Let’s improve reviews - sample rejected submissions

I would've rejected that too.

Most people don't know how to write. I blame our education system, which fails to teach, and our students, who don't want to learn.

No disrespect, but if a goal is to improve reviews it might be useful to write an outline articulating the "minimum information for a review" rather than simply posting an example of a bad review.

The issue isn't brevity. After all, you wouldn't want to reject Hemingway's reviews (if he enjoyed writing for TUSCL, which I suspect he would have!)

You also don't necessarily want to reject "place sucked so I left" reviews. After all, if somebody thinks a place sucks I'd like to know that. In general, I like to avoid places that suck. Places that suck = non-brilliant!

I'll be honest, I've had limited energy to write reviews for a while. The reviews I have written are fairly long and detailed. But then I lost energy to write that much. A rubric describing what is absolutely necessary might be helpful. Who knows, founder may post it somewhere!

What would I have liked to have seen in this review?

- A description of what "rough looking" meant. Approximate ages, weights, ethnicity. And it could be stated as an actual number (necessarily approximate since few of us take census)

- Some minimum description of club. Why was security tight? Is it a bad neighborhood?

- What does "Dances were pretty average" mean? Is it a reference to private dances or stage dances? If the former I have another question: given that the reviewer described a mix of "very rough" and "slightly less rough" girls why did he get a private dance?

- How did the bartender "a good job"? In most places my expectations of a bartender aren't that high. If I get the drink I want promptly all is brilliant in 4got's world!

The review didn't need to be much longer, just more informative!

Now back to being goofy! ;)

That review could have been for any club. Way too vague. People should gives details that actually prove they have gone there.

I agree that it would be great to improve reviews.

If there is an outline posted - showing what should be included in a review - and a notice that mentions that not all reviews are accepted - that’s about all that can be done.

Then - crappy reviews would need to be rejected - in a uniform manner.

I don't think that review is so bad, but when I started writing reviews I had a few rejected for being too short as well. Since I usually just review one club, I try to bring new aspects every time I write one. Since PL's tend to be somewhat educated older men, one would think they have some writing skills. Of course, there are exceptions but most of them I have on 'ignore'.

This looks like a made-up review to get free VIP - good chance the person was not even there.

If I feel there are not enough details I reject it. Some guys will put a dance price or a number for dancer looks but still don't give info about dance mileage or dancer body type which is more important.

There already is a set of guidelines on TUSCL about what should be included in a review.

^ those guidelines can be more specific, they're kinda generic themselves - IMO