...which of the search features are the least used that could be eliminated or replaced with something better.  Am I alone in this?  I, for one, would like to see the smoking one updated to include vaping as I feel like there are providers  listed as non-smokers who vape and I am not fond of either.  I am sure I sound petty and apologize if others take offense. But curious if there are other thoughts this community has on the search features that can be refined.  Another enhancement I would love to see is allowing us to pick options in the drop downs rather than select just one.

Thoughts

Definitely a frequent suggestion on both fronts.  E.g., there should be a category for toys, too. I can't remember all the other good suggestions that have come up.

And there is considerable advocacy to switch from the single choice (Y/N; one but no other) database field to a more sophisticated (yet readily available) "Choose all that apply" type of database field.

Toys - check all that apply
( ) for use on her
( ) for use on him
( ) Internal (dildo)
( ) External (vibrator)
( ) Anal  
( ) ...

There is probably free database code or easy programming to get that.  

Complexion, based a COLOR CHART, not some meaningless verbal descriptor, has been suggested.  

Ethnicity choices have to be changed. Build choices have to be changed (thin or skinny - what's the diff?), maybe based on pictures / silhouettes. And so on.  

And the whole 1-10 review scale has been criticized, bigly .

The BIGGEST problem will probably be migrating the OLD (current) Profile Database to anything new. There will be huge numbers of "Does not apply" and single answers when more should apply. I say to do it; the sooner the better! Let the new girls info fill up the new database structure as others retire and fade away.

BUT TER SHOULD SOLICIT OUR INPUT ON THIS STUFF BEFORE IMPOSING A CHANGE WITH MANY WEAKNESSES OR ERRORS. TER Admin could post suggested templates and ask for our feedback.

I might have already submitted something similar in a previous S&P thread, but maybe some Survey (Review) numbers could be made public / exposed.  

Those market research survey forms that we all get usually want to keep the data secret so they can plan their marketing strategies.  

Programming Languages that you use; choose all that apply
( ) Basic
( ) COBOL
( ) Lisp
( ) APL
( ) C
( ) Java  
( ) ...

Techniques that you use; choose all that apply:
( ) Missionary
( ) Doggie (K9)
( ) RCG  
( ) ...

 
TER could adapt that code so we get an idea of the actual range or likelihood of certain things. Reviewers would click "all that apply" but we also get to assess the outliers.

REVIEW FORM
Blow job
( ) covered  
( ) BBBJ
( ) CIM - Spit
( ) CIMNQNS Swallow
( ) COB
( ) COF  
( ) ...

PROFILE
Blow Job
Covered 6
BBBJ 11
CIM Spit 10
CIMNQNS Swallow 1  
COB 7
COF 2
...

So we see that Swallow is not common, but at least a possibility.  

As long as reviewers are honest, the numbers don't have to add up perfectly as, in the case of BJ, many guys will go for MSOG (first one Swallow, second one COB, third one CIM Spit). Etc.  

 
The OP can come up with some more specific suggestions for his own pet peeve on a revised Review / Survey form:

Smoking and related
( ) No
( ) Tobacco
( ) Vape - eCig
( ) Chew
( ) Snuff
( ) Pot
( ) Blows smoke rings out of her pussy  
( ) ..

The process of submitting a review is already fairly involved and tedious, is it not? Do you really want the process lengthened? Don't get me wrong, I completely see the benefits of what you're proposing, I just don't know that they could be implemented in such a way that doesn't piss off a number of people equal to or more than that of those who really want this kind of change.

In the past 2 years, TER has added some new fields and choices to the Review Forms (e.g., female condom, squirt, rimming). But the basic database / form design hasn't changed significantly.  

I'm pretty sure that many reviewers skip the parts of the form that they don't use or don't want to bother with anyway.  A reviewer can skip the Toy (well, there isn't a toy section yet) Section or FC or squirt boxes, or just pick "No" or "I don't know" or skip other sections (e.g., OP's Smoking section) as well.  

A lot of info is easier to address in the Details anyway. "I thought I smelled smoke on her but I wasn't sure. After 20 minutes of struggling with the "smoking" section on the review form, I decided to skip and just mention it here."  Nope, too much info. It's just: "I thought I smelled smoke on her but I wasn't sure. I let her suck my dick anyway."

Yes, the Review Form shouldn't be too long or too hard to use. But the most useful and searchable Profiles comes from info entered into a new and improved Review form.

It TER would just create some actual New Review Forms for testing, user feedback would help to improve them and find the Happy Medium

I agree the process of submitting a review is already very involved.  Would be great if we paying members could just input the TER ID and then change what is already pre-populated.

 
That comes up very, very often. I don't know that TER has ever directly answered here but the general and oft posted belief is that TER wants to keep manually filled forms as a (minor) deterrent to people trying to file fake reviews.  

I happen not to agree. The tedium of form completion is one the things I found to be such a PITA that I eventually stopped reviewing.

I do think wanting to prescreen providers for vaping is petty. It's like screening for membership in the Republican Party, or something. Who cares?  

I understand not wanting to have them vape on your time, but if it's really that important just ask them to put it away if they happen to pull out a vaporizer during the session. Or screen out vapers when you contact them.  

You should have to work harder for the little things, like I do when I ask ladies I know to be pierced to wear as few piercings as possible. That's our penance.

I agree with darmody about vaping.  What I would genuinely like to know, as a vaper myself, what exactly do you not like about being in the same room with someone who vapes?  The vapor from an ecig and cigarette smoke are nothing alike. Vapor does not smell like anything unless you're vaping a strong liquid like a custard flavor, vapor does not burn your eyes like smoke, you can't smell it on the vaper's breath or clothes etc.

I'm not advocating for vaping, but as a vaper I genuinely want to know what your turn-off is because I have vaped in the presence of providers and would like to know what the downside is from a non-vaper's point of view. I don't want to piss providers off.  To date, no provider has denied my vaping nor have they shown any type of disgust or negativity toward me for vaping. I do tone it down considerably as I am afraid to trip a fire alarm, though.  lol Would be so embarrassing among other things.