I May Be Wrong But ?

[Ellocohombre]

Just my observation. Some of the veterans of the site along with myself have noticed an influx of super brief reviews being posted. Most if not all of these reviews are being posted by members who have been around for awhile with little comments or reviews.
Not saying this is the reason or not but could it be that these members have had let's say free access and had it taken away. Follow me here. So on occasion I may check a members private access days left. Check it a few days later and balance is the same. Also cross reference it with the date of their last review and it does not match ?
Like I said just a haunch, but did all these members finally get that so called free days taken away and are now forced to write a review?

 

[oldhorndog53]

You’re not wrong Elloco. A few weeks back I PM’d @topjimmy that I had noticed quite a few member accounts where the Reviews Days balance appeared to be stuck at 44. He asked me for examples, and I sent him maybe a half a dozen. He thanked me and said he had forwarded them to the site developers. Apparently, this programming glitch has been fixed.

 

[East Lake II]

It also seems like there there are a a lot of new members, who join a few minutes before their first review and the review is severely lacking or contains erroneous half baked non information.

During the great purge when many well respected were banned, everyone became hesitant to participate. Since the great reformation or reinstatement, there are a lot of reviews. Review activity has really picked up, but I’m still not seeing the reviews and comments by the long time well revered handles.

 

[EKBlitz]

I’m sure that’s exactly what’s going on Ellocohombre. I admit that the glitch allowed me access to reviews well past the time I should have had & I only recently lost access to read the reviews. I’m not going to make up some bs review just to regain access but I can see how some would be tempted.

 

[Vongruber78]

Sometimes I will keep reviews brief simply because I am writing a review on a provider that has been previously posted about. I will elude that further info is available on the site and simply am confirming what others have said. I do try to be a little more lengthy as to provide a positive contribution, because let’s face it…the intel is appreciated.

 

[Pop_pop]

You’re not wrong Elloco. A few weeks back I PM’d @topjimmy that I had noticed quite a few member accounts where the Reviews Days balance appeared to be stuck at 44. He asked me for examples, and I sent him maybe a half a dozen. He thanked me and said he had forwarded them to the site developers. Apparently, this programming glitch has been fixed.

You bastard, I enjoyed having unlimited access after posting 1-2 reviews now you’re forcing me to keep writing more

 

[Pop_pop]

It’s different when a seasoned member has a good experience and writes an informative review, vs one who just joined or been unbanned and finds himself limited and desperate to get access so he’ll write up something real quick in order to get access, I would suggest to be a little lenient with that perhaps next time when they won’t be under stress for entry they’ll do better

 

[oldhorndog53]

You bastard, I enjoyed having unlimited access after posting 1-2 reviews now you’re forcing me to keep writing more

Or purchase Private Access. Haven’t you heard - there’s no free lunch.

 

[Pop_pop]

Or purchase Private Access. Haven’t you heard - there’s no free lunch.

Yea yea good to know you’re the one who stole my lunch

 

[Johnnylovesmassages]

I am wondering if there is a lot of new fiction being written, with descriptions of services that don't match what other people have obtained.

 

[Smokenchoke]

I agree with thecrazyguy although sometimes reviews are short because there’s really nothing new to contribute regarding information for some of these providers.

 

[hhnyc77]

Just so everyone is clear, those brief, barebones reviews are being rejected. And as stated in the guidance sticky at the top of every review section in every geographical area (and repeated by us for the past 5 years), just because a review stays up does NOT mean it was approved.

I will repeat...being able to see a brief, no info "review" that's live on the site DOES NOT MEAN it was approved, and the member will NOT receive site access credit.

What guys typically do in those cases, will make a comment like "where's the review", or "WTF", or "how did this get approved", or something similar. What members fail to realize is that it gives it even more attention by bumping the non-review to the top of the list, instead of just letting it die.

Trust us when we say that we have minimum standards of what constitutes an informative and helpful review, and we will NOT approve those reviews that do not contain the required content and fields. And for those who still don't know what that is, look here:

https://www.ampreviews.net/index.ph...for-your-reviews-you-should-read-this.144190/

https://www.ampreviews.net/index.php?threads/would-you-like-your-reviews-to-be-approved.3027/

Read those two links thoroughly and commit them to memory, if you aren't aware of them.

 

[hhnyc77]

I agree with thecrazyguy although sometimes reviews are short because there’s really nothing new to contribute regarding information for some of these providers.

Not necessarily true...there's always something new to learn about a provider. Everyone has different things that make them tick...whether it's a new perfume scent, or how they were made up, or the particular outfit the provider was wearing that day. Whether she had an off-day or was especially energetic. Something simple as what the parking situation at the establishment or quality of linens or choice of candy. Every little detail helps.

