who thinks getting pegged equates to Anal and allows for a point in TER's scoring system?
along those lines, what about a client giving a BBBJ to a pre-op TS?
A provider DATY on a female client? Gotta be worth something, right?
While it's apparent that a lot of clients like those options, I don't think these fit into TER's current model. Just my opinion.
I'd love to see TER take this into consideration
The current point system favors providers that provide PSE instead of GFE and not every guy is into that. You should not be restricted who you give a high score to based on criteria set by someone else. If I had a phenomenal time with a provider, I should be able to give them a 10 if I want.
I did a duo with 2 girls. Had a great time and gave them a 10. It got knocked down to a 9 because the duo had to be 2 guys and a girl to give that extra point. All I could think is why the hell would I want to do a duo with 2 guys. Made no sense.
If it’s the only duo review that you currently have up, you should’ve been able to rate it 10 with DFK, BBBJ and girls really bi. I’ve had to push back on a rejected high score before.
I like the point system and I think it works very well. The ladies that engage in GFE type service are doing more work and taking on more risk than ladies who don’t offer GFE type services. The ladies that engage in PSE type services are doing way more work and taking on more risk than ladies who only offer GFE type services. So I think GFE type providers should have a higher ceiling than non-GFE providers and PSE providers should have the highest ceiling. I think some guys don’t understand how much work/risk PSE requires, especially if they don’t engage in it. I just don’t think the average guy here realizes how much work anal can be. Maybe if they knew these girls had to spend a half hour to an hour flushing their rectum with a fleet enema they wouldn’t be complaining about that extra point they get. Any provider that puts her tongue on my butt deserves a higher score than the ones that don’t. In my opinion, the PSE providers earn those extra points. I specifically use TER to find PSE type providers and the ladies that are willing to go above and beyond. I don’t think that should change just because some vanilla guys want to give their favorite provider a perfect score.
I pretty much agree with everything except the "deserve" part. Imo just because someone provides that service doesn't automatically make them deserve more but at their ceiling (as you've mentioned) certainly deserves more, in service department.
And yes, giving providers who don't engage in wide menus perfect scores, is really the crux of the issue here.
While I can agree with your premise that certain activities are worthy of extra recognition, the bottom line is that the current system is antiquated. It was devised more than a quarter century ago when GFE was relatively rare in sex work, presumably to promote more GFE by rewarding these few acts; but the sex work world has changed and the system hasn't kept up.
With regard to your examples, first of all, "a provider putting her tongue on your butt" is not eligible for an "extra" point.
With regard to your work/risk argument, you are then equating the work of DFK to that of anal. Both are worth one point in the current system.
I like 420smoka’s point better than your counterpoint. The current system works well enough and a good part of the call for change is coming from the desire of some reviewers to award their GFE ATFs a 10.
As to your DFK vs anal complaint, the reality is DFK is generally the difference between a 7 and an 8, BBBJ between an 8 and a 9, and anal the difference between a 9 and a 10. So while they all are singularly worth a point a piece, the cumulative score anal gets does end up reflecting the extra work that goes into it.
[Not making a critique of or arguing with your post, but it's a good place to voice some thoughts I've had about the general topic.]
While I suppose some of the incentives behind the posts have been about giving out the 10s to who people want to the discussions has pointed to an easy area to address. Currently each of the additional points seem to be tied to a specific act, not really a class or set of acts. We can argue about what fits where or why the acts were so narrowly defined but not sure that really helps.
I do now wonder how lopaw submits and writes reviews and scores but perhaps she has never wanted to give more than a 9 which even without the ability to receive and BBBJ she can certainly use DFK and Bi. I suppose allowing pegging as anal would allow a 10 for her.
I tend to think people might be trying to get the numbering system to do more than it can. "Fair" really has nothing to do with the points system as people seem to want to use the word "fair". The points are merely a way of making some objectively verifiable scale -- if someone has a 10 or a 9 or an 8 everyone can infer certain actions must have been present, then check in the review and then personally go verify a specific action. So some provider that has a 10 in no way actually implies their sessions will be better than some other provider that has 7, 8 or 9. But that seems to be the way so many here want to use the number. In the past I probably did as well.
