Reviews

So let's say you see a provider multiple times in a month, how often should you post a review. Common sense should highlight extraordinary events, but how often is too much? I'm not too concerned about being credited with 'time' tho that's nice, just want to make sure I'm not shortchanging my provider. Thanks for any suggestions.

I think 1 nice review every 4-6 months or so is enough. When I see multiple reviews on a lady by the same gentleman, the reviews lose credibility.

My 2 cents as a provider, but I guess it's the hobbyists opinions that matter the most here.

I have to agree with evie

I think 1 nice review every 4-6 months or so is enough. When I see multiple reviews on a lady by the same gentleman, the reviews lose credibility.

My 2 cents as a provider, but I guess it's the hobbyists opinions that matter the most here. Originally Posted by evietaylor

I know the OP says he isn't concerned with "time" (I assume he means he's not concerned with the award of PA credit), but FWIW I think that the requirement for an award for PA credit for the review of a second/subsequent session with the same provider (IIRC 90 days) is about right for keeping the lady's reputation "current" without it beginning to look like the reviewer is shilling for her, though frankly I'm not sure how much attention I'd going to pay to reviews from a guy who reviews only one provider, even if he does so only every 3 to 6 months. The best reviewers have quite a bit more experience of more ladies than that.

Also, in reading reviews it's more valuable to get the experience of different reviewers; that helps "correct" for possible reviewer biases (like the fact that someone who sees only one provider most of the time probably has an extraordinarily good relationship with that provider, and other guys may not get along with her as well). I'd rather see 4 reviews of any given lady from 4 separate reviewers in a year, rather than 4 reviews by the same reviewer in that time frame.

The one exception to a "3 to 6 month rule" that I'd make is where another session sooner than that is radically different in such a way that the community ought to know about it. An admittedly extreme example: I might see a lady one week, have a good enough time that I post a favorable review, and then go back the next week; maybe that second session she might pull a "cash and dash", or maybe her pimp (who was never in evidence at the time of the first session) might hassle me on the way out. In that case, I'd want to post a second review tempering the favorable review I posted earlier. Like I said, those are extreme examples; there are probably other examples not so extreme where a hobbyist might want to "supplement" information in his first review from a later session a few weeks later.

Just some thoughts to consider.

Cheers,

bcg

I think you make some very good points Bluffcityguy.

I would agree with what you said, nice to read 4-5 reviews from different gentlemen that more or less agree. The main things that I look for in a review are that pictures are accurate, no upselling, and the menu she lists is accurate for what the gentleman wanted or experienced that day.

Chemistry still plays a part in the interaction, and two really nice people sometimes just don't hit it off, even though they both try to be nice.

I think you make some very good points Bluffcityguy.

I would agree with what you said, nice to read 4-5 reviews from different gentlemen that more or less agree. The main things that I look for in a review are that pictures are accurate, no upselling, and the menu she lists is accurate for what the gentleman wanted or experienced that day.

Chemistry still plays a part in the interaction, and two really nice people sometimes just don't hit it off, even though they both try to be nice. Originally Posted by farmstud60

4-5 reviews that don't agree is still useful information (if nothing else, it flags the YMMV factor we all should be more aware of than we are), though it's a bitch trying to tease out how my session would go if I booked it. But at least where multiple reviewers are making their input you can get a feeling for the various biases and filters that might be involved (especially where the reviewers are fairly active here and you have some idea of their tastes, etc.).

Cheers,

bcg

How often should you review the same provider? I would have to say once. I don't think there is any point in a hobbyist reviewing a provider more than once unless the appointment was significantly different from previous appointments.
I would actually tend to discredit a reviewer who has multiple reviews of the same provider.
Oh, and yes I do realize that two of my reviews are of the same provider, but the second one is of a different type of appointment.

How often should you review the same provider? I would have to say once. I don't think there is any point in a hobbyist reviewing a provider more than once unless the appointment was significantly different from previous appointments.
I would actually tend to discredit a reviewer who has multiple reviews of the same provider.
Oh, and yes I do realize that two of my reviews are of the same provider, but the second one is of a different type of appointment. Originally Posted by TheDoc

Oh yes it wasssssssssssssss

Doc, I disagree that you shouldn't EVER "re-review" unless it's substantially different....and that's because part of the reason we review these ladies is because we appreciate their service, and want to voluntarily do some word-of-mouth advertising for her. For example, you love a particular store....you always get great service, great value, etc., etc.....are you suggesting that because you've recommended that store to others once that you shouldn't recommend them again? That's the apples to apples comparison, and I'm sorry, but that's just not me. And I don't understand why that ruins my credibility with anybody.

Obviously, if she's the only one I'm reviewing, and it's every 90 days (or even 120, or 180 days) like clock-work, then your point is well-taken....that's just a slightly more-acceptable version of a WK situation. But if I reviewed a girl 9 months ago, had a session recently, and notice she hasn't had many other reviews lately, I'm probably going to do one.....it will communicate that a.) she's definitely worth seeing again, and b.) might even give insight into whether she's YMMV (not just in a bad way, but good YMMV too - we've all had ladies who get better each time because of the rapport/familiarity built).

No better way I know of to communicate that than a second review.

Thanks all, I'm trying to expand my "catalog", but seem to be drawn back to certain providers time and again and was wondering at the protocol and you've all raised valid points. Course my area of operations changed recently so I'll be able to provide variety of my samples. Hmmm.. Whoever said divorce was a bad thing, have you tried dating from the big sites? Much less drama going hobby route for now.... Well at least for the most part

Big Mack

I think 1 nice review every 4-6 months or so is enough. When I see multiple reviews on a lady by the same gentleman, the reviews lose credibility. Originally Posted by evietaylor

I agree with that.
Any provider can evolve with time and re-reviewing the same one is no harm at all IMO, but like Evie said, given enough time in between.

Thanks all, I'm trying to expand my "catalog", but seem to be drawn back to certain providers time and again and was wondering at the protocol and you've all raised valid points. Course my area of operations changed recently so I'll be able to provide variety of my samples. Hmmm.. Whoever said divorce was a bad thing, have you tried dating from the big sites? Much less drama going hobby route for now.... Well at least for the most part

Big Mack Originally Posted by Mog77

Oh my goodness, definitely less drama than real dating. I did a bunch on online dating after my divorce a number of years ago & let me tell you, it SUCKED. The men I meet as a provider treat me 110% better than when I was doing civilian dating. Stick with hobbying for the time being.