How do you decide which unpublished reviews to evaluate?

The majority of the unpublished reviews I read are for clubs in my area. I occasionally read reviews of clubs I’ve gone to as a tourist, or clubs in an area where I used to live. After that, I just read really short reviews and usually reject them because it is too obvious the reviewer didn’t put much effort into it.

I try to read whatever is there when I have time to do so.

I generally look at the review as an out of town traveler would to determine if there is anything that helps me understand how the club is (costs, other useful intel, unique perspective, etc.) If it is useless generic crap, i reject. if it has something that I would find useful while doing research on a club that I have never visited, I generally approve. Overall I probably approve 65% and reject 35%.

But as a matter of principle, I am now voting no on any shit review that uses words like "standard" or "usual" in discussing prices. Fuck them for wasting my time and likely posting a crap review using information lifted from others.

My protocol is pretty much the same as Shadowcat's.

Crazy, I have almost the same process as you, Shadowcat.

If a review is short, I read it to see if it at least contains some valuable info about prices, hours, description of girls, layout of club, anything. If it doesn't contain anything, rejected.

If it's long I skim through and once again look for the stuff I mentioned above. Once I find a couple of satisfactory details, I'll pass it. If I don't find anything and the review still has a lot left I leave it for someone else to approve/reject.

If a review ties names to extras, I reject and tell them the underlying rule of don't name names if you're gonna detail extras.

If a review has a cool name, just like Shadowcat said, it gets an autoread.

It's actually kind of cool to read a review and recognize who the author is just by their writing style. Papi's reviews are unmistakeable.

1. All local clubs

2. Out of area clubs of interest to me

3. TUSCLers I'm fond of

4. Catchy title - e.g. "I got ripped off ..."

I avoid reading Papi Chulo reviews, I got better shit to do with my time

Some reviewers seem to either be totally uncreative, or too-lazy, to come up with a worthwhile title that more or less describes the spirit of the review - e.g.

• "Tuesday Review"

• or they just put the name of the club as the title

• etc

If it’s short, I usually wind up rejecting it since there are rarely enough details. If it’s too long I’ll skim through it and generally I approve them since it meets criteria. If it’s a review that would get a specific dancer in trouble I’ll generally reject that too.

I don't scroll thru the unpublished reviews, I just look at the name of the club of the first review then do a search for "reject " (with a space at the end) so I can jump to the beginning of each subsequent review and see if the club interests me - thus I don't look for short reviews worthy of rejection but sometimes I do happen to catch a short one and I'll read it for possible rejection

I read and approve or reject the reviews of local clubs or clubs I've been to and make sure they at least sound as if they have entered the building and aren't making something up that is complete BS. I'll read many of them but don't approve or reject. I wouldn't want to help publish BS or reject truth.

If I remember to read them I just read whatever is there.

If I remember to read them I just read whatever is there.

I usually skim through and read the ones that are in my area, that’s my early morning read after I look at the news and the market reports generally around 5AM sometimes a title catches my eye and I’ll read it if it is readable, and either up vote it if seems like there was some decent thought put into or reject the ones that seem to have no value. The reviews that I’m familiar with I will read and agaiyand either up or down vote them, I don’t really read the reviews after my early mornings as most days I am concentrating on other things and don’t really give them the fair amount of attention to rate them well

Don’t always get to them but when I do, I read and vote up or down on all I look at. I’ve been rejecting all 2 sentence reviews, which are frequent. If someone has made an effort to write more, and it’s not complete crap, I’ll generally “approve”.

i read most all of them and look for useful info and hopefully good writing. ones that really tell a good story are my favorites!

If I have time, I will evaluate all that need evaluated.

I tested out the shadowcat system, and ended up rejecting this one:

The good news is Harley’s back! Everything else sucked

Had an OTC meet up (love the downriver whores) flake out on me we were going to meet at the Malays sport bar down the street. When that didn’t happen I headed to subis and the disappointment continued. 3 AA GIRLS and 2 white girls that were so tall and skinny they could have played in the WNBA. Just as I was drowning my sorrows low and behold who do I see taking the stage? Harley! Still looking fucking awesome too by the way. She’s slimmed way down blonde trashy look I fucking love! So as I was getting excited to enjoy her blow me to forget about the OTC no show she settled down with a whale and doesn’t come back to surface for air. Now I’m buzzed and fucking annoyed so I bounced out of here after wasting about two hours of my life. Headed to the criket with the almighty flight club as a back up plan

^^^^did you tell him why you rejected this though?

Interesting... I would have likely approved though the author does name some names.

I only evaluate the reviews of clubs that I've personally visited at least once. I'm not suggesting that's how it should be done, as some good reviews would not be processed if personal knowledge of the club was a requirement.

I would like to see the requirement to suggest "club ad" be personal knowledge of the club!

I said it was too explicit. I guess I should have put a comment saying that the review pretty much says that Harley sucks dick for money.

I’ll do better next time

Same protocol as described above:

1. Clubs that I've been to, locally and while traveling
2. Clubs in areas that I might visit
3. Reviews with catchy titles

The Cliff Notes version of Papi Chulo's club reviews. (Got a chuckle out of Papi's comment about not reading his own long winded reviews).