Dario - Today's reviews

[pierrot]

Under Newest Reviews today, Dario has some 7 new reviews all at once. How does this happen? Is it because his friends and enemies are warring and all posting at once?

[+ deej]

From the M4M FAQ:

 

To maintain variety, there is a 10 day separation on reviews except for escorts with 10 or more reviews. For them, the separation is 30 days.

 

Dario is definitely in the >10 reviews category, so the window of opportunity to publish opens every 30 days. Any qualified reviews in the queue go up when the window opens.

 

Is it reasonable to think Dario saw 7 clients in 30 days? That's the reader's decision to make. <shrug> And remember there's overlap. A review can be in the queue, but dated such that it won't show up until the next window opens. So it's actually 7 reviews in 60 days.

[carryover123]

I can see his reviews getting somewhat backlogged with the 30 day posting policy. It just seems that a 60 day waiting period is a long time for a review to hit. Especially if there happen to be a few negative reviews. I generally would like to know as much about the escort and what others experienced with the escort if I was to consider hiring him.

 

It is good to know about the 60 day wait between postings. Also, it seems that it is best to track the MC as the discussions hit there generally before the reviews are posted.

 

Thanks for the explanation

[+ deej]

Yes, much can be argued either way. The waiting period was implemented partially to combat efforts to "stuff the ballot box".

 

At one time, Hooboy would only post one review from the queue every time the window opened but he ended up with some guys having reviews queued up that would take a century or so to post, so now everything that's eligible gets posted.

 

It's an ever-evolving process.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>Is it reasonable to think Dario saw 7 clients in 30 days?

>That's the reader's decision to make. <shrug> And remember

>there's overlap. A review can be in the queue, but dated such

>that it won't show up until the next window opens. So it's

>actually 7 reviews in 60 days.

 

I don't wish to open a discussion of the mechanics or policy of the 10/30 day review posting process. I may understand it or not and it really doesn't matter in the end. I try to keep things simple and I apply Occam's Razor to explanations or to my interpretation of observations. When this policy was instituted some years ago it was a mechanism for a single person working this site as a second job (and labor of love) to deal with processing an overload of reviews.

 

In line with that understanding I have always viewed the 10/30 day intervals as post opportunities for an escort with repeating reviews. Thus when an escort with more than 10 reviews receives a review it is posted as received unless he has had a review posted within the last 30 days. If so then the posting is delayed until the 30th day elapses from his last review. Any reviews received within that wait period will also be posted when the 30 day interval is up. Else it just aggrivates the backlog issue. (This may not have been the orginal concept when HB had the full time job in addition to the site as he had to balance his workload too hence the number of reviews processed per day.) With this understanding I don't see how, under normal circumstances, a 60 day interval enters the process from HooBoy's end.

 

As far as how many reviews are posted in a month for an escort, that is a simple function of how many are received, not necessarily an indication of when the appointments took place. As a reviewer I have a queue too and it contains more than escort reviews to be written. I have posted reviews 90 days or more after an appointment. FWIW

[noviceny]

Numbers...hurt...head...Hulk....must...smash...smart...gay...guys....

[+ deej]

>Any reviews received within that wait period will also be

>posted when the 30 day interval is up.

 

Almost. Any VETTED review will be posted. If there are reviews in the queue to post tomorrow, and a review comes in today, the new review likely won't be vetted by tomorrow's upload so it'll wait until the next cycle.

 

The vetting cycle sometimes isn't rapid as it depends on response from the reviewer.

[noviceny]

Hulk just vetted his pants

[KY_TOP]

Dario, would you hire him?

 

>Under Newest Reviews today, Dario has some 7 new reviews all

>at once. How does this happen? Is it because his friends and

>enemies are warring and all posting at once?

 

But would you hire him?

 

Dario had been on my list for sometime. I actually had to cancel on him BEFORE a trip to DC last year, which he was very nice about. Since I will be in DC again soon I had planned to contact him, even with recent mixed reviews and debate over his picture. I found the new picture to still be attractive. But, with the lastest round of reviews I am hedging on hiring him. Mainly due to his response to Review #32. The most common excuse for a bad review is to say the client was dirty and stunk. Dario used that excuse and now I'm not sure he is still on my list. Would you still hire him? Hedging in KY.

