Where is the editing?

The reviewer and the editor both probably were drunk

Hey, give the guy a break - he lives in Virginia. You know we're all desperate here.

I agree with the main point though, there are a lot of reviews that are worthless. They fall into two categories. First are reviews that are clearly written by employee or owner. Second is posting that has complete lack of details. In all fairness to F though, I think it would be impossible to read all posts. One idea would be adding voting buttons (like netflix), where readers would give a thumbs up or down on a review. If a new review got x number of thumbs down in x time, maybe flag it for review by F.

Just an idea.

Get a couple people to do reviews. Pay them minimally off the advertising income. There are alot of worthless reviews on here.

It's true that some reviews aren't very useful. They don't give any details, they say 'It was fun, I had a good time.' or 'I won't be back' without providing any justification. Sometimes you wonder if the person even visited the club, or if they're making something up so they can earn VIP status.

The up-down vote is a good idea. You could also display some information about the reviewers credibility, maybe the number of reviews they have or the number of up-votes they've gotten.

Quite often, you'll see a review for an air-dance club which says something like 'The lapdances were amazing, they were $50 each but well worth it,' then after reading the full review you see that the person posting never had an LD before or it was their first visit to a club. Sometimes when reading a review, I look at the other clubs the person has reviewed to see what they are basing their comparisons on.

I don't see any need for reviewing by Founder. We all have enough experience and common sense to be able to distinguish BS reviews.

TUSCL could adopt a similar technique that google uses to peer edit their review. Each review could have a "did you find this review useful?" and if enough people click on "no" it could get automatically deleted or flagged for deletion. Also could push the useful reviews to the top and the less useful reviews to the end rather than sorting them by date.

^ personally i want to see the reviews by date, latest ones 1st just like it already is. someone else's opinion of most useful reviews might not match my opinion.

regarding editing, i'm guessing that founder does it all by himself. if true there's no doubt that he's overwhelmed by the amount of reviews at times. i've seen alot of questionable reviews posted but short of having a trained roumd the clock moderation crew i don't see how the questionable reviews will be eliminated. we have a good forum for reviews and discussions here, no it's not perfect but no matter how things are there will be some that aren't satisfied. afterall we do have alot of very opinionated peeps hanging out here.

I agree with the point of this thread and thought the same thing when I first read that review. That was not a review, it seemed more like a message to someone and had absolutely nothing to do with the club. The only thing that had something to do with the club was clicking on the club name and clicking some numbers for ratings. I remember some time ago under a different name I had part of my review rejected because it didn't apply to the club strictly speaking. Someone edited out a sentence or two they thought did not apply to the club in my review before it was posted. We go from one extreme to the other.

P.S. EDOG65 replied to my PM and thanked me for catching his error. He PM'd Founder and the review has been deleted.