I recently submitted a provider review that included a 10 performance score. However, the review was not approved because it failed to meet certain services "offered" criteria. This is a flawed policy. You cannot objectively score subjective service. If I think the woman deserves a 10 that should communicate that she rocked my world whether she offered every conceivable sexual permutation or not. Maybe I don't want everything available. Maybe she finds some practices dangerous or distasteful. That should not prevent a perfect score if she was perfect for me.
The unintended consequences are that clients will eventually lie about the session to acquire the 10 score for their favorite provider thus creating unrealistic expectations for the next new client, or the provider may subject herself to activities she deems distasteful or too dangerous to enhance her scores and improve her business. Neither one of these are good in my opinion.
Comments?
Someone will correct me but I think they are reevaluating the scoring system here and plan on making changes.
Your complaint has been mentioned numerous times and of course it is dead on accurate.
Any and all should be available to get a 10 as adding an "objective" standard (ana, really bi, etc) to a "subjective" score is problematic on its face.
..right after they roll out the new TER software they told us all about last year.
and many people, including myself, would agree, but TER makes the rules, so that is that.
One way around this is to mention in the text of your review that you would score her a 10 were you able to
I tend to rate high like you, but unlike looks-that is very subjective-performance has boundaries and is more objective. If you are with a provider who does massage only, and no BBBJ's, DFK and/or anal, one can only give a "7". These providers are aware of this. If you see someone who offers only covered BJ's, that's still a 7.
For each additional "perk" she performs on/to you, you can add "1".
If she gives you a BBBJ, you can give her an 8
If she also DFK's with you, you can giver her a 9
Is she allows anal, you can give her a 10.
I might not be totally 100% correct here, but these are the basic scoring rules.
I see many reviewers give a 7 based on TER criteria, but say in the body of the review that, "to me she deserves a 10".
That's my two cents.
you can add 1 if she's bi.
But a guy isn't going to know if she is really bi or not, so right off the bat that is (IMHO) a bogus score option that hopefully TER will remove if or when they revamp the scoring system.
Yes, u cannot REALLY tell if a girI Is bi unless they are me or you are lopaw.
Because I am really really bi.
And lopaw is a female who.can tell when females are fakers.
Lol!
I have had the very same thing happen with a few of my reviews. For instance, I am not at all interested in Greek, and so if it's not on her menu then I could care less, but now I can't give her a 10. To be clear, if it's on her menu and you don't choose to partake you can still give her a 10.
I don't understand it myself, but those are the laws of the land and we must play the hand we are dealt.
I know for certain, that a lady in the top 5 (United States), doesn't do Greek, and yet she has all 10's on every review. I can't figure that out, but resistance in this matter is futile.
The best I've found is to communicate in your review that although you cannot by rule give a 10, she was a 10.
Nothing is perfect, TER is by far the best, but still not perfect.
She needs to do 3 of the following 5:
1) BBBJ
2) DFK
3) Anal
4) Lesbian i.e. Really Bi
5) More than One Guy
many girls get profiled as "really bi" in order for a reviewer to game the system, when in fact, they don't know for sure and the girl has never offered doubles. If a girl has been reviewed in a doubles session, then you can still give her a 10 thereafter even if you see her individually, because she is already established as "really bi". Although "anal" and "more than one guy" holds little or no interest for me, I find the "really bi' trait to be a reasonable threshold to receive a perfect score of 10 for service. However, it needs to be fact-based, not illusory in order to give a higher score. If I were pope of this place, I would require a link to a doubles session review in order to allow a 10 based on "really bi."
I like threesomes a lot but a guy that doesn't should still be able to give a girl who doesn't do them a 10 if he wants.
What does he care what she does do, or doesn't do, with other people? He only cares what she does, and how well she does it, with HIM.
Its all a mess and I think we do agree on that.
is "really bi". My first two doubles sessions (8-10 years ago before I knew better) were with providers who didn't interact with each other. Both just paid attention to me and the sessions were enjoyable. But, nothing near what a session is like when the providers are "really bi".
I was suggesting that a claim of "really bi" would have to be linked to a doubles review that SHOWED the girl was bi from what the reviewer described as some FF action within the session. I agree with you that many doubles sessions, especially with Kgirls, is just two girls tag-teaming you and doing half the work each for the same money
i am bi, but do not associate with other providers...my bi part comes for couples that seek a bi female...i should not have to offer a double session with another provider to be "really bi"
Sadly even a doubles session doesn't mean that she is really bi. All it means is that she is willing to at least make it look good enough to pass, and most guys wouldn't be able to tell the difference. It really ruins it for folks searching for a TRULY bi provider and virtually everyone of the profiles here lists "really bi". The odds alone tell you that it is unlikely that 90% of the providers on TER are "really bi", tho that is what the profile says. makes the search that much harder having to weed out the gay for pay and the all-out frauds.
I think you correctly state the rules on how extra points may be earned, but other than the word of the provider that she's "really bi" or willing to do MFM, it's meaningless. I've seen many scores above 7 that say really bi but there are no doubles mentioned in any review or on her site. It seems like an easy cheat. If I'm incorrect, please let me know.
