Review Specials.

[PODarkness]

The logic of complaining about how none of the reviews mentioned her pics not matching... then stating that you did not want to mention it either because you didn't want to "stab her in the back"? You can't have it both ways. Is it wrong to not share the info or isn't it?

I doubt many reviews are written at the in-call. I think most providers will tell you that review specials are a sign of the young and gullible. There is no way to enforce the review after the discount has been given.

The smart girls give a discount on the return visit, after the review has been written. That way, there is incentive to write a good review, since you will have to answer for a "NO" review when you go back for the discount. Everybody loves a discount. Nobody likes to put their dick into the mouth of a girl he gave a bad review to.

Well... when I say nobody...

[EZ.]

You might not understand this but when I give my word, it's done deal. She has a no review policy, as I was told at the time. She saw me even though I didn't have P411 status, which I feel was doing me a favor.
The fact remains that I saw her because 15 people recommended her. She doesn't look like her pictures. If I wouldn't see someone again, why would I recommend her to others.

Do women offer review discounts and are those reviews written in the presence of the provider.... I think that is very likely.

[PODarkness]

She has 15 reviews (all of them positive) and a "no review policy"? OK. I'm not sure how to respond to that, so I'll just go back to my hole.

[TinMan]

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.

[EZ.]

Originally Posted by PODarkness

She has 15 reviews (all of them positive) and a "no review policy"? OK. I'm not sure how to respond to that, so I'll just go back to my hole.

It was due to my lack of references that she asked me not to review. On here, I was still a newbie. I stated it as a policy but just for me, in that instance.

Tinman, I would have liked to have kept my old handle, and nickname forever, EZ. I saw someone using a frog with a long tongue and EZ1 or something like that.

[dodger]

I need you to stop posting. Your avatar is killing me!

[Jewish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by TinMan

I came upon this thread kinda late. It's one of the better ones, sort of like the old days.


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.

I agree with you completely. I feel like I know who some of them are but would get pointed for naming them.
BTW, I've paid for every session I've ever had, and never received a discount for a review.

[TinMan]

It's the women who are going to have to take that first step. It needs to be firsthand reports. The rest of the community can then support them when they take that first step.

[EZ.]

Originally Posted by TinMan

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.

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.

[Bombay]

Review specials shouldn't be allowed at all. Too much conflict of interest.

[uncle buck 50]

When it's a new provider and she's suddenly a goddess or a legend, you just have to take the review with a grain of salt.

If the reviewer got a review special that's fine.

If he got a special rate or free ride in exchange for a 10-page glowing review with pics, that's another matter.

Funny part is when the reviewer acts like he's the big stud and rang that rookie's chimes 14 times-- You supposedly paid for the pussy. She should act like you nailed it!