VIPs who read the unpublished reviews, what reason do you use as to why a review

I don't mind helping out the site, but it's annoying having to click Yes, it's a valid review and then a reason why (because the review is acceptable).

Anything too short, has very little actual information, or is too filler-esque

"I don't mind helping out the site, but it's annoying having to click Yes, it's a valid review and then a reason why (because the review is acceptable)."

I'm confused by this. Nobody is forcing you to check the unpublished reviews

Any of the following would cause me to reject it. Too short or little information. It sounds like the reviewer has never been there. Due to the current environment if I thought it would cause the club trouble. If I did reject for this reason, the review would have to be extremely blatant. It looks like a shill review or an attack job on the club or specific dancer Extremely hard to read.

Other than that and a few others, I would approve it.

Nobody is forcing you to check the unpublished reviews

But it's my duty! I just wish my duty was a little easier. Isn't it enough for me to say Yes or No and be done with it?

I approved the ones that gave an idea of the vibe, prices, mileage, dancers looks, and other general tips, but I wouldn’t expect every review to address everything, since different things matter to different ppl. I didn’t approve the one that was very short, and sounded like he hadn’t been there in awhile and just wanted his membership.

I’m not too harsh about it and I don’t expect every base to be covered. However, the review has to give enough info for a reader to have a sense of the club, it has to make me more inclined to go to a club or less inclined because of the review. In short, is the review helpful?

There are two kinds of reviews I don’t like besides club ads. One is where the reviewer is just whiny. The other is where the reviewer seems to think everything is wonderful all the time.

I think it is best for the site that most get published, what we should be doing is rejecting club ads although I do get some perverse fun out of those idiotic Key West reviews.

I took a quick look late last night and just rejected one that was 2 sentences long with no detail whatsoever. I was kinda surprised people submit that kinda crap thinking its worth anyones time.

Pricing is important for me. Unless you walked in and walked out, you should have some idea of how much cover, drinks, dances, VIP, etc all cost. Or at least some of those. If I don't see that info, I'll scroll right by it. Someone else can determine if the reviewer's erotic (non?)fiction is worth publishing.

^I love the erotic ones! I’m voting those in! ❤️

Well, that makes sense for you. I'm generally not interested in reading about another mans rock-hard, throbbing cock. I can read a little of it, but if I start to suspect the reviewer is beating off while writing his review, I gotta start drawing a line!

will the review author get the benefit of feedback of our opinions?

^^That's a great point. I dunno how many people would listen, but I bet some would. And maybe even resubmit the review with the info we request in the feedback.

The author gets an email with the feedback if a review is rejected. The author also gets to know who rejected the review.

Well, in that case, to the person that wrote a review that simply repeated "This club sucks!!!" for about 50 lines, I hope my feedback of "This review sucks!!!" was clear enough. If not, please let me know by replying below so I can clarify.

If there's anything valuable in the review, I approve. I'm not that hung up on length per se. A long review that is just a rant from one guy about one girl isn't all that valuable, cause YMMV, ya know? Maybe someone had a bad day. A short review with some news (like this place is now closed on Mondays) is still valuable.

So, I'm trying this feature out for the first time.

I'd say I'm easy to get past and haven't voted 'no' yet. I don't think TUSCL should be super strict. Basically, as long as the review convinces me that the person actually visited the club I vote 'yes.'

I get it how some people think it's all about length.

However, please consider this discussion from last year about how width can be pretty important, too:

tuscl.net

It seams some people didnt understand the op. I actually didnt see this thread until just now but i made a suggestion to founder on the other thread. if i vote yes, the reason should be irrelevant. Whereas if i vote no, the poster deserves to know why their review was rejected.

I voted on a few earlier today...if they had prices and club-specific details, I voted yes. If they didn't, I voted no. I feel like a review should give me a pretty good idea of what to expect if I went to that club the next night.

"if i vote yes, the reason should be irrelevant. Whereas if i vote no, the poster deserves to know why their review was rejected."

For a while (maybe years?) there was an option to add a review title even though it didn't show in the published review. I gave my reviews a title anyway, and then one day they all showed up. Today there's not an obvious use for the comments on the yes votes. Tomorrow there may be.

Look at all the text written so far about whether or not a positive vote comment is needed. Seriously, it's not a Founder issue if some people who post paragraph after paragraph in these forums can't type out one coherent reason they voted up or down on a review draft.

^for every single review though?

"or every single review though?"

Why not? Most review drafts have at least one thing worth commenting on.

The problem is that it won't let you submit your approval without putting a comment. You not only have to click Yes but you have to put something in the box.

Some more feedback: it would be nice to pull up the profile of whoever is doing the review so I can determine if it's an ad along with any other reviews they might have put up.