[JT Brooklyn]

RE: Dario, would you hire him?

 

It hasn't been my experience in NYC for any of the guys I have hungout with to "ask me" to send in a Review..I always let the guy know, IF I am sending in a review, and if he is cool with it, I go ahead. I donot always send in a Review. Especially if the guy has many existing Reviews... BUT IF you have an Escort "who asks" every client, he sees.. to send in a Review, I guess this is where the Backlog can show up. In time some of the guys will have an unreal amount of Reviews...By alot of 1st Time Reviewers, who now via the Escort, know the site exists. :+ :+ :+

[+ deej]

RE: Dario, would you hire him?

 

>But would you hire him?

 

Wow, that's a tough call! Particularly after you already "took one for the team" with Travis earlier this year.

 

Bear in mind that when an escort's response says the client was smelly, the client MAY actually have been smelly. ;-) (Hey, it COULD happen!) Dario mentions the reviewer's other negative reviews and there is in fact at least one other negative review (an excoriating review on a third encounter). The escort's response to that review actually sounds reasonable. (And that's as much time as I'll invest in checking it out.)

 

I, personally, wouldn't hire Dario because I don't usually hire tops, and he's taller than I normally go for, and he's not the "look" I usually go for. But I also know how limited the choices are in the DC area. (Apologies to Aaron Scott! :-))

 

To answer your question, no I wouldn't hire him. But it's not because of this latest review/response go-round.

[HotdadENYC]

RE: Dario, would you hire him?

 

Sitting here in NYC, I wouldn't go out of my way to hire Dario (that is, having him come up here). If I find myself in DC, I would definitely give him a phone call and chat with him a bit and find out if its going to work or not. The fact that he and I are both tops might ultimately work against us, but hey, you never know until you ask.

 

The fact that I would, without question or qualm, hire the little married hottie in Seattle, the Bobby twink in LA or the spelling boy in San Antonio only goes to show that I value integrity as much as I value exceptional skills between the sheets.

 

The fact that Dario said the client "smelled", etc. may not be so far from the truth. OR, it may be. Not having been there, I can't offer a reliable opinion.

 

I can't say that my experiences are 100% representative, and I do realize that some escorts will resort to certain comments when they get a bad review, but I have spoken to many escorts that complained about a previous client's hygiene (that is, obvious lack thereof). The fact that I use brillo on my balls before I have an intimate encounter (escort or otherwise) is merely an amplification of this thought.

 

And while I have the response window open and ready to receive keystrokes, I thought I might offer a few more cents (or is it scents, or sense?).

 

While it is NOT my intention to criticize the way HooBoy does business, since overall the contribution is valuable, I NO LONGER see the wisdom in maintaining a window for posting and publishing reviews. Timely reviews are valuable; older ones might not be as useful if we are looking to hire within a very short time frame. IN short, I think ALL reviews, after verification, should be posted as they are received.

 

"Stuffing the ballot box" will always go on, no matter how hard the site managers try to prevent it and I am inclined to think that the clients who use this site will (hopefully) use discretion and wisdom in weeding out those escorts they want to see and those escorts they hope to avoid.

 

Besides, its apparent to me that the MC has become more of a forum for discussing and reviewing escorts, relaying good and bad experiences, etc., so the wisdom of imposing a moratorium on reviews just doesn't seem feasible any longer.

 

Finally, in my opinion, the constant and consistent discussions about "first-time" reviewers doesn't hold a lot of water for me. As more clients find out about this site and more escorts enter the field, its inevitable that we are going to find a slew of inexperienced buyers and sellers. It only makes sense. I don't think that attaching a statistical significance to that phenomenon should be a major consideration.

 

Thanks for listening.

 

hd NYC

[KY_TOP]

RE: Dario, would you hire him?

 

>I, personally, wouldn't hire Dario because I don't usually

>hire tops, and he's taller than I normally go for, and he's

>not the "look" I usually go for. But I also know how limited

>the choices are in the DC area. (Apologies to Aaron Scott!

>:-))

 

Well that's another thing. I am also a Top but some reviews say he is a Top and others versatile (i.e. Review #26).Thanks for your comments, I'm still hedging on Dario even though Vince Tiexeira hasn't returned my e-mail. :-(