The State of REVIEWS

[Guest DallasObserver]

There was once a time when the review section of this site added value to the hiring procedure. Part of the selection process had been to survey an escort’s reviews on Hooboy’s pages however, that time has now passed.

 

Today’s reviews are totally void of content. As once had been the case there no longer is information being shared by the reviewer. Instead we are subjected to clips of previous reviews or even worse press releases. Some reviewers have written interactive reviews which can be quite frustrating for those of us without special powers. Phrases like, “I’ll leave that part of our encounter to your imagination,” don’t qualify as an actual review.

 

Now a day the best source of escort information can be found here in the message center. There are many active contributors who maintain a zest for hiring. These men freely exchange details both in public format and via private contact about their escort – client experiences. I raise my glass in gratitude you these guys.

 

To maintain the honesty and credibility of the review process it will need a major overhaul. If enough people contacted daddy with their displeasure he might be forced to examine current review policy. Till that time comes I suggest those with questions or information on escorts neglect the daily reviews in favor of posting or reading the posted knowledge found here within.

 

-Dallas Observer

[JT Brooklyn]

This of course.. We all take on Face Value, from a First Time Poster!

 

Thanks for the Post...:+

[Hamlet]

>Today’s reviews are totally void of content. As once had been

>the case there no longer is information being shared by the

>reviewer.

 

Huh? Did you actually READ today's review of Billy Skullfucker? I found out everything I could possibly want to know about him. Everything. And then some.

[+ deej]

Yeah, let's lynch Daddy over what other people write! That's the ticket!

 

I wish he'd be more selective, but he and I have had this conversation many times. Last time we were chuckling about the reviewer who foamed at the mouth because his no-show wasn't published.

 

Never mind the fact that his review needed to wait the proscribed time since the escort's last review.... the reviewer claimed four previous reviews yet none existed using either his handle, his phone number or his IP address. Never mind that the escort was out of country on the date of the review according to other reviews from credible sources.

 

There is a lot of bullshit that comes through the review process, and much of it gets rejected. The rest is stuff careful readers need to see. With 10 "press release" reviews in a row, readers need to see the pattern.

 

Daddy could reject them, as Hooboy sometimes did, but then readers wouldn't see (or know about) the pattern.

 

If deception is possibly involved, would you rather know about it or have it hidden from you by an editor?

[Guest DallasObserver]

>Yeah, let's lynch Daddy over what other people write! That's

>the ticket!

>

 

Please don't put words in my "post." I never suggested daddy be lynched. However, he does own the process now and is responsible for the mostly void content posted now a days.

 

Hooboy routinely rejected reviews for lack of substance otherwise, my post would have been made years ago.

 

-Dallas Observer

[+ Lucky]

Welcome to the message center, Mr. Dallas! I'll bet you 2-1 that you have a good time posting here. Ignore the curmudgeons and the lone rangers, unless they're Texas Rangers. I think we need to light a little fire under Daddy so he demands just a little more in a review. But then, we need to ask more of the reviewers as well.

 

Take a look at last week's review of Danny Cruz if you want to see an old-fashioned review all lubed up and ready to go!

[Luv2play]

I happen to agree that in general the reviews have gone downhill since Hooboy's passing. He did not tolerate "press reviews". The current management seems to allow them. Of course, there are always the exceptions as Lucky has pointed out with the Danny Cruz review and today's Billy Skullfucker's review. Of course, I'm not sure either of these reviews would lead me to hire either of these gentlemen, but they sure let me know what I would be in for if I did! }(

[+ Lucky]

Here's my suggestion to Daddy:

 

If a review comes in with thin or no content, how about sending it back to the reviewer with a request for more details? Then, if that is declined, the review could be published with the proviso that the reviewer declined a request for more information. At least the effort has been made and we can know that it wasn't just shyness that kept the reviewer from spilling the beans.

 

It's a compromise between shitcanning the review altogether or bullshitting the readers!

[+ deej]

OK, so you're advocating eliminating a quarter of the reviews?

 

That's what would happen. Some people simply aren't comfortable writing. Faced with a "not enough detail" response, they'll just decline. (Hooboy did tell me that he rarely if ever got anything back when he rejected a "press release" review unless it was bogus to begin with.)

 

Where would YOU personally draw the line? What are the concrete criteria that make a review valid? Are you willing to give up knowledge that a guy has been hired recently? How many posts do we see here asking "anyone hired so-and-so lately?"

 

What one-size-fits-all yardstick are you proposing that works for all clients and escorts?

