There is a new Review today for the Tropical Lei club in California.
The Review is basically a Review of a stripper there, not really a Review of the club. Also, the Review is very explicitly describing some EXTRA activities. A few of us have made comments on the Review.
Should this Review be taken down ?
I already sent Founder a PM requesting it