reviewer "goforbroke" has a total of 15 reviews.  Of these, he gave 5 "once in a lifetime's" for performance, and 6 "once in a lifetime's" for looks.

(his review of Ali in L.A. appeared today)  

I wonder how many lives he has left.

It seems that your reviews have averaged out at 9, with a 10 among them, so what's the point of being critical?  Does a 9 or a 10 really mean that much?  While I commend you on the choices you've made & am not casting doubt on your methods of determining "scores"--what the hell is really your point?

Much too much is made about the scores IMO, & frankly you appear to be questioning others (both the lady & the reviewer)when you haven't seen the lady yourself.  Why so citical?  I happen to have seen both Ali & one of the ladies (one of them I didn't review) you've reviwed, & while we might be close in our individual opinions, we're in the probably in the same ballpark.  How important is is that we'd match up on individual score is irrelavent...or isn't it?

Many guys have seen Ali, & individual scores aside, all seem to have been very happy with the time spent.  If you don't want to see her because of your skeptism, it's you loss...not hers.  And believe me, she isn't in need of my endorsement! Just move on to more worthwhile endevours dude!!

This has nothing to do with Ali.  And after I posted the message I looked back at my reviews and realized I was in for it.  I would change a few of my ratings if I could write the reviews over again.  Mostly because I didn't have as many to compare to in my earlier reviews.  Maybe that has been goforbroke's experience, too.  He gives a 10, then "O, my God!" the next one is so much better that he has to give a 10 again and can't take back his earlier 10.  
I just found it amusing how many 10's he had in 15 reviews.  I guess I also find it amusing how many 9's I have in 5 reviews.  It certainly limits my ability to give rave reviews in the future.

Good discussion, though:  Staff, what's the bell curve distribution look like here?  Of all reviews in the database, how many are 1s, 2s, 3s...10s?  It might be useful to know what the average is overall, so you can calibrate.

Also, I find that I rate lower than others (n=2 so not much data yet) and wonder if there's something wrong with me.  But maybe it's just grade inflation!

Look, in spite of the fact that I know I can be a bit curt at times (usually on a subject I personally deem tiresome, repetitive, or impossible to reach a consensus on) your response to what I said has given you more more respect in my eyes, for whatever that is or isn't worth.

If you want to change your scoring "methods" that's entirely up to you, it was never my intention to suggest you needed to change that.  Hell, it's all subjective anyway...which was really the main point I was trying to make.

Personally, & this is probably my own quirk, I've never given anyone a 10 & it's doubtful I ever will. But I have no bone to pick with those that do.  The only thing I ever look for is a degree of honesty, not either personal preferences or agreemnet with scores.    

I guess in light of some other jackass having posted on the local board to something to the effect that she was manipulating her reviews, I'm a little more sensitive on the subject than I probably should be.

I have lately come to believe based upon my reading of many reviews that if a guy doesn't get ROBbed, the session equates to a "hot time".  In addition, if a lady has all of her appendages intact, she is somehow "attractive".  I understand that everyone has an opinion regarding looks and service.  Personally, unless a "provider" is Asian or Russian, she will never score higher than a 7 in my book (in looks or service).  I would prefer if TER were to do away with the ranking system and require its members to think more, and compute less.  Until then, TER will remain like my ivy league alma mater where the "average" grade in any given class was a B+.

isn't it just hard to pick a number for an experience that is really personal and intense? beyond a certain level the number becomes meaningless, we need flavors instead -- "caramel," "merlot," "key lime pie."

i read the "review policy" page and it said that 7 was the highest number you could give on personality alone; after that the minx had to dfk or bbbj or greek or some such lists of stunts to get higher numbers -- and inflated ratings would be adjusted downward if you didn't stick to that rule.

funny thing is, i know of a beautiful and magical minx who doesn't do greek but regularly now gets 10's, one after another. and she deserves them! but i stuck her with an 8, because, well ... the policy said ...

"In order to keep our performance ratings consistent, we set up the following system: An escort provider may only earn up to a 7, unless she also performs the following during a session: Kisses With Tongue, Bare-Back Blow Job, Really Bi, Anal Sex, or More than One Guy. The addition of each offering will raise her score by one point. If your review doesn’t already accurately reflect this rating system, we will adjust it."

