I suspect there is some information that you are not giving on this thread that doesn't support your non-complaint. You say you didn't know how to contact them, then say you sent an email "explaining" using the link at the bottom. So you did contact them. Did you actually request a clarification? Anyway, since you're not complaining, then what is the point of extending this thread?
Ok, I have probably posted 50 reviews (I have used other screen names over the years). Maybe more. Anyway, I know how to write a review. So I submit a review -- no names, yet; will wait for it to be approved, which it will, eventually -- and it is rejected for insufficient details. I described in detail the oral aspect, the kissing, the licking, the DT action, the tightness of her vaginal muscles, the slurping and rimming.... Except for the length of her toe nails, this review had just as many details as most, more than some (although, admittedly, fewer than others).
My point is this: there seems to be no rhyme or reason in the rejection process. I have seen reviews where the details were summed up in three sentences. What gives? RT Over & Out.
PS - have resubmitted, as I said, and will await outcome of the TER evaluators before I name names....
Apparently, there are unwritten rules about what is required and what is forbidden, so you just have to learn them from experiencing rejection. If the feedback for rejection is unclear, then I ask for clarification.
For example, for some reason, the feedback was to specifically state that a condom was applied before penetration. Another feedback was to not mention that the trick pad looked "lived in", so as to not imply that this location was also where the provider lived.
I'm sure anyone who has submitted a number of reviews has had their fair share of rejections. You just need to accept that they have many rules that you won't know about until you violate them.
They rejected my reviews before because in my haste to get the details down on the page I forgot to mention anything about the condom, which I always use, as should everyone every time. I never meant to imply that the girl would be so unwise as to go bbfs with any guy other than her husband a few years from now. I would hope everyone realizes that as soon as you go bb, you are exposing yourself to everyone that person has ever been with, multiplied by everyone all of them have ever been with, and so on and so on....
the review was pretty thorough, and I have no clue why it was rejected. the ter admin says to contact them, but then they don't say how.....
Sheesh. RT Frustrated & Out
Then select "Review Questions" from the drop down menu from the "Contact Us" link at the top of the screen. As I mentioned, the volume of detail is not the criterion. Yes, it would help if they were more specific as to exactly what they are looking for, but that's not something I can control.
...and sent them an email explaining.... No reply other than to re-reject the review, with their note to contact them to find out why.
Very frustrating.
I suspect there is some information that you are not giving on this thread that doesn't support your non-complaint. You say you didn't know how to contact them, then say you sent an email "explaining" using the link at the bottom. So you did contact them. Did you actually request a clarification? Anyway, since you're not complaining, then what is the point of extending this thread?
I have had a review or two rejected (temporarily) for 'insufficient details' as well. I easily picked out two posted reviews that barely gave any details, other than the provider was female. I copied those and sent them in as evidence of reviews that apparently pass muster at TER. My review looked like a novel compared to the Fortune Cookie reviews that had been approved and posted. TER reversed their stance and accepted my review as originally submitted.
You are correct...the criteria is very vague.
i tried submitting a review about a month ago.
1st rejection says it lacks details, so i fix that and then get invalid ad link to provider...
then i fixed that and
today receive "lack of details"
btw, i've seen some reviews that are very short and lack details and i think are worst than mine
need help or input fellas
should not be so hard...
other rivals sites aren't as picky
won't name the other site, but a lot easier than the ter
I've been lucky with 6 for 6. the one time it was rejected, they gave a reason. When I fixed their issue, they passed. Isn't it important to find out why?
and still they get posted.. i really don''t understand..
i guess I am going to have to write a novel on my session
this is ridiculous.
