Uh, oh, I feel another of those pensive, philosophical posts coming on. [Fair Warning Disclaimer: Leave now!] So, I'll offer a few observations on posts, reviews and credibility. First the specific, then the general.

As to VvH, Showmethemoneyy (an obvious alias) implies that he has in fact written a review of her under his true TER identity. I see no reason to doubt him. So let's use me instead.

I have also seen the lovely Victoria several times, and I second his recommendation. She is absolutely wonderful, fantastic and her 90+ excellent reviews are totally on target. No shilling, not an 'I love you Victoria' post, just my own observation and reaction. And yet, as is obvious to anyone who cares to check, I have never written a review of her. So why, Bill and Bacca might ask, should my comment be accorded any weight?

When a TER member posts a comment, good or bad, about a specific lady on a discussion board, is his credibility deminished if he has not written a review of the particular lady about whom he comments? I think not. While a member with no reviews to his name who offers what could be construed as a promotional post might be subject to having his credibility doubted, a member with a review history and a posting history should be entitled to credence unless he has proven himself unreliable in the past.

As I look back at my own reviews, I see I have not done one in over six months - although I think I feel another one percolating around. In point of fact, the 14 reviews I have submitted to TER represent only about 15% of the ladies I have seen in my time in this hobby. (And BTW Bill, I have seen, but not reviewed, one of the two ladies who you have reviewed - care to guess which?)

The question is often raised on various boards, why do members not write reviews of all the ladies they see for the benefit of all. I can only speak for myself, but personally I view reviews with mixed emotions. On the one hand, I do like having the benefit of reviews when I am considering seeing a provider who I have not yet met. On the other hand, I am often loathe to write one myself, as I feel it is in some way a violation of a shared intimacy. Also, the TER requirements for graphic details is a bit of a turn off - I absolutely hate the two liners that say basically "I came, I saw, I fucked." (apologies to J. Caesar)

So when I do sit down and write a review, I approach it as writing an erotic novella (although I do not claim that my style is up to the standards of some of the alltime great review writers of TER, such as the sorely-missed pauliewalnuts). Moreover, there is a certain amount of work involved in writing a review, as I approach the process, and generally I will write only when truly moved to do so, and only when I feel that my contribution will add to the body of TER knowledge. When a lady already has 60 or 70 reviews already in her profile which are consistent with my experience, I will rarely feel motivated to write a review at all, and will do so only if I feel I can add something unique to the state of knowledge about the particular provider. (Extra credit: find my three reviews that fit that criteria.)

The bottom line, I suppose, is that I participate in this hobby to enjoy myself, and I participate in this and other online communities to enjoy myself. The act of writing a review is not, in and of itself, particularly enjoyable, and I do it only when I feel that my review would have something new to contribute to the community - as in writing the first review of a lady who previously had no TER profile, or a review of a lady with a relatively small number of reviews.

I guess what I'm saying in all of these ramblings is that in this hobby, like in so many things in life, we must make judgements about the credibility of people who tell us things. But in the microcosm of TER, when evaluating the credibility of a message board post commenting on a provider, there should be more to the equation than 'did that particular poster review that particular provider?'