Honest Question for Anyone and Everyone

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by John Bull

I have another theory as to why some hobbyists don't write reviews. Many competing boards - and they shall go unnamed - allow providers to read all the review. When guys come from those boards, they are accustomed to this practice and afraid the provider will see it and cause them trouble. That is not the case here so write away.

Oh, c'mon, JB, they still find out what you wrote in the review. Whether or not they lurk here as a "male" member, or get the info from a WK, they still get it if they want it.

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

On the other hand, I'm not going to hand out an A+ for every provider I see. She is going to have to earn it (so to speak) I would say that I've had good times with the providers I've been with. Most have been solid B+/A- material; although, I've yet to recently find an ATF. The last one I had was over 15 years ago.

This is an interesting concept. Maybe there should be a line in the reviews where you could rate the provider as suggested.

[Carl]

Also the original poster is listed as a registered member not as a member with Premium Access, so I presume that he doesn't have access to the private in-depth review comments.

Often, while a review may have a Yes recommendation posted, the private comments may post details which, while not negating the reviewer's choice to give a Yes recommendation for what might have possibly been merely a minimally adequate experience which just barely qualified for a positive recommendation, might discourage others who do not possess the same charitable disposition to make a different choice.

As an example, let's say I have a session that results a Yes recommendation on a review. But in the private comments I mention that she has some rather pronounced stretch marks but it didn't matter to me because she has a face like an angel and she gave a BJ that was so good, so intense, that it curled my toes and had me seeing deceased relatives.

If you can only see the public comments and recommendations you might be horribly distressed and disappointed if the sight of stretch marks makes you jump out of your skin. But if you can see the private comments, you'd know not to book with her.

Now, not everybody wants to pony up the $$$ for Premium Access. Heck, I don't. But I'm just an internet troll. However, the reason some guys don't pay is that they're happy just as long as the gal isn't a scammer, a thief or a cop. If one's standards are higher than that and they don't or can't pay for Premium Access for whatever reason, well, then, the occasional disappointment is bound to happen. It's only a matter of time. But at least the disappointment won't be because the provider was a scammer, a thief or a cop.

[jokacz]

Originally Posted by John Bull

Word.

In fact guys, you do your fellow hobbyists a disservice by not writing a good, to the point, dispassionate review.

I have another theory as to why some hobbyists don't write reviews. Many competing boards - and they shall go unnamed - allow providers to read all the review. When guys come from those boards, they are accustomed to this practice and afraid the provider will see it and cause them trouble. That is not the case here so write away.

What would prevent a provider from joining the board with a different handle paying for premium access and reading all the review? Or maybe one of her lapdogs would just give her access.

[Cpalmson]

Originally Posted by Carl

Also the original poster is listed as a registered member not as a member with Premium Access, so I presume that he doesn't have access to the private in-depth review comments.

Often, while a review may have a Yes recommendation posted, the private comments may post details which, while not negating the reviewer's choice to give a Yes recommendation for what might have possibly been merely a minimally adequate experience which just barely qualified for a positive recommendation, might discourage others who do not possess the same charitable disposition to make a different choice.

As an example, let's say I have a session that results a Yes recommendation on a review. But in the private comments I mention that she has some rather pronounced stretch marks but it didn't matter to me because she has a face like an angel and she gave a BJ that was so good, so intense, that it curled my toes and had me seeing deceased relatives.

If you can only see the public comments and recommendations you might be horribly distressed and disappointed if the sight of stretch marks makes you jump out of your skin. But if you can see the private comments, you'd know not to book with her.

Now, not everybody wants to pony up the $$$ for Premium Access. Heck, I don't. But I'm just an internet troll. However, the reason some guys don't pay is that they're happy just as long as the gal isn't a scammer, a thief or a cop. If one's standards are higher than that and they don't or can't pay for Premium Access for whatever reason, well, then, the occasional disappointment is bound to happen. It's only a matter of time. But at least the disappointment won't be because the provider was a scammer, a thief or a cop.

Very valid point. There are other review sites that offer detailed BCD information without paying for premium access. ECCIE is just one of several resources I use. I probably trust it more than others, but it is still just a source. And if someone really wants BCD without premium access, a PM is just a few keystrokes away.....

[urhuckleberry]

Originally Posted by jokacz

What would prevent a provider from joining the board with a different handle paying for premium access and reading all the review? Or maybe one of her lapdogs would just give her access.

The only thing "preventing" a provider from joining as a fictitious man is a permanent ban when discovered. Notice I say when, not if...

We know there are providers who have hobbyist BF's, live ins, etc. and we can't prevent sharing of info that way. However in that case the male members risk suspension of PA privileges or a ban.

Huck

[China Doll]

Originally Posted by Sa_artman

When there's $$ involved, decency has nothing to do with it. When it boils down to it, it's just a business transaction. If the service sucks, then it's only fair to let others know. Visits are highly subjective, but I hope hobbyist don't start holding back for fear of reprisal from providers. If that happens then this board is heading for the sinkhole.

Nonsense! I know for a fact that the reason of wanting to be liked makes people sugarcoat the reviews. I do agree with you that it's only fair to let others know and that this decency is not necessarily a good thing in this case.

