Believe it or not, I am not bringing this up for myself but for providers that I feel deserve much higher numbers.....

I think the descriptions on performance are dead on...but, when it comes to appearance, I believe they are all accurate except number 9.  

Many take the term 'model material' very literally.  But, to me, and tell me if I am wrong...there are many women that are 9s-10s without having a typical model look, no?  

Wouldn't it make more sense if 9 was described as 'beautiful' or 'stunning' (something along those lines)?

I just think there are a lot of girls out there that would be getting much higher numbers if that one word was changed.

What do you think?

Subjectivity is just that. Even if you were to change the wording it doesn't make much difference.I frankly don't pay as much attention to it as I do the service. Truth be known it is far more important to me to see a provider that sounds like she actually enjoys what she does. Even when it comes to the service rating with numbers I don't take allot of stock in those. I have noticed that some guys consistantly rate high and other low. I have to read the detail review to get a feel. There are guys who rate GFE's quite liberally. Reading between the lines looking at consistant patterns blah blah blah...the standard drill.

You talk like the hobbyists would put earrings on a pig, if the pig was good at certain specialties.

   Specialties are important, but not the only thing. I consider certain providers for a variety of my other personal preferences. Sure attractiveness is great, but so is a nice figure (Varies by guys), personality, hygiene etc.

   Than their is my kink preferences.........



   

I totally agree with you.  Good point.