Completely agree. A few problems with different scores.
White knights wanting to get in the good graces of the provider after their review is read. Eye of the beholder. When I think of a 10, I imagine Nina Agdal or Bar Rafaela. Will always be a problem but it does suck seeing inflated numbers when they are really a little above average.I read a recent review of a lady I was thinking of seeing and then looked at all of her reviews. She has scores for appearance from a high of 10 (once in a lifetime) hard to imagine - to 6. Are we supposed to split the difference? It would be nice if guys were realistic and not looking with the one eye.
Completely agree. A few problems with different scores.
White knights wanting to get in the good graces of the provider after their review is read.
Eye of the beholder. When I think of a 10, I imagine Nina Agdal or Bar Rafaela. Will always be a problem but it does suck seeing inflated numbers when they are really a little above average.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Too many guys have very narrow tastes in appearance. (Did you know there are websites devoted to oddly beautiful women?)
Some guys punish women with scores if they will not discount.
Read the review. Is this the kind of interaction that you want?
And then, take a chance. She has reviews, so she is authentic.
Life is boring if you eat or dress the same way all the time.
You are not going to find a supermodel providing!!!!!
Thinking that a "10" is going to be like one of the gals mentioned is ridiculous. By the way, they have their make-up professionally applied and are photographed by the best photographers and are Photoshopped as well.
Each of us has a different idea of a great looking women, the number ratings are just a general guideline.
To the OP. I understand your confusion, that is a big swing. Did the guy(s) that gave her a 10 have a lot of reviews? Newbies often are so happy to get laid they tend to over rate. Was the guy(s) that gave her a 6 unhappy with the performance? I often see that when a client has a less than good session his appearance ratings also get lowered, has the 6 guy written a lot of reviews? Is he a "tough" grader? Some guys give out too many 10's and others have impossibly high standards.
You might not want to "split the difference" but average out the scores, and then figure a half point lower.
You are not going to get Bar Rafaela (OMFG yes a true 10) for $350 an hour.
Good luck!
I understand that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I have seen her pics on her site and she is a 7 - 8 tops. I think we can all agree that a 10 would be someone like Monica Bellucci and we are not going to find those here very often so why score them that way? Lets be a bit realistic shall we? Please?
I have no idea who you are talking about nor do I care to look. However, what I consider to be gorgeous and stunning will be completely different from others. If I rate a woman a 10 in looks, it is because "I" think she is a 10. I do not expect anyone to agree with my rating nor do I agree with others. For me, the ladies rating also figures in personality. So a lady that only gets a 9 in looks but a "my" type of gal personality would have a higher score.
As far as the other score, that just irritates me. Too many clients just guess on what is offered. Because remember that score is based on what is offered not what the 2 of you enjoyed.
In general..I take the number give and reduce by 1...as it is usally too high.....and nothing agasint the gals being rated...but 8-9-10 seem to be given way too much.....
Does the rating score for appearance really matter if the providers has pictures? Whether her pictures are real and accurate means more to me than the score, which is very subjective.
Putting a person's appearance on a number scale seems rather demeaning to me.
different people like different things and are attracted to different looks but it is so much more than that. psychologist will explain that 60% of the decision about the food in a restaurant is made before you taste the food. when you meet some one who could be a 6 or a 9 at the extremes, it will depend on other things. was the first contact friendly, did you like the sound of her voice, the atmosphere when you arrived is just the start. It is not misleading or did honest. From experience most of us can recall a meeting with a lady who started out less than attractive and in the 15 minuets before we walked out she became truly ugly. More often it goes the other way, a lady who could be a 5 or 6 objectively takes an a glow in the heat of the moment, Take a good look at your old wedding photos and compare it to the lady you went through divorce with. Kind people get better looking mean people are ugly.
You take the aggregate of the Appearance scores then add the aggregate of the Performance scores minus total number of reviews divided by two. Divide total by number of reviews then divide by two. Then make an appearance rating based on her pictures multiplied by number of reviews. Subtract number of reviews divided by 4 or 2 if pictures where clearly edited, then divided by number of reviews. Then divide by two. Add the two scores then divide by two. MAYBE?
L=Aggregate Looks
P=Aggregate Performance
R=Number of reviews
I=Personal Looks rating based on pictures
(((((L + (P-(R/2)))/R)/2)+((((I*R)-(R/4 or 2))/R)/2))/2
Example TER ID 8602 randomly picked
8.55*125=AGG LOOKS 1069 Rounded
8.3*125=AGG PER 1037 Rounded
(1037-(125/2))/125=974.5
(1069+974.5)/125=16.348
16.348/2=8.174
8*125=1000
1000-(125/4)=968.75
968.75/125=7.75
8.174+7.75=15.924
15.924/2=7.962
So Looks are really 7.962 or not. I have not had a Honey Bun in a few days and I am having withdrawls.
You spend a lot of time thinking about this? Or typing it?
I know I spent way too long looking at it lol.
My system is a little more scientific.