And as subjective as looks are, we welcome everyone's opinion on them...every other review might say any given provider is an 8 in the face or a 7 for the body...but your opinion might be different, and especially helpful with other context. "I thought Yoyo was a 7 but Cici is a legit 9". "I prefer spinners so her curvy body wasn't for me". Same for age. Or service. Or whether certain parts are fake or altered. Etc., etc.

Point being, there's always a different perspective that can be helpful to someone. Reviews that say "she has been talked about repeatedly so I won't get into it" is not very helpful and in certain cases, will be rejected.

 

[Rutts Hutt]

Just so everyone is clear, those brief, barebones reviews are being rejected. And as stated in the guidance sticky at the top of every review section in every geographical area (and repeated by us for the past 5 years), just because a review stays up does NOT mean it was approved.

I will repeat...being able to see a brief, no info "review" that's live on the site DOES NOT MEAN it was approved, and the member will NOT receive site access credit.

What guys typically do in those cases, will make a comment like "where's the review", or "WTF", or "how did this get approved", or something similar. What members fail to realize is that it gives it even more attention by bumping the non-review to the top of the list, instead of just letting it die.

Trust us when we say that we have minimum standards of what constitutes an informative and helpful review, and we will NOT approve those reviews that do not contain the required content and fields. And for those who still don't know what that is, look here:

https://www.ampreviews.net/index.ph...for-your-reviews-you-should-read-this.144190/

https://www.ampreviews.net/index.php?threads/would-you-like-your-reviews-to-be-approved.3027/

Read those two links thoroughly and commit them to memory, if you aren't aware of them.

The above is very informative. The one thing I don't recall seeing was the necessity to post damages. Shouldn't they be a prerequisite for a review being accepted also? It's important info and followup posts are always inquiring about the damages. Also the damages format should be in plain numbers, no decimal codes. Thanks for considering these points.

 

[Smokenchoke]

The above is very informative. The one thing I don't recall seeing was the necessity to post damages. Shouldn't they be a prerequisite for a review being accepted also? It's important info and followup posts are always inquiring about the damages. Also the damages format should be in plain numbers, no decimal codes. Thanks for considering these points.

That might expose all the guys who lie about how much of a discount they get.

 

[Rutts Hutt]

That might expose all the guys who lie about how much of a discount they get.

I don't recall seeing that.

 

[Smokenchoke]

I don't recall seeing that.

I see it here and there. Some guys say oh you paid too much. I only pay and then it’s a number that’s less than what everyone has previously posted.

 

[Rutts Hutt]

I see it here and there. Some guys say oh you paid too much. I only pay and then it’s a number that’s less than what everyone has previously posted.

I guess I have seen that. I believe the moderators frown upon those kind of comments. I know of one gal who gets 60/160 from some guys and 60/100 from me and other longtime customers for the same service. How much someone is willing to pay for the first visit sets the stage for all future appointments. It's hard to go backwards.

 

[Johnnylovesmassages]

I think the biggest problem is we don't know what is real and what is an elaboration. That being said 1. It is possible one provider will provide a service different for one person than another based on the mongers looks, time of day, how many clients she had already see that day, etc. 2. What I find to be great service may not be the same as another monger and 3. Style is subjective. I like a massage with teasing and a long ST because I need more time to get the motor running, while monger X may not like any massage and wants a minimal ST because his motor goes to full blast right away and he can last longer at full speed and 4. What I find attractive in a provider may not be the same as someone else. And lastly, #5 Age: some mongers only want young cute girls but I find the older ones to be more experienced in what I want. I find the younger ones don't do a good massage (mostly), don't know how to tease or edge, and want to go to the main event (FS or non FS) while the older providers know how to get a monger worked up, know how to do a ST very well, and are willing to take their time. For ALL of those reasons it is important to have a good honest review with true information.

 

[Rutts Hutt]

I think the biggest problem is we don't know what is real and what is an elaboration. That being said 1. It is possible one provider will provide a service different for one person than another based on the mongers looks, time of day, how many clients she had already see that day, etc. 2. What I find to be great service may not be the same as another monger and 3. Style is subjective. I like a massage with teasing and a long ST because I need more time to get the motor running, while monger X may not like any massage and wants a minimal ST because his motor goes to full blast right away and he can last longer at full speed and 4. What I find attractive in a provider may not be the same as someone else. And lastly, #5 Age: some mongers only want young cute girls but I find the older ones to be more experienced in what I want. I find the younger ones don't do a good massage (mostly), don't know how to tease or edge, and want to go to the main event (FS or non FS) while the older providers know how to get a monger worked up, know how to do a ST very well, and are willing to take their time. For ALL of those reasons it is important to have a good honest review with true information.

I've been doing this for a while and most reviews I recall have usually had similar amounts for services rendered. I don't monger as often as I used to but am satisfied with the gals in most places. I don't need young ones. As I've mentioned in previous comments I mostly desire bj/fs first. Then afterwards I'll accept a foot or back massage to use up the remaining time.