My ATF didn't partake in Greek when I was seeing her, she recently started gentle Greek and is currently on hiatus. But this woman rocked my world like no other, all other providers I've seen are measured to the bar which she set, looks, performance and personality. A few have come close and have gotten 10's from me, but none have surpassed her.
So here's the thing, at the time I was seeing her, no Greek, no threesomes either other men nor women. So, I ask rhetorically, I can't rate her performance a 10, even though she was the very best in every regard? Now of course, since she offers Greek I can give her a 10, if she ever comes back from her hiatus. Even though she has an amazing ass it's just not my thing.
IMHO, deepthroat should be one of the criteria which could raise a performance to a 10, in her case this would have permitted me to give her a 10 all 8 times that I saw her. And by the way, I'm talking deepthroat, not deep mouth as it turns out a lot of reviewers call deepthroat. Very few of the ladies whom I've seen which the guys write that deepthroat actually do deepthroat. To be clear, I'm only average endowed, so it's not that I'm too big.
Really Bi
More than one guy
OR
A glorious, enthusiastic, completely uninhibited, completely thorough, 15 minute ass-cleaning from a lovely lady's tongue??
Yet, if you have a rapturous rare experience like this you still BY RULE can't give the lady a 10 if she ONLY does BBBJ and DFK from the other things on the list?
Sorry, something is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed with this, IMO.
assuming a bbbj (+1), dfk (+1) and if she suggests a double with her friend so she's bi (+1) takes you to 10.
ask her if she's bi.
if she doesn't dfk or give bbbj then she's outta luck, but very few women refuse those services.
Seems the rules are applied/enforced rather haphazardly.
Hard to re-write the rule book and still maintain a top 100 list (but that's a whole other topic). You'll have better luck getting consensus on a rewrite of the 2nd Amendment.
I once scored a well established massage girl 7 on performance only to have the mod ask if I wanted to up it to 8 based on other reviewers comments that she DFK. I noted that this was not offered to me, and so I'll stick at 7. That was ~4 years ago and i haven't had a mod comment on a score since. Not sure if they are less active in reviews now, but I see more and more scores that don't match performance descriptions.
Anymore I roll my eyes and call a regular
in the juicy details, my review has been rejected claiming I can't write that. Of note, I've seen the same written 100 times. Eh.
Not worth the effort to complain or point the finger, I remove the reference.
I've reviewed a gal that loves anal as do I. It doesn't mean we partake at every meal. On the contrary, it's a delicacy that I like
to indulge when the mood strikes.
Frankly, my cock feels better in her pussy, it's amazing. Her rules are no CBJ and no DATY🙁 ... but the DFK, nipples play and fucking were a 10 every time. EVERY.
As most agree, improvements to the system would be welcome and if your listening TER ... PLEASE make it unnecessary to have to update the escorts profile IF nothing has changed.
but I do get the reason for making every reviewer fill out the profile. They want you to earn your 15 days of free VIP. There are enough fake reviews out there as it is, can you imagine how many more there would be if you could pop them out in 2-3 minutes time?
I've been only doing this for ten+ years but if there's one thing I've learned it's to read reviews. And I ONLY put credence into reputable reviewers. And gals. I still check reviews from guys I read when I started. It works for me.
It's like your bartender. If he tells you to try something, you do. Because he knows you and what you like. Get it
They might not be a problem for you, but they are a problem for both the guys and the girls alike. Any that cuts down on review fraud is a good thing as far as I am concerned.
Now if they would only get rid of those fucking "top" lists we might start making some progress in that regard.
understood. I just see it as the 80/20 rule. With the ability to search for escorts with 0nly 9 and 10 performance scores, we'd all create the same Top 10 list for our respective areas. Needless to say, these are the ladies I'd prefer to see when the rate is in my play zone
It seems they'd have to get rid of the numerical criteria and go/stay with a more subjective option like they have now. There's also the.
o put unity to include a personal touch with Atmosphere. I've seen a few dillies, but most are in line with the verbal criteria, like Once in a Lifetime, etc.
Now that I've solved that .... I'm sitting outside, beer in hand at a small bistro ... no hooker in tow (tomorrow, sans bistro) ...
Happy Father's Day NoB . May you get lucky on Sunday too... you to GG
Now if they would only get rid of those fucking "top" lists we might start making some progress in that regard.
It is possible for a massage provider to get a 10 in this system without offering traditional FS sex.
I just find that more than a little odd.
Just kidding.
As mentioned previously, the rules are applied haphazardly. I once gave a provider a 10 for performance, even though she didn't meet the criteria, and it went through. She subsequently updated the menu items on her profile.
This has been discussed many times on S&P, too.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=13714&boardID=4&page=#13714
7/7 is a better score (100%) than 8/10 or 9/10, right? Post scores as X/N instead of just X.
Just allow +1 0 -1 or even just +1 -1.