Attached is the link to the official TER review submission guidelines.  Item # 7, clearly explains the Rating Guidelines.

As a community, we need to be more consistent.

them a chance.  There are quite a number of 5 or 6 look ratings and 5 or 6 performance ratings in LA reviews.  I think if I have a good time, the session should be rated "hot time".  "Nice" is for sessions that are alright but something is missing.

I scored the ratings based on a comparison of them with women I met in everyday life.  I guess your way is to compare them to each others.

Just my 2 cents.


-- Modified on 8/28/2002 1:20:58 AM

So, if a provider were to offer all of these, and deserved a 7 beforehand, that would give her a 12? Perhaps each offering should merit 0.6 points.  

whether the reviewer is known to the reviewee.  If a guy is planning to return, and she knows whose review is whose, then how is he going to rate her?  (This has been discussed before, but it is always something you have to factor in when looking at the range of reviews)
I have been guilty of this too.  I once got an email thanking me for a review, though I do not remember telling her my TER handle.  Maybe I did.  I think I have rated a little higher a few times because I was aware that the subject of the review likes to read TER.
Often, one or more of the reviews will give a clue, like 'love you, honey.'  I have never been misled into thinking the reviewer was addressing me.  
Overall, I have to say, Jeez, I have been reading way too many of these reviews.  Get a life!

there won't be a "bell curve" on bounded ratings, but a skewed distribution -- skewed high, obviously, since the highly rated providers, just on the strength of their reviews, will generate more business and more repeat positive reviews.

the average is biased by skewed distributions, and to compute the average you'd need to tally up every rating. but you can easily find the unbiased MEDIAN:

* search on a location (san francisco), area code or any other criterion
* RANK THE RESULTS by performance or appearance or overall rating
* pick the *middle* page in the list of pages (if it's 1 to 20, choose 10)

the ranking in the middle of the page will be the median ranking of the lot. i just did this for "san francisco," and got a median performance rating of 6.5.

median means: half the minxes have that score or higher; half have that score or lower.

-- Modified on 8/28/2002 10:12:15 AM

"be more consistent" is a red herring, i'm afraid.

the *policy* explicitly states that **TER STAFF** will CHANGE THE REVIEW RATINGS to reflect the actual service described in the review. instead, it's obvious from several examples that the *practice* at ter is something more happenstance, ad hoc, or casual -- bogus high ratings get by all the time.

again, my major concern with the ter database and review quality, which directly affects the effectiveness of the search function, starts with the many hidden, ad hoc or discrepant *practices* in handling the review data as compared to the stated *policies and guidelines* of the ter service.

i've enumerated several of these in previous posts: inconsistent ROB standards; profile pages based only on the first review; deleting challenged reviews without *obvious* evidence the review is bogus (ad hoc determination of "truth"); deleting profile pages without explanatory notice; and now inconsistent application of item 7.

i don't know why "community" gets stuck with all the glory and all the hard work. "community" was not attending the meetings where the database revision steps described in the previous paragraph were decided. "community" cannot reach out and magically educate and train every new member in the right way to write a review. "community" affects the quality of the database only through *individual* minx reviews, and the "problem reports."

the ter *business* is ultimately responsible for the quality and consistency of the ter database. THEY OWN IT. they can set whatever policy they want -- then, they should deliver on whatever they say they will do.

I've started a few threads within the San Diego discussion board on the same subject and have met with close to the same responses.

It is a shame that all of us cannot play by the same rules, whatever they may be.

Suprisingly, the providers did not step up the plate when I opened up the subject.  I felt like they should have been lobbying for us to definitely play by the rules, especially the ones who get less than top marks for good hard work.

I doubt if Staff gets paid for correcting the ratings but I know that it would certainly be appreciated if they would be a little more diligent when allowing 10's on the scoreboards.

They ought to be able to write into the code that 10's automatically require Staff approval on a level that makes them look for the extra points within the specific review awarding the rating.

Maybe we should just give every provider a 10 and then see what happens.