[DianaDeepthroats]

It's not fair for guys to walk around scared to tell the facts of a shit session.
If the provider goes out of her way to see what you said, she deserves hurts feelings. I mean, really. We're all human beings. "You go snooping for shit, you just might find it."

You're also doing a disservice to the providers who do their job right.. recommening someone you know you yourself wouldn't even see again.

[jokacz]

Originally Posted by urhuckleberry

The only thing "preventing" a provider from joining as a fictitious man is a permanent ban when discovered. Notice I say when, not if...

We know there are providers who have hobbyist BF's, live ins, etc. and we can't prevent sharing of info that way. However in that case the male members risk suspension of PA privileges or a ban.

Huck

Thanks for reciting the company line. If a provider wants to see the BCD section she will. The only reason it exists is to encourage review creation to increase traffic and to generate revenue. Oh yea, and to provide a service for our fellow hobbyists. The degree of security is in no way equal to that of the women’s section. But that’s not perfect either.

[elghund]

Originally Posted by China Doll

Nonsense! I know for a fact that the reason of wanting to be liked makes people sugarcoat the reviews. I do agree with you that it's only fair to let others know and that this decency is not necessarily a good thing in this case.

China,

I think "sugarcoating" of the reviews exists, and the reasons are threefold:

1. Men tend to like to "brag" a bit, perhaps. Writing a huge review of a Fantastic..Fabulous...Wonderif ic...Heavenly...experience may be as much patting themselves on the back as complimenting the lady. Men gotta feed that ego, right? Not many men are gonna write about the fact that the one hour session ended 30 seconds into foreplay, right?

2. I think that hurting someones feelings may be the best answer, though. You are right, most people would tend not to want to be mean, in a public setting, where they expose themselves to hurtful rebuttals, perhaps..

3. I can also understand the apprehension of posting a negative review.....beside ending up feeling bad about doing it, protecting your ability to see other providers can very well play into this.

Bad reviews here are like bad reviews of any service or product....for every 100 great reviews, one bad one is all that people remember. And, I for one, would probably hesitate to harm someone like that. Unless, of course, something way over the line/dangerous occured.

Just my 3 cents.....

elg.....

[China Doll]

Just because there are many reasons that people do something doesn't mean that the reason I gave is not one of them.

[elghund]

Originally Posted by China Doll

Just because there are many reasons that people do something doesn't mean that the reason I gave is not one of them.

I thought I was agreeing with you!!

[SlowHand49]

I believe I've read somewhere that most online reviews of anything are overwhelmingly positive because of a reluctance by reviewers to admit they got a bad deal . . .

That being said, we've all probably read reviews of things that we realized were probably written by someone who had purchased a perfectly good thing but just didn't know what to do with it . . .

[China Doll]

Originally Posted by elghund

I thought I was agreeing with you!!

Oh, sorry! If it makes it any better, it wasn't just directed at you.

Originally Posted by SlowHand49

I believe I've read somewhere that most online reviews of anything are overwhelmingly positive because of a reluctance by reviewers to admit they got a bad deal . . .

That being said, we've all probably read reviews of things that we realized were probably written by someone who had purchased a perfectly good thing but just didn't know what to do with it . . .

It seems to me that there are so many possible reasons for the tendency of which we speak.

[charlestudor2005]

I think one of the major problems with the reviews as they exist now is that there are only two options in the recommendation section: Yes and No.

I don't think you can adequately gauge the level of service on a yes/no question. There needs to be some elaboration in addition to the ROS section.

For instance, I've given "Yes" recommendations basically on all the providers I have seen, but my satisfaction rate is fairly low. The "yes" recc is based on the fact she showed up, got nekkid and we fucked. And I paid for her time. We both held up our end of the bargain.

But was I satisfied completely. No. In some cases she was late. In some cases she was late and left early. In some cases she stayed just long enough to get me off (not a hard task, IMO). In some cases she just went through the motions. In some cases she was early. In one case her snatch stunk like shit. In one case she didn't even bring the covers (I had some, so I was saved).

Based on the foregoing, do I feel like I always got my money's worth? No.

But given that one question, "Recommendation," can I honestly say "no?" No, I can't. She held up her side of the basic bargain.

Again, as everyone says on here, YMMV. And everyone has their bad days. However, when most every provider promises stellar service, it's hard to justify the (what I consider to be) faulty service I've listed above.

[Sa_artman]

Originally Posted by China Doll

Nonsense! I know for a fact that the reason of wanting to be liked makes people sugarcoat the reviews. I do agree with you that it's only fair to let others know and that this decency is not necessarily a good thing in this case.

Well, if you can say with 100% confidence that people sugarcoat reviews just to be liked, I'd like to see that study. I'm sure everyone wants to be liked (except WTF) but I've read plenty of reviews that aren't sugarcoated. I think that's a generalization to say just because it's a nice review it's being sugarcoated. You need to take into account the time they're written. If a hobbyist is still fuming a scathing review might follow. A few days later and things tend to cool and maybe they're re-evaluated their experience. Maybe there's an intimidation factor that plays into the positive reviews or fear of being blacklisted on the providers forum? Obviously more providers sneak into the bcd than hobbyist do with the providers forums as I've seen providers reference reviews with first hand knowledge.