And lopaw has commented on the "gay for pay" gals who aren't really bi at all but claim to be to get higher scores. What about FIV. I like FIV but not all Providers allow it. Why isn't FIV +1 to the max score allowed?
I'm going to toss out another suggestion about "10 - One in a lifetime." Should there be just ONE 10 in a lifetime? Just imagine if they wrote some code so that each Reviewer could award one and only on "10 - One in a lifetime." If he reviews a new provider and gives her a 10, his previous 10 gets automatically switched to a "9 - Forgot it was a service." You could do the whole database right now (based on the most recent 10) and watch a million 10s get switched to 9s in the blink of an eye.
If TER Admin is doing anything behind the scene, I wish they'd discuss it with us and get a dialog going
Your approach solves some types of problems -- and perhaps is preferable to what is currently in place.
That said the issue is really one of combining two aspects into a single metric -- types of services and the quality of providing each of the services are different issues. Not sure what the best approach is -- rate each of the itemized services and have that displayed in the review? TER could then create some weighting system to produce an average performance score for producing things like Top 10 and Top 100 and use that in the current search functionality -- but then each of us will really need to drill into the review to understand the performance rating just as each should be doing in terms of reading the juicy details.
i don't really care what the english designations of the scoring increments; they could be named after the 7 dwarves and 3 stooges for all i care.
what i concentrate on is the numbers. 10's are the best a lady can get; if i find a lady that deserves the best she can get and she can satisfy the silly ter requirements to get a 10, she gets a 10.
what if the designations were just simply
10 - really really really really good
9 - really really really good
8 - really really good
7 - really good
6 - good
5 - not so good
4 - really not so good
3 - really really not so good
2 - really really really not so good
1 - really really really really not so good
in other words, the math counts more than the words.
i'll give you fiv though. i prefer that over daty, so sueme.
but it's TER's site so they get to make the rules and seems like a lot of people have learned how to deal with it.
It the defense of the current system (and I'm not a fan either) they do need to attempt to provide some type of objective structure if there is even going to be a remote claim of common basis for the ratings. If the objective aspects as removed it's not clear we need a numerical rating system all or that it would be useful at all.
In any case you can use the requirements as part of your interpretation of the other reviewers ratings -- if a girl doesn't qualify for a 10 but is getting 9s that's probably someone worth seeing. Take away some external constraint like the TER system imposes and you may start seeing a lot of 10s that you leave the session thinking you could have done better.
The services listed, like anal, BBJ, really bi, and----my favorite on this stupid list---BGB, only have to be OFFERED, not delivered.
BGB is the one that really gets me. How many times have any of you brought a buddy along? What fraction of all reviews even mention BGB? I've been to a few M&G, and guys, no offense, ain't no BGB happening with any of you, no matter what hot little number is in between.
So, it's BS to list the service, since it is almost NEVER actually happening. Okay, now someone will say "I did it 3 times back in 87". Sure. But, as a percentage of all encounters, its vanishingly small.
The larger issue is that it just makes no sense to artificially increase ratings for services that are theoretically available but not actually delivered in the encounter being reviewed. Just makes no sense at all.
All that said, I completely agree that a reviewer should be able to give a 9 or 10 on performance if the provider made him feel like it was a 9 or 10. Just state clearly what made you feel that way.
you read earlier, that there'll be those who will fall short in the description of the Juicy details, while mine might be considered
the opposite ... lengthy anyhoo
We each need to learn how to read between the lines. Regardless
of the system. I am open to be overwhelmed by TER enhancements
For the record, I completely agree with you. While DFK and BBBJ are VERY important to me, and I suppose I can see how anal could be a criteria to add points even though it's not really very important to me, the other two are completely meaningless to me. As a man, why would I even know much less care if the women I have sex with are bi, and as for BGB as you like to put it, I am with you 100% in not ever being with you in the same fucking bed with our clothes off and I don't have any male friends THAT fucking close.
with no access to the Juicy details, I learned to rely on the General Discussion. And of course, info provided by those whose opinions and descriptions I learned to trust in a very short time.
The numerical ratings did and still do direct me to those I might be interested in. Then I do my homework, seeking consistency of reviews. So for me, it's the written word that validates the rating.
One man's 10 is another man's 8 and conversely.
It's interesting to read how sometime words are ignored on the board and other times its taken verbatim. Maybe we guys have a time of the month too ... and while the system could be improved or updated in several areas, it works pretty same good for me.
Is there anyone out there that feels it's "failing" them
There are flaws with TER that I don't like but review scoring is definitely the BEST part about TER.
Would you be happy if you're allowed to give 10 but TER upped the scoring range to 13?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What is fair to you is NOT fair to some of us, guys and gals.
Subjective evaluations are too subject to YMMV...there have to be objective measures that we can all agree on, since reviews are a key criterion to others in evaluating who to see.
I have never been questioned on preformance numbers despite not meeting the TER critearia on some of my reviews ,I don't agree with the rule that (really bi) is needed to get a 10 rating.
worth the money
not worth the money
worth way more