 

Be careful what you ask for, though. You just might get it. ;-)

[+ ArVaGuy]

Well here's a topic that brings this quasi-lurker out to join in the discussion. For background I have been using and posting on the site since about 2000. I have more than five reviews but post those under a different handle.

 

It has been noticeable lately that the current crop of reviews have been a little thin, lacking in detail, and in some cases an outright waste of time at least IMO. Two or three lines of text are not a review. Such "reviews" are even less like a "press release" but more in tune with a notice in a church bulletin dashed off before the printer deadline.

 

What I find admirable is that there seems to be a larger number of escorts being reviewed for the first time. Note that today there are 11 escorts with five or fewer reviews listed.

 

Personally, I think this is an indication of the strength of this site that - for lack of a better term - "new product" is being made available by apparently new and long time reviewers. In addition the more, <ahem>, "established brands" continue to receive new reviews and notices.

 

My first review was published in late 2001. (Which of course due to the new archiving around here is no longer accessible. I will address that issue in a moment.) Then, as I think happens now with any other first time reviewers, I took my example from the other reviews being posted at the time. They formed the model for me and I am sure many others who posted in the earlier days of the site.

 

Since more and more of the reviews seem to be of an "abbreviated" nature its my assumption that newer reviewers may be taking this as a cue that such is the level of expectation here. Guys take a few minutes and add some detail. Your reviews gain more credibility when there's some meat on those bones rather than "He fucked real good." OK?

 

Now as for the current practice of archiving older reviews, and I have addressed this issue directly with Daddy, I am not in favor of the practice. In conversation with guys I have hired its been a topic that's come up and each time we have agreed. This practice is not fair to the reviewer or to the escort.

 

Of all of the issues and changes that have occurred on this site since the passing of HooBoy, this has been the most detrimental to the long term viability of this site. At least that's my opinion. It’s not possible to pull up the archived reviews though I have tried several times, perhaps I am not doing it correctly or the search feature does not allow it.

 

This issue has been noted in the Deli section recently and I would hazard a guess that it’s not a popular feature. Given the brevity of recent reviews lately those older reviews become more important as far as I am concerned and seeing "positive review by XYZ 2002" just does not cut it for me. Perhaps that's why there appears to be an increase in 411 requests in the Deli.

 

ArlingtonVaGuy

[Guest gman2115]

Hey Hamlet,

 

I'm glad that you found my review just as informative as when I wrote it. I was worried that it may be on the lengthy side, but I did notice that there was alot of new reviews that were more like a Readers Digest version instead of a Roger and Roeper style:

 

http://babydb.male4malescorts.com/m4mdc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=7&topic_id=57629&mesg_id=57629&page=

 

I also happen to notice that of the reviews that were in detail, they were also just one giant paragraph with no spacing in between. Frankly, I wound up reading the review more than once because I found myself sitting there with my eyes bugging out trying to figure out where one line began and where one would end.

 

GMan

[Guest gman2115]

Hi Luv2play,

 

Thanks for stating my "exceptional" review of Billy. I'm sure our taste in men may be totally on opposite ends, but I'm sure that based on what you read, I'm willing to bet that if you find someone who needs a recommendation that you will know who and where to lead them in the right direction. Of course, if you find that your own preferences will change over time, then I will be glad that my review has served it's purpose. :9

 

GMan

[Guest DallasObserver]

>OK, so you're advocating eliminating a quarter of the

>reviews?

 

If your statistics are correct then yes without hesitation.

 

>

>That's what would happen. Some people simply aren't

>comfortable writing.

 

Then they should not attempt to write a review.

 

>Where would YOU personally draw the line?

 

I draw the line when a review is filled with useless content i.e. I'll leave that to your imagination.

 

>What one-size-fits-all yardstick are you proposing that works

>for all clients and escorts?

 

I don't believe in one size fits all. I believe in common sense.

 

>Be careful what you ask for, though. You just might get it.

 

I hope I do and most likely so do the other men who read the reviews side of the site.

[BigD]

Dallas Observer,

Is that all you do - OBSERVE?!

Where are your reviews?

Show us an example of your reviews

so we will know what to strive for.

You would probably consider my reviews tame,

but at least I am more than an observer in Dallas.

BigD

[JT Brooklyn]

Hamlet, The "Skullfucker" sure sounds Entertaining!My kind of guy(IF he Flipped)... BUT every Guy reads the reviews looking for Different Experiences with a Guy, who will probably have different Chemistry with Different People!

 

A General Outline is cool, but til YOU Contact him ask questions etc, 3 Paragraphs IMHO.. shouldn't Seal The Deal!

