One review was approved the other was not approved due to lack of graphic detail.  But what is permissible without getting oneself into trouble

Lately I've seen some reviews that really leave little to the imagination, even describing sights, sounds and smells.

On the other hand, I've seen some reviews that were hardly more than twenty words of generalizations and no specifics, so go figure.

I think the best way to describe a session is by refering to our beloved alphabet soup of acronyms along with a general indication of your satisfaction, or lack thereof, as a way to guide the perspective client.

I had a couple rejected for lack of detail when I really didn't feel like going in to the blow by blow and had to add the alphabet soup that Mr Fisher described.

I also have read four liners that essentially said nothing- so apparently it heavily depends on who is reviewing your review and approving!

I generally describe which positions and what ways the lady wowed me or was special- whether humor, fun to be with, great connection, whatever!