some reviews are a ust a paragraph at most and still get posted
So, guys, YOU make the call. Here is the Juicy Details section. Insufficient detail? You be the judge:
REVIEW BELOW REVIEW BELOW:
In the bedroom got a nice kiss, hug and standing body to body massage. Off to the shwowers, where she did a thorough cleaning, if no preview BBBJ.... Back to the bedroom, where she then proceeded to lick me from stem to stern, and I do mean stern. She rimmed me til I couldn't take it, so I got on my hands and knees and she rimmed me deeper while stroking me.... Then she orally worshipped 'the boys,' and they enjoyed it. She spent a lot of time there and got my rock hard with her hands.... She attempted DT and got close...really good try.... [13][13]On the flip, she slowly, and i do mean S L O W L Y teased my cock and finally engulfed it, but not until she had licked it from top to bottom... This gal does a pretty darn good DT. Not fully in the throat, but 3/4 of the cock in and the tip almost into the throat. She goes fast, slow, circular...you name it she tried it...[13][13]She is also a sweet and happy provider -- no attitude except positive. She then offered condom and I hopped on for a ride. Mish, Doggie, CG....
She made a lot of slurping sounds while sucking, by the way...LOTS.... This can be a turn on or turn off, depending on the individual, but for me, it was ok. Your reaction might be very intensely in favor, or not...cannot say. But she is a very oral gal, and will try to please that way....
On went the cover and she offered me her rear -- not Greek, just doggie -- but I wanted to look into her eyes, so opted fro mish...and stayed there for the finish...very tight vaginal muscles...very intense orgasm, or, as she called it, 'orcashem'. She slowed and stopped from time to time, as if resting.... Did not understand what she was doing, but it was fine with me, since it extended the time in the saddle very nicely. No other positions were necessary to bring me to an explosive orgasm in the bag. Very sweet girl. Will repeat.
They must have multiple individuals making judgments on the reviews, with each subjectively and arbitrarily applying TER "standards" whatever those might. Plenty of reviews with much less detail get posted and I'd rather see it that way than setting the bar higher and higher.
Here are my observations:
She made a lot of slurping sounds while sucking,
On went the cover and she offered me her rear -- not Greek, just doggie -- but I wanted to look into her eyes, so opted fro mish...
But - no transition to slurping? Nitpicking. But I see the points upon taking a more critical eye to the review. Actually initally mentions 3 positions, but later only suggests dog & mish, so was it 2 or 3? I can see the concern about the cover, but I didn't read it that way. I think I wrote a review where it looked like the auditor wasn't clear and I think edited my review rather than rejecting. Does that every happen? I think I wrote something like "went to mish" and when the review was posted it said "went to mish (cov)." I've seen that "(cov)" in some other reviews and it just seems like something a hobbiest wouldn't write it in that manner. That's what made me think auditor may, or at least have in the past, have inserted their own clarification/corrections rather than outright review rejection. Might wrong, but that's the impression I got.
I do not approve or reject reviews. I am a regular TER member and am just using an alias.
Thought that was the case, but what you said makes sense. Probably more than staff that actually do the audits.
Thanks. I guess I have to specifically state that the condom was applied and on before commencing intercourse. Of course, that is NOT why they rejected the review. TER said it was for lack of details. If it was for something else, they should simply say so.... Also, they could respond to my emails asking for clarification, or not, as they see fit. It's their site, we just play here....
I'm sure most of you know, there is a whole group of loser/ A**hole guys out there who look for girls they can do without a condom. They don't care about the girls at all and are true misogynists who don't care if they spread diseases. They try to look for reviews that don't mention condom. Guys, unless you want HIV (didn't you hear about the recent porn stars who got HIV!), use a condom every time! And boycott girls who are not careful about their moneymakers and seem like they don't know how important condoms are to everyones health! Just mention you used a condom. It is important to TER.
So, to follow up...still no word other than, "contact us," which I do, with no response. I give up. Maybe the All Seeing, All Knowing, All Powerful Wizard of Doc Gonzo can assist/advise, because I haven't a clue what TER is objecting to, now.... RT Beaten & Out
TER finally tells me that the reason they rejected the review was because I included in the first section of general remarks a few sentences that should have gone in the juicy details. Specifically, I mentioned that in the shower the gal did "rub-a-dub-dub" but "not bbbj," which is a no-no on the general remarks section. So, I screwed up, as far as that goes. On the other hand, if TER had told me that at the outset, instead fo saying that I had included insufficient details, it would have all been cleared up without the necessity of this thread.... RT Illuminated & Out