But TER could draft some new guidelines to define a set of activities, with each of the sets granting one additional point above the seven base. That would address the specific concerns raised in the OP and related threads -- but still fit with the idea that merely offering and performing any collections of activities is not sufficient for getting the maximum score allowed.
He rightfully points out that offering up that specific sex act, and the provider being good at it, are not one and the same. Would you rather have the worst BBBJ of your life or a great HJ? One gets a point, the other does not. And therein lies the problem.
.
I guess some improvements can be made but it will never, ever satisfy everyone so TER might be of the thought that it is as good as they can reasonable make it. So, from their POV, why bother to go down the rabbit hole of trying to please certain people knowing full well that a new crop of critics will pop up after any new changes are implemented?
I don't think I've ever actually given a 10, though I'd have to look back on my older reviews to see if I had gotten away with it, lol. Technically I wouldn't qualify to give a 10 since I don't partake of all the options as you stated.
A point system restricted by services provided makes no sense. We can see if those services are provided between their profiles and review details. It unfairly favors providers who offer services that don’t matter to every client. I see more 10s with trans providers because of course it’s anal. No points deducted for the absence of a pussy.
Maybe they should not get that point as it is their “pussy” Well sort of .
Then again a typical provider provider does it have to have vaginal intercourse to get credit for the anal so the discussion continues.
The first is that it ignores all types of kinky fetish stuff like golden showers, or even great (IMHO) services like massage.
But the real kicker is that is awards points for menu items as opposed to rating HOW WELL that provider does those things. What is better, a so-so BBBJ or really hot kink?
I say let the reviewer rate the performance as they will. The reader can tell what was done (Which is also listed in her profile.) but more importantly the reader can tell how happy the reviewer was with their performance.
Yes. Exactly. I agree.
I think adding an ever increasing list of items only makes it worse.
If we want to fix things, let try coming up with an alternative (not that I think TER is going to change). Of the top of my head, I would thing scraping the idea of a single number score, it would be much better to have a list of activities that cover 90% of what those here are interested in and then some catch-all bucket. Each gets a rating from the reviewer. No effort to "average" then various numbers because different people will want them weighted differently. But it would hardly be a technical nightmare to allow people to search reviews based on a set of scores rather than just the two currently used -- assuming people want to use that functionality in their searches.
Did somebody say, "try coming up with an alternative"?
X-out-of-Y scoring is a 10-out-of-10 suggestion that has been made many, many times. And I should know!
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/ter-general-board-12/x-out-of-y-scoring-is-a-10-out-of-10-suggestion-1029579
.
I usually limit myself to commenting that a 7-out-of-7 = 100% (10) or 8-out-of-8 = 100% (10) is often a better experience than a 7-out-of-10 = 70% (7). If you want to EXPAND the list of menu items beyond the current options, X-out-of-Y can be as big as you want: 15-out-of-15 = 100% (10) or 10-out-of-15 = 67% (6.7) or even more detailed: 123-out-of-246 = 50% (5). Save the extra details for written text, not the "menu" items.
I think adding an ever increasing list of items only makes it worse.
If we want to fix things, let try coming up with an alternative (not that I think TER is going to change). Of the top of my head, I would thing scraping the idea of a single number score, it would be much better to have a list of activities that cover 90% of what those here are interested in and then some catch-all bucket. Each gets a rating from the reviewer. No effort to "average" then various numbers because different people will want them weighted differently. But it would hardly be a technical nightmare to allow people to search reviews based on a set of scores rather than just the two currently used -- assuming people want to use that functionality in their searches.
They can't go back and make them conform to any new scoring system. So we'd end up with a two-tiered TER. How does that benefit anyone?
They could just run two separate sets, legacy and new. Search under whichever you want for some period of time but when presenting the profile all reviews could be shown.
