picture). Numerical ratings are pretty much useless.
No, I agree, sometimes I will see a provider that should be a 6 or 7 at best and the review has her at a 9 or 10. I do not wish to disparage any of the girls but I do want to know what I am getting.