1. Like her picture...
2. Has solid positive reviews...
3 Price point good?
4. Contact/Set up appointment
5. See...Review (maybe)..Repeat.
L=Aggregate Looks
P=Aggregate Performance
R=Number of reviews
I=Personal Looks rating based on pictures
(((((L + (P-(R/2)))/R)/2)+((((I*R)-(R/4 or 2))/R)/2))/2
Example TER ID 8602 randomly picked
8.55*125=AGG LOOKS 1069 Rounded
8.3*125=AGG PER 1037 Rounded
(1037-(125/2))/125=974.5
(1069+974.5)/125=16.348
16.348/2=8.174
8*125=1000
1000-(125/4)=968.75
968.75/125=7.75
8.174+7.75=15.924
15.924/2=7.962
So Looks are really 7.962 or not. I have not had a Honey Bun in a few days and I am having withdrawls.
My formula: Smile + Look me in the eyes + knowing touch = Perfect
Like it...your way is even simpler!
But, has anyone ever accused you of thinking too much
Eye appeal x pant tenting (mine not hers) volume x boobie (hers not mine) volume = SCORE
I am not sure what is worse the fact that Dr TR came up with this formula or that I am correcting it. I notice the "4 or 2" in the formula and thought it was really odd and then I notice that (1037 - (125/2)/125 does not equal 974.5 it is 7.8 so I decided to go through the example and got
8.55 * 125 = 1069 which is (L*R)
8.30 * 125 = 1037 which is (P*R)
(1037-(125/2))125 = 974.5? (7.8 actually) which is ((P*R)-(R/2))/R
(1069+974.5)/125 = 16.348 which is ((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R
16.348 / 2 = 8.174 which is (((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2
8*125 = 1000 which is (I*R)
1000-(125/4)=968.75 which is (I*R)-(R/4)
968.75 / 125 = 7.75 which is ((I*R)-(R/4))/R
8.174 + 7.75 = 15.924 which is ((((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2)+(((I*R)-(R/4))/R)
15.924 / 2 = 7.962 which is:
(((((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2)+(((I*R)-(R/4))/R))/2
But this formula is overly complicated since it just takes the average of looks score, performance score - .5 and personal looks score -.25. I think your base formula of ((L*R)-(R/2))/R should be ((L*R)-(2/R))/R. Having the review variable on the denominator would give a two point penalty to a person with only one review and get closer to the actual score as provider got more reviews which is the effect I think you were going for. The variable on the numerator makes the review penalty a constant.
So did I get an A+ professor?
Genius!
8.55 * 125 = 1069 which is (L*R)
8.30 * 125 = 1037 which is (P*R)
(1037-(125/2))125 = 974.5? (7.8 actually) which is ((P*R)-(R/2))/R
(1069+974.5)/125 = 16.348 which is ((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R
16.348 / 2 = 8.174 which is (((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2
8*125 = 1000 which is (I*R)
1000-(125/4)=968.75 which is (I*R)-(R/4)
968.75 / 125 = 7.75 which is ((I*R)-(R/4))/R
8.174 + 7.75 = 15.924 which is ((((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2)+(((I*R)-(R/4))/R)
15.924 / 2 = 7.962 which is:
(((((L*R) + ((P*R)-(R/2))/R)/R)/2)+(((I*R)-(R/4))/R))/2
But this formula is overly complicated since it just takes the average of looks score, performance score - .5 and personal looks score -.25. I think your base formula of ((L*R)-(R/2))/R should be ((L*R)-(2/R))/R. Having the review variable on the denominator would give a two point penalty to a person with only one review and get closer to the actual score as provider got more reviews which is the effect I think you were going for. The variable on the numerator makes the review penalty a constant.
So did I get an A+ professor?
Further, I think you would do well to incorporate some kind of outlier-elimination logic once a provider has a statistically significant N of, say, 15 reviews. You could use either a Gaussian or power-law (Pareto) approach to normalizing distribution.
Ultimately you could come up with a "karma" approach to scoring reviewers using a two-step process.
First, you identify reviewers whose tastes are either very similar (high R^2) or very different (low R^2) than your own. You do this by looking at pictures of those who each reviewer has rated, or looking at the ratings for providers you have both seen, and comparing your ratings.
You also look for bias by looking at the reviwer's history. Some reviewers may have a tendency toward higher or lower assessment.
You then create a filter that takes as its input the correlation factor (R squared) and a bias factor of each reviwer that then weights your scoring mechanism.
Any woman looks good with her chin on your balls. I have witnessed amazing transformations myself. Additionally, their eyes have gotten much more seductive from that point of view. I will continue to experiment and report back on this spooky phenomenon.
What if she doesnt have a chin? This one in the link gets a score of 7 from TER reviewers. Wonder what a 4 would look like? Aliciah Hartoley got a 7 too. Her pictures look like they were taken by a coroner.
"Madam, at night all cats are grey."
I get the biggest kick out of the 6-6 scores that detail what a great looking lady she is and what a great time he had! And then "I've already repeated!"
This is what I do
1) Look at the actual pics - if accurate you can make up your own mind from that
2) Read the review details - will hopefully tell you if the pics are reasonably accurate or not and reveal other details the pics may not
3) Check out other reviews by the reviewers - helps give you a better idea of how a given reviewer looks at the ladies, particularly if you find someone you have also seen
I think there is also some merit in paying less attention to the highest and lowest scores. Also keep in mind that not every ad a provider has up is listed in her profile. A reviewer may respond to a provider based off of an ad that is not in her profile but when he reviews her that ad is not automatically added to her profile.
And I've wondered the same thing. Funny you should suggest splitting the difference, because I'd honestly rate myself (looks alone) as an 8
You are too modest.....you're beautiful baby!!