Transitions are always with a cost but you're not going to fix the problems people keep calling out about the current system with tweaks to things. It's the structure that is the underlying issue. But if it's still so valuable then people maybe should be more forgiving of it's weaknesses and consider all the strengths -- and there must be some since it's been here for 20 plus years, right?
-- Modified on 3/22/2026 5:26:00 PM
I just think that might be changing from one flawed system to another. I guess that really is the point...no matter what TER does, there will be a contingent of people who will push back on the changes or keep criticizing the current system. They are sort of in a no win situation.
.
I am not saying we shouldn't strive to improve things but my guess is that there are always unintended consequences of doing so. Either way, it's a great debate and one I can see from both sides.
Gals age and drop out of the business, so newer ones with more accurate reviews will replace them for the most part.
Although this thread is about review SCORING, I have had several other recommendations to improve TER Reviews and Profiles. If one change is going to be made, TER should evaluate and make several changes at one time so that there will be the legacy archive AND whatever the new system will be called ("New and Improved"?). And include a link in the New and Improved Profile to the Provider's legacy Profile to make it easy to check her still relevant but older reviews.
.
In addition to X-out-of-Y scoring, my next major suggestion is to remove "Ethnicity" and replace it with TWO data fields, one for Complexion and one for something Cultural or Country or Origin (e.g., born in Poland but is culturally American; or born in the USA but is culturally Korean kind of stuff - needs discussion and input from users).
.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/suggestion-and-policy-4/i-have-several-10-out-of-10-suggestions-for-improving-reviews-16959
1. Switch to an X-out-of-Y scoring system for Performance. ...
2. Replace the ridiculous "Ethnicity" data field with UNAMBIGUOUS "pick one" data fields:
A. "Complexion" chosen from a color pallet (see the Mattell pallet, below) ...
B. Add another field for "Country of Origin" or "Cultural Heritage."...
3. Replace the ridiculous "Build" data field with a numbered chart of silhouettes or standard pictures (from the CLOTHING or fashion industry). ...
4. I have had many other GREAT suggestions over the years to improve the system. In summary, the BEST suggestion is, "Put impposter in charge and give him an unlimited budget to implement his changes."
They can't go back and make them conform to any new scoring system. So we'd end up with a two-tiered TER. How does that benefit anyone?
PiV Intercourse... you know, the thing that the vast majority of clients want... Doesn't even merit a +1 in the current system.
BBJ + kissing but NO actual intercourse gets the same maximum "points" as BBJ + kissing + PiV intercourse does. Both scenarios have a "maximum" score of 9.
I've been posting about this since they made the changes to the points system 10 or 12 years ago. I'm not the only one who has talked about this issue, but more *clients* need to push for the system to change.
Also note that two guys can go into a massage parlor and therapist can give both a handjob, stick her tongue in their throat, and give them both a BbJ and get a 10 .
A while back I put in proposal that to get above 7 needs to perform traditional intercourse . Was shot down as is “ The Erotic Review” not the sex review.
Now they reward anal .
Anal getting it but standard intercourse not is wild. TER is out of touch with what clients want. It makes you wonder is this site here for us or the few who run it. Personally, I prefer no service point restrictions. But if they want to insist on it, expand what can earn it. Another example is FIV. I find it less common than DFK and BBBJ, and I love it. But it’s not considered an +1 in their current system. I think if there were more special services that qualified, less of us would mind. But as it stands, it’s too restrictive.
They need to clear the advertising hurdle first so everyone has a name and image to match to, which is often not possible in a MP setting. The HJ is just part of the expected set of options and doesn't count for additional scoring (like FS regardless of how people feel about that) so you only get a +2 for the DFK and BBBJ. Those do get the additional points because many customers want them but they are often YMMV with the providers -- so the points are the incentive to offer and deliver to the customers.
He is correct. That, plus the DFK plus the BBBJ can add up to a 10.
I did not read that as MFM so yes, missed that implication. However, allowing that, MP girls that do FS, BBBJ and Anal will not be allowed the additional scoring because the ad problems (no identified girl, no pic and name...)
Is it fair to MP girls? Probably not but it had nothing to do with the services delivered.
