Is it my imagination or does there seem to be an increasing number of reviews with 8,9,or 10 for performance when clearly there was no BBBJ, kissing with tongue, Greek, more than one guy, or "clearly bi" available?  These are the criteria that TER lists for extra points above a 7, however, I see more and more reviews with either none of these (or perhaps one of these) yet the score is a 9 or 10.

Is it OK to award a 9 or 10 with none of these services?  If not, then why are they scores not adjusted before posting?

That a very good question , I seen one review that all the juicy details said cbj yet the profile said bbbj and she was rated 8 to 10 in perf. It very unfair to the ladys that do offer the perk we all like

Add to this problem the exaggeration some reviewers add to their reviews by confabulating services that were never provided which also inflates the score.  I've seen a number of reviews lately that claim to have received BBBJ from a provider who never does this or DFK from a provider who does not offer this, etc, etc.  It's disheartening because it lowers the credibility of all reviews including those that are actually accurate.

TER should revise their system and either eliminate the numbers altogether or make them more scientific by breaking down the categories.

I find interesting how a provider with a "6" body gets a "9" rating because she has a beautiful face... and vice versa  When I see the "looks" category, I see it is everything from head to toe.  Perhaps the looks category should be listed as follows...

Face: 1- 10
Chest: 1 - 10
Legs: 1-10
Butt: 1 - 10
Stomach: 1 - 10

TER lets the reviewer rank each category, but TER then lists the final "looks" rating as the average of all 5 categories.  The same can be for performance...

Attitude: 0 - 10
Kissing: 0 - 10
BJ: 0 - 10
The Ride: 0 - 10

Zeros are used for the score if the escort does not provide the service.  The average of the 4 categories makes the final performance rating.  I know there are more categories and areas for which to rate a provider, but these listed are the core. The other high lites, or low lites can be covered in the questionaire and/or mentioned in the details.

Just my .02

Appearance is "in the eye of the beholder" so it will always be subjective.

Perhaps the Performance should be more objective with points for specific services but have a new third category for "Overall Experience" which is a combination of both the ojective and subjective components

I don't like inflated performance ratings because some guy can't believe he just got laid so he dishes out a 9 or 10 that is totally disconnected from what actually happened.

it seems many of us believe that a good score may bring added favors from a provider or to inflate ones own ego ....  even my own ATF I have never given a 10 .. as a matter of fact I've never given out a 10 in any of my mini reviews or full reviews. Everything is subjective and then there is always the bail out move by using the famous "YMMV"  my .02 .. hobby safe hobby well hobby all you can be

I've been aware of TER's services requirements for ratings of "7" and up. (Excuse me, I need to go to the fridge.)  I really don't think about them when I'm writing a review.  Reviews are totally subjective and full of YMMV, so it's difficult for me to equate a particular service with a rating.  My "Hot time" could be someone else's "She just laid there."

My reviews are based on my feelings during the encounter, and not really tied to the particular services.  You can definitely see it in my "6" rated reviews.  Some of the services which would qualify for higher ratings happened in some of those "6" rated encounters, but because of the my subjective mood/atmosphere factor detailed in the review, I didn't rate them higher.  They just weren't 7/8/9/10 experiences for me.

I can see why TER wants particular services as a prerequisite for a particular review rating.  TER may want the review ratings tied to services, but in doing so, may not really capture the mood of the review, which is what the rating for me is all about.  In addition, certain services, even if provided, shouldn't automatically justify a higher rating.  DFK may have happened, but how did you feel while it was happening, i.e., what was the mood?  Was it mechanical?  Did her breath stink?  Did she give you a tonsillectomy?  I saw a woman once who offered French-kissing, but she was so not into it that it wasn't enjoyable for me at all.  Should I give a "7" or "8" review rating just because she French-kissed during our time together?  I didn't feel the kissing I experienced "Went the extra mile" in my book.  Hard to believe, but not every BBBJ is going to justify those ratings, either.  I just try to read the review and attempt to objectively "feel" the experience of the reviewer.  I may or may not agree with his rating, because my rating scale and its components are most likely different from his.  The higher ratings earning services may have happened during your encounter, but if it felt like it was a "going through the motions" experience, the review rating should realistically reflect that IMHO.

This is an interesting topic to explore; however, I'm not sure any rating system can be developed which emcompasses both services and atmosphere in an objective manner that would be universally accepted in the TER world.

-- Modified on 7/7/2004 2:06:04 AM

I agree completely which is why I'm proposing a new category for "Overall Experience." Thus we would have"

Appearance - totally subjective

Performance - totally ojbective - only get points if service offered

Overall Experience - exactly what you describe.  This would allow a mechanical, unenthusiastic performance to be downgraded but allow for a higher score than performance alone would dictate if the emotional component is extraordinary.

I find beauty in all different shapes and sizes. Yes you can be an average/big woman/bbw, and still be considered beautiful. Beauty IS in the eye of the beholder. I applaud bbw's when they are rated high, I must be honest. It goes to show that there is someone out there, who finds them beautiful. Just because you may rate someone with just an average body not eye candy enough to be with you, does not mean that the next guy who posts on here feels the same way. Your definition of an eye candy may not agree with the next guy either. I am just glad that world is made up of different types of candy and not just one flavor (how borrrrrrrrring that would really be).

-- Modified on 7/7/2004 6:51:52 AM

I completely agree with you. I follow reviews pretty closely, as some of my escort friends who are not VIP members (shame on you, girls, LOL) ask me to watch their reviews.

What you are seeing is very common, and as said above by the other posters, it's probably because the reviewer is grading his overall impression, not the specific performance details.

To compound the problem, overworked TER reviewers are not reading all the reviews carefully enough, and sometimes the errors aren't caught before the review is posted. (You can always submit a "problem report" to fix it, though--this will give you extra VIP days.)

Since I hear from many guys that the juicy details are very important (BBBJ or CBJ, etc), I don't think we should throw out the performance rating. That means a third category of overall impression should be developed, assuming the database can handle it.

Excellent point, SeekingGFE!

New categories

Butt Ugly Nympho (gets a letter grade)

I Never Even Scored (somewhere between a 0 and a 1)

Yeah. Performance numbers are inflated if certain activities don't take place but a high score could just mean that what was offered was done exceptionally well. Got to read entire review and not just rely on number. Also, appearance ratings are inflated too but again we all see things differently including women. Guess no exact science here. My one pet peeve is a high rating for looks coupled with website pics that are years old. I hold my breathe everytime I answer the door. And it's not always for the sake of privacy that faces are blurred.

the review was too far of a fabrication.  In other words, entirely fake.  Conversely, I see profiles where providers are described as "athletic" and "31-35" and just from the web pictures it's clear the lady hasn't seen the inside of a gym or a pair of Reeboks in YEARS -- about as long as the last time she was "31-35".