Reviews

[HooBoy]

You guys should see the ones that do not get published because they are so bereft of information. Maybe I could start a website with just those. (What's that? Someone already did? Oh, sorry.)}(

[marc anthony]

>You guys should see the ones that do not get published

>because they are so bereft of information. Maybe I could

>start a website with just those. (What's that? Someone

>already did? Oh, sorry.)}(

 

 

ROFLMAO!!!!

 

Too funny.

 

And btw... speaking for myself... my constructive criticism is with the hope that people will put more detail into their reviews, not that you wil stop publishing those which have little detail. Truly there is SOME value in even those... even if it is only that the escort really does have 2 legs and won't steal your money LOL. Just the value could be enhanced if everyone wrote, as someone posted above, with their inteneded audience in mind (we are NOT the choir!)

[marc anthony]

>You guys should see the ones that do not get published

>because they are so bereft of information. Maybe I could

>start a website with just those. (What's that? Someone

>already did? Oh, sorry.)}(

 

 

ROFLMAO!!!!

 

Too funny.

 

And btw... speaking for myself... my constructive criticism is with the hope that people will put more detail into their reviews, not that you wil stop publishing those which have little detail. Truly there is SOME value in even those... even if it is only that the escort really does have 2 legs and won't steal your money LOL. Just the value could be enhanced if everyone wrote, as someone posted above, with their inteneded audience in mind (we are NOT the choir!)

[+ Axiom2001]

>>While I agree reviews need enough detail to be valuable, I

>>also understand (and sometimes do) hold back details that I

>>consider private.

>

>Why? We don't know who you are. Being only a screen name is

>why it should be even easier to write a complete review.

>

>For a reviewer to say what is our little secret or I'll keep

>the bedroom fun to myself does't give me any indication as to

>what the escort will and/or won't do.

>

>I think Mark Anthony put it best. I too want to know is he

>hard when he gets fucked, does he like to be spanked,is he

>into role play, any fetishes?

>

>Details give me details :7

>

>RT

 

 

 

I loudly echo the preceding comments, and while I read the first ones that appear here today, my major thought was: few of us know the writer or reviewr so why the friggin' ambivalence!

 

I've written my share of reviews, and all have contained enough detail to give future clients what they need to know! And I have also appreciated those other reviewers who have done likewise!!

[+ Axiom2001]

>>While I agree reviews need enough detail to be valuable, I

>>also understand (and sometimes do) hold back details that I

>>consider private.

>

>Why? We don't know who you are. Being only a screen name is

>why it should be even easier to write a complete review.

>

>For a reviewer to say what is our little secret or I'll keep

>the bedroom fun to myself does't give me any indication as to

>what the escort will and/or won't do.

>

>I think Mark Anthony put it best. I too want to know is he

>hard when he gets fucked, does he like to be spanked,is he

>into role play, any fetishes?

>

>Details give me details :7

>

>RT

 

 

 

I loudly echo the preceding comments, and while I read the first ones that appear here today, my major thought was: few of us know the writer or reviewr so why the friggin' ambivalence!

 

I've written my share of reviews, and all have contained enough detail to give future clients what they need to know! And I have also appreciated those other reviewers who have done likewise!!

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>First off, this is not a criticism, but rather an inquiry. I

>really don't understand the need to copy someone's entire post

>and then dissect it line by line, and further dissect it word

>by word within the individual lines. I didn't know that mine

>or anyone else's point of view, needed such dissemination, as

>such dissections often lead to the obfuscation of the original

>point of view.

>

 

No offense taken. It was simply a matter of convenience and laziness on my part. (It was late.) You made several points in your post that I wanted to address. Rather than construct a mini essay covering my view of the issues you raised, I opted to present it as a pseudo dialog. (It worked well for Galileo.) Simple point-counterpoint that covered those issues of interest to me while minimizing the chance that I would forget a point along the way.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>First off, this is not a criticism, but rather an inquiry. I

>really don't understand the need to copy someone's entire post

>and then dissect it line by line, and further dissect it word

>by word within the individual lines. I didn't know that mine

>or anyone else's point of view, needed such dissemination, as

>such dissections often lead to the obfuscation of the original

>point of view.

>

 

No offense taken. It was simply a matter of convenience and laziness on my part. (It was late.) You made several points in your post that I wanted to address. Rather than construct a mini essay covering my view of the issues you raised, I opted to present it as a pseudo dialog. (It worked well for Galileo.) Simple point-counterpoint that covered those issues of interest to me while minimizing the chance that I would forget a point along the way.

[Guest zipperzone]

>Point being, HB published the very reviews that people are

>complaining about. HB determined that such reviews met the

>criteria for submitted reviews (read the rules), and HB

>verified the legitimacy of those reviews via his verification

>procedures. I for one, trust HB, as so far, imo, he has done

>an outstanding job, both for the escorts and the clients that

>hire them.

 

A little ass kissing now that you're back in favour?

[Guest zipperzone]

>Point being, HB published the very reviews that people are

>complaining about. HB determined that such reviews met the

>criteria for submitted reviews (read the rules), and HB

>verified the legitimacy of those reviews via his verification

>procedures. I for one, trust HB, as so far, imo, he has done

>an outstanding job, both for the escorts and the clients that

>hire them.

 

A little ass kissing now that you're back in favour?

[Guest alanm]

Hey marc, I just went back and reread our respective reviews of Billy Brandt. My review is #3, your review is #4. I believe that we both left a lot of information out of our reviews, or rather I should say that I left a lot of information out of my review.

 

I did not mentioned that Billy loves to get spanked. I did not mention that Bill brought his girl friend and a male friend along; they eventually waited in a local bar for the "photo shoot" to be over. There are other things that happened that night that I am still not willing to post even now. In my case, I was more careful than usual because Billy was one of the biggest porn stars in the country in the early fall of 2000. I did not want to say anything that could damage his porn career (the girl friend would have been at least a minor surprise in 2000). Since I know Billy and can read between the lines of your review, I am fairly sure that you left out quite a bit also. Am I correct that your held back information because of the fame of the escort? That's a legitimate reason (in my opinion)to not tell all in a review. Alan

[Guest alanm]

Hey marc, I just went back and reread our respective reviews of Billy Brandt. My review is #3, your review is #4. I believe that we both left a lot of information out of our reviews, or rather I should say that I left a lot of information out of my review.

 

I did not mentioned that Billy loves to get spanked. I did not mention that Bill brought his girl friend and a male friend along; they eventually waited in a local bar for the "photo shoot" to be over. There are other things that happened that night that I am still not willing to post even now. In my case, I was more careful than usual because Billy was one of the biggest porn stars in the country in the early fall of 2000. I did not want to say anything that could damage his porn career (the girl friend would have been at least a minor surprise in 2000). Since I know Billy and can read between the lines of your review, I am fairly sure that you left out quite a bit also. Am I correct that your held back information because of the fame of the escort? That's a legitimate reason (in my opinion)to not tell all in a review. Alan

[pierrot]

Tom's original posting is right on. Frankly, I suspect the ones with no detail are particularly likely to be fakes, posted by the escort or his friends. It's not proof, since of course a long, detailed review could also be trumped up. But the lack of detail is just so easy to do, with no creativity attached.

Also, I agree with you about the pursed lip tone of "we'll keep the details between us". What kind of bull is that? This is a chat room about male escorts for God's sake, not Victorian drawing room ladies. I'm sure the escort is worried, sitting somewhere pining over the client, and hoping the details are kept secret -- as he counts his money.

[Guest Tomcal_]

>>...get over your self-important, judgmental self!<<

 

ROTFLMAO...this statement coming from VAHAWK!! talk about the pot calling the kettle black! I am glad my post got him riled up enough to slither out into the posting world again!

[Funseeker 22]

I agree.

Since the client is paying (usually ?) Let`s get down and honest with reviews. !!.

Fucking, Sucking,Rimming, vice versa - o.k. with me, spanking ?, cuffs ?, (w.s. but not with me). Need a great french kisser too. :-)

Wheh !!!- it`s getting hot here. Looking forward to my Oct visit with a highly rated guy on this board. :9

[OneFinger]

>... my constructive criticism is with the hope that people will put more detail into their reviews...

 

Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean by "more detail". I've contributed 5+ reviews and there are some details that are really not for public consumption.

 

I don't want to put in a review that "...XXXX fucked me so hard and deep that he tickled my tonsils." IMHO that is TMD (too much detail). I find the reviews meaningful when they:

 

[li] Confirm preferences.

[li] Verify reliability.

[li] Address attitude or ability to relate with clients.

[li] Warn of restrictions, limitations, or no shows.

[li] Demonstrate that the escort doesn't discriminate against fat, old men (like me).

 

I don't want or need to know that the escort reminded you of your brief affair with Trigger or wore a loin cloth like Tarzan. I don't really care that the escort was able to put his entire arm (up to elbow) inside your willing hole. I also don't want to know that he licked your hairy ass like he hadn't eaten in the last week.

 

The review questions provide a good way to confirm necessary info. The narrative portion of the review gives me a means to determine the honesty of the reviewer. And, listing the number of reviews gives me some idea whether to trust the reviewer.

 

I'm not sure I need more details. I only trust reviews from multiple reviewers who emulate my personal taste in men.

[marc anthony]

I find the reviews meaningful when they:

>

>[li] Confirm preferences.

>[li] Verify reliability.

>[li] Address attitude or ability to relate with clients.

>[li] Warn of restrictions, limitations, or no shows.

>[li] Demonstrate that the escort doesn't discriminate against

>fat, old men (like me).

>

 

>

 

And how do you get this information when the reviewer writes..."what happened in the bedroom is between us." ???

[marc anthony]

Alan: I am sure there can be reasons to leave some details out of reviews... and I certainly have left some gory details out of my reviews for a variety of reasons. I am not advocating porn novels nor am I suggesting that a review is useless unless every single detail is laid out.

 

I don't think that is the issue here though. The issue is how valuable is a review when the narrative simply says "what happened in the bedroom is between us."

 

I didn't go back and read my review of Billy... but if I said that, please spank me! (I did spank him too, btw).

[OneFinger]

>And how do you get this information when the reviewer writes..."what happened in the bedroom is between us." ???

 

The review form specifically asks if the escort is top, bottom, or versatile. The form also asks if he his looks met his description and it he lived up to expectations. There is also a special review for "no shows".

 

The "You:" section allows the reviewer to describe himself. I routinely look here for reviewers that have similar interests or describe themselves like me (fat, old men).

 

Do you ignore the "standard" parts of the review and only read the descriptions? Do you not look at the reviewers description and see if it is similar to your preferences?

 

Perhaps you're ignoring the obvious and expecting others to "spoon feed" you details that are already provided.

[marc anthony]

>>And how do you get this information when the reviewer

>writes..."what happened in the bedroom is between us."

>???

>

>The review form specifically asks if the escort is top,

>bottom, or versatile. The form also asks if he his looks met

>his description and it he lived up to expectations. There is

>also a special review for "no shows".

>

 

And if an escort says he is top, bottom, or versatile... does that tell you if he kisses well? If his oral skills are exceptional? If he is passionate when is bottoming or if he lies there? Does it tell you if he takes the lead in sex or if he wants you to? Does it tell you if he is verbal in bed?

 

>

>Perhaps you're ignoring the obvious and expecting others to

>"spoon feed" you details that are already provided.

 

No.. it's just that the details listed above are not provided in the short answer standard form, and they are important to me and many other readers of this site. And that is why there is narrative section as part of the standard form.