So I just got back from a trip to DC and MD. Little 4got was happy to see me return and wagged his little wiener dog tail (and you'd be amazed by how high dachshunds can jump!) but that's not why I'm posting.
While I was actually in the district I had one evening and one afternoon where I didn't have anything scheduled. So I decided to walk on down to M street and check out Mpire and Camelot.
I wasn't expecting much based on DC reviews, but I found Mpire better than Camelot and figured I'd provide reviews of both. Question: what scale should I use? I wasn't expecting much so Mpire exceeded my expectations whereas Camelot fell short. Neither experience was brilliant on an absolute scale, but Mpire was enjoyable in a laid back watching boobs kind of way. Since that is (I suspect) the best that is possible in DC I feel like I should give a high rating since it seems likely to be the best in the area. But in an absolute sense it sucked relative to Atlanta (or Miami and Detroit based on stories shared here). So should only places as off the hook as ATL get good rankings?
Any brilliant opinions?
Comments
last commentBase it on your experiences elsewhere. We all end up in places that exceed our expectations, we all take one for the team.
Log in to vote
I think ratings should be based on an absolute scale.
If you give a mediocre club a good rating just because it is in an overregulated location a newbie that reads the review may get the idea that it is the best they can expect to experience in their SCing pursuits.
Example: Rating the best Orlando club as better than a 5 in value would provide an unrealistic expectation for vets but also dissuade newbies from expecting/demanding more when traveling elsewhere.
Log in to vote
Just say in the review what you are saying here, and why; you expected less from Mpire and got more, you expected more from Camelot and got less. I value the verbage in a review a lot more than the numerical rating as the numerical rating is relative according to the reviewer. So the numerical rating isn't absolute anyway. Just explain your choices in your review and that will help more than an arbitrary, relative, or absolute number.
Log in to vote
I like the idea of "based on reviews of the area clubs, this was better than I expected." I find it hard to rate a club with numerical ratings even if it is my regular club. You really can't compare it to other clubs in other cities and states as the rules are different everywhere.
Log in to vote
The text of the review is where you should explain why dc strip clubs suck and why they should save their money for trips to other cities(or in this case take their money to Maryland strip clubs which are a lot closer than atlanta, Miami or detroit). Not everyone has the luxury or desire to travel far away just for a strip club.
Log in to vote
As Flag explained, you should give it mediocre numerical rankings. Clubs should not be graded on a curve. But in the description you should explain why the club exceeded your low expectations.
Log in to vote
If you were to preface your review of an absolutely no extras, fat chance of OTC, club with that clear disclaimer and state that your review was based on solely on the "show," I wouldn't object to whatever ratings you assigned. As others have already mentioned, I would prefer a single, uniform scale of ratings, but I have no idea how that can happen. There are simply too many different variables, too many different opinions, and too many different clubs, for any one scale to fit all reviews.
Give it your best shot, be clear about what is and is not available, and describe your visit. That is all any of us can do. Then, when your review is posted, it will be time for the rest of us to bitch about your ratings and tell you what you should have done.
Log in to vote