I came upon this thread kinda late. It's one of the better ones, sort of like the old days.
I really liked OBSG's comment earlier about imagining going off the grid on an old board with 5000 members, then popping back on years later to a new site, new decade and 200k members. It's like all those old movies about time travel where it takes some time (and missteps) before the protagonist gets the swing of things. I think that's what has happened here.
I can appreciate OldLRRP's (can I call you by your old handle, btw? It's so much easier to type, particularly when I'm on my phone) frustration, but I urge you to hang in there and let the new way of things settle in. It's really not as bad as it first appears.
LA and DavidFree both made comments that resonate with me: I'm not real fond of the reviews that are more about the guy doing the review than the girl he's reviewing. It's a popular style, though, and I've read some negative feedback on my own reviews because I usually spend too much time (in their opinion) describing the setup, the incall, how she looks...everything but the action. Fair enough: I write reviews for guys who are like-minded. I'm not trying to convert the world to my particular brand of hobby religion. I've (mostly) learned to accept that the "look at me" style is speaking to another, perhaps younger, audience that likes that sort of thing.
But even though I don't write pornographic screenplays and don't take photos (and think most providers are making a mistake by allowing them), I still find them useful and worthwhile as part of my research. If I read enough of them, look for common 'markers', read between the lines when I can tell the author means for me to do so, and, yes, view the photos the guys took the time to take, edit and post, I rarely am led astray. The sheer volume of data available to us now makes that possible.
The one thing I wish we would be more proactive in identifying and eliminating are the guys who are trading good reviews for free sessions, and not being honest about their arrangement. I know they're out there, but can't always tell who they are. I think they're a scourge on the hobby and need to be branded with a scarlet "F" (for "Fraud" or "Fake").
Good discussion, and congrats on your first Eccie review! May you write many more. I know I'll be reading them.
Originally Posted by TinMan
You know this was rampant in the ASPD days. I think the photos are great for research if they are taken by the guy and not supplied by the girl.
On ASPD, you never saw guys write in the ROS that they wouldn't see the girl again and then give her a yes.
I have to laugh at some of the titles to the reviews. Guys, it's pussy, it didn't change your life. I guarantee the women see what's in the ROS. I know they got to be laughing at the overly dramatic language.