There are massage ladies listed who gave a happy ending that earned a 7 for service as well. I get the extras argument, but putting a massage with a HJ on the same level as a FS provider who doesn’t offer any of the extras doesn’t make sense. If this site was limited to FS providers, then I could see it.
It's like someone said, there have been criticisms of the rating system for years. Either they don't agree with what some reviewers think or the complaints haven't been significant in relation to the number of TER members overall. So the option is to either participate and live with our perceived shortcomings or don't review.
NOT the same as a provider opening up the back door and inviting you inside. It takes no skill or special service to shove something into a customer's ass, as any customer can do this to themselves when they are also alone, unless they are so obese they can't reach around due to their girth. All of these things you suggest can be included in the narrative of the review. Points are not necessary to affirm they happened. Perhaps the guys that think this is something special could be awarded a "participation trophy" in the form of a little image of a trophy that would appear on their screen when they are logged onto TER?
It takes a lot of skill to make anal sex feel amazing. No skill often means pain (maybe that's why TER gives the providers plus one).
And under you logic here, any man can just fuck a silicone pussy instead seeing a provider. Maybe it's time for you to follow your own advice
is not here whining about not getting extra points. The rest of your post makes no sense . . . Follow my own advice about what? About half of my 34,000+ posts offer advice covering most every topic that has ever come up here, so which advice do you think I need to follow?
Thats what I do.
On one hand, I agree that reviews are subjective.
On the other, I agree with TER there needs to be a pseudo objective skill check for services.
Let me try to explain.
There are plenty of people who want to give a provider a 10 for service not because the skill was high or menu was wide but of how well they perrofmed it.
But also in reality many just want to give 10 in service simply because they liked the girl or service is not important to them that much.
What this does is effectively punish girls who go all out pse open all their holes and perform at porn star level. No gag reflex DTbj to the pubes is a skill. So is cowgirl endurance in Greek. Like it or not, there is a level of mechanical skill involved.
To do all that work and have the same service score as a girl who is just hot, is not fair; nor is it really representative and it obfuscates real service queens for people who love vigorous service. Such as myself.
Lets use a sports example. Steph Curry is the greatest three point shooter of all time. You may not like three point shooting and think it's too pussy and real men bang in the post like The Dream. But when it comes to evaluating three point shots, if you put Michael Jordan as having the same score as Steph, it doesn't make sense and it's insulting to Steph. If Steph is a 10 in three point shooting, Jordan is like a 2.
So I think it makes sense that the highest service grades would be reserved for someone who is one of the nastiest, widest menu, service queens. At least in theory, you should be able to sort by service score and the highest would be the all-out "anything goes" whirlwind in the sack queens.
-- Modified on 3/23/2026 12:46:45 PM
You can always write your own score in the body of review....
There are plenty of people who want to give a provider a 10 for service not because the skill was high or menu was wide but of how well they perrofmed (sic) it.
I have done this as well, and it's something. The main flaw is that it doesn't help their actual rating. Guys will do search filters based on ratings. And, guys will decide if even reading reviews is worth their time based on ratings.
I suppose that those clients *may* get pushed into a higher cost bracket unnecessarily, due to their short sighted approach?
I don't filter by ratings, as a category specifically. So far I've ended up with providers in the 8 to 9 range because that's how it shakes out after considering all information together.
I always filter by ratings when researching globally. I try to be reasonable though. I like to be aware of ladies that may tour. And, there are so many that I could not begin to read through them all. I usually filter 8.7 and up. That said, I do not filter for those in my local area and if I see an ad of a touring lady coming to my area that peaks my interest, I will see if she is on TER. But there is a point where I will not spend my time reading reviews. If they are below 8, it's a no go for me. It's worked out well.
As a female client I expect to both give and receive DATY during a session. According to TER, that falls under the umbrella of bisexuality for the provider, which allows me to upgrade my score by 1 point.
Members who actually deal with this on a daily basis know how to interpret the rules. This is a good lesson for the low-volume and inexperienced among us.