Alot of Guys donot feel comfortable 'Writing Down and Dirty"!

Of course I realize it is "Great Therapy" for most! Writing it or Reading It. Daddy sending it back for More- More- More- (Remember the Disco Song?) Just doesn't make sense Time Wise!

 

I personally think it is Great, that there Now are Newbies Popping Up all over the Place also, even with just a 4 Line Review! A Little Competition... keeps the Oldies on their toes, Attitude Wise! IN most cases! LOL :+

[VaHawk]

I think all reviews, unless obvious fakes should be published, and if the review doesn't interest you or convey the info you need, then just ignore it and move on to other reviews of the escort.

 

Some reviewers are just not comfortable going into specific details about the sexual part of the encounter, and they should have the right to submit a review, without being castigated by those who want all the details!

 

Personally, I hate the reviews that rave on an on, paragraph after paragraph, about every minute of the sexual encounter! IMO, they are mostly useless since they seem to confuse "fantasy" ala "exaggeration" with reality, as the reviewer posts them in the throes of post-ejaculation fever. In other words, most are nothing but pure, fictional, amateur "stroke" pornography, and imo, extremely boring, as is most pornography.

 

The only things necessary: an honest description, did the escort show up and if so, on time, what you hired the escort for, and whether the escort delivered as promised for what he was hired for and for the price agreed upon.

 

If you want some "stroke" pornography to put some cream in your morning coffee, then don't demand that it be present in an honest review on this site, or perhaps go to some site that "guarantees" it (good luck on that pursuit).

[Yeswell]

Some reviews go on for too long without really saying anything useful: "we ate at my favourite restaurant and walked around the block before going back to my apartment" and so on and so on. I've only written one review (the third [i think] review of Kevin Vancouver. The review is short, but I tried to be helpful. I'd be more than happy to get comments on whether my review is helpful and what could make it more helpful. Or people could just start posting what they look for in reviews: did he get hard, did he stay the full time, was he clean, et cetera. I'd like to write more and better reviews. It will mean having a lot of sex with handsome men, but I think I'm up to the challenge.

[Yeswell]

P.S. Sorry about the disturbing italics. I don't know what happened.

[Guest mbarz]

Daddy Sez: "Mbarz is no longer welcome here."

[+ Lucky]

I think your review of Kevin was perfect! Lots of info with no excess verbiage:

 

Experience:

I've seen Kevin several times. I've always enjoyed deepthroating him--no mean feat as his dick is about 8 inches and thick--but I wasn't sure I could bottom for him. Today I found out I could. The whole experience was wonderful. Feeling his big dick inside you while you look into his handsome face and his piercingly deep blue eyes is not to be missed. He's also great with his mouth and his hands. As well as being handsome and muscular, Kevin is a really nice guy. I admit that when he was pounding my ass he didn't seem so very nice, but that was good too. If you're in Vancouver you'd be foolish not to see him.

 

Handle: Yeswell

Submissions: First Review

 

Now, howzcum you didn't see Juan too?

[+ deej]

Plagiarism: a sport the whole lieing family can enjoy. :9

[+ newatthis]

When I started reading this thread, I was all in favor of censorship and editing to a high standard, but then I got to thinking...

 

...I hate the 4-liners that give essentially no information -- but they do alert me to escorts I didn't know about so I can search for them on other sites and be sensitized to future reviews.

 

...And I also hate the overly long reviews that include lots of irrelevant detail (what was discussed at dinner and the menu and ....) that seem to be mostly about the reviewer and not the reviewee -- but I can skim those parts, can't I?

 

It doesn't take much review reading to figure out that the fact that escort X did Y with client Z is no guarantee of what escort X will be moved to do with me. Nevertheless those pornographic details get the old engine revving and stimulate interest -- I would think escorts would like that kind of advertising.

 

So I guess I'm not as discontented with the state of reviews as I thought.

[Yeswell]

Thanks. I live in Vancouver so I've seen both Kevin and Juan several times separately and together. I just thought I'd begin my reviewing career with Kevin, as he has fewer reviews here. But I'll continue my researches.

[Bob]

Maybe we should start a forum to review reviewers.

 

Many of them desperately need help. Today is a prime example. Of the nine reviews presented not one piqued my interest or caused a stirring in my groin. What a waste of time.

[Luv2play]

After you made your comment I went back and looked at all of today's reviews; it didn't take too long as they are mostly quite short, which backs up your point. I thought a couple were OK such as the ones on Kaleb and Kory and Joey Jordon. Sometimes the reviewer's description of himself is helpful too in judging whether the escort would suit me.