First Time Reviews

[+ not2rowdy]

This subject needs its own thread - if for no other reason so it’s easy to search for.

 

Off on a rant.

 

Seems like every week there’s a slam on “first time review”. Or “first time reviewer”.

That’s very unfortunate. It’s kind of the chicken and the egg situation.

Complaints about lack of reviews.

Complaints about not submitting reviews.

But then complaints about first time reviews and first time reviewers.

 

Damned if you do - damned if you don’t.

 

How about be a little more welcoming. How is the reviewer, and the review-ee ever to develop a reputation in a such a quasi-hostile environment? Quite frankly this attitude has been a reason for me to not post further reviews. At what point does a reviewer become “trusted”?

 

I’ve been a member on this site here for almost 6 years now. I’m merely a “Master” with a paltry 214 posts to my name. I’ve only posted one review on this site. (Although I’ve also posted a few reviews on other sites under different names).

 

Nobody says you have to give credence to the review - or any other posting on this website whatsoever.

 

But how about thinking more long term, for the betterment of the website - and the review section, before shooting the messenger.

[longtime lurker]

Ha ha! Maybe people easily get bored... the whole "been there, done that" scenario. Reading a first time review seems too "wide eyed" and innocent. After you visited the Magic Kingdom a few times, Space Mountain doesn't seem like such a big deal. To be perfectly honest, there are a few of us who haven't had much adventure in life...

 

I recently posted my first review here in the "spa" section for an Orlando masseur, although I had seen him several times already. Somebody questioned about him way back in December and I avoided responding for four months, thinking somebody ELSE would comment on him instead.

 

Truth is... I secretly would prefer him all to myself, but that's not an option since he has to make a living with other clients besides me. I was still... a little, um... diabolical by saying the enthusiastic fans of another masseur discussed in the same thread "will stay happily content with him". You know... sort of, like, "you folks keep to your guy's massage table" so my guy's massage table isn't TOO crowded.

 

I don't know what is wrong with me. I am sssssoooooo selfish.

 

 

All joking aside...

 

For me, it is important to just be accurate about the person's personality, the environment he does his work and his professionalism... so that a reader has some idea of what the experience would be like, in addition to what pictures are available for you to "guess" what they are like. Anybody can post "Gee, I slept like a baby after my session".

[gallahadesquire]

To the OP:

 

It's not always the fact of a "first review." It's when the Unsub has multiple first reviewers that suspicion arises.

 

"Every disease has to start sometime"

[mike carey]

To the OP:

 

It's not always the fact of a "first review." It's when the Unsub has multiple first reviewers that suspicion arises.

Exactly! In particular if they are posted in quick succession (I originally said 'if they come in a rush', thought better of that).

 

It's all a matter of trust. The better a reviewer is known in the forum, the more others have on which to judge what they say, whether it's their first or 100th review. I seem to recall an escort here recently saying that if a forum member requests an appointment he checks what they have said in here and what they have written in reviews. So review away, you can't become a frequent reviewer if you don't post a first review.

[UnstableAtom]

Does first review also include first experience? I've heard that some people don't like when both are put together.

[longtime lurker]

I shouldn't have responded to this thread (Daffy reference included), but since the damage is done...

 

... and it is obvious that my brain is not driving with the proper flow of traffic...

 

Does first review also include first experience? I've heard that some people don't like when both are put together.

 

I know you are mentioning something entirely different here, but this reminded me of a review on, I think, Masseurfinder. This would have been a while back, long before all of the censorship. The guy spent half of the review discussing himself. He talked about being divorced after only a few years and curious about experiencing "m4m" intimacy for the first time. The review was so raw and honest, but I did wonder if some readers would critique him: "Well, enough about you. Was he good at what he did?" There was some mention about his skills, but mostly about all of the talking they did about personal backgrounds, suppression by family and so forth. It seemed more like a review of a psychiatrist/therapist. Yet my impression is that the reviewer liked him so much that he must have been a nonjudgmental and patient man who went out of his way to make this first-timer as comfortable as possible.

[+ Gar1eth]

To the OP:

 

It's not always the fact of a "first review." It's when the Unsub has multiple first reviewers that suspicion arises.

 

"Every disease has to start sometime"

 

Or when the escort has only (or mainly) first time reviewers-especially when all of the first time reviewers use the same turns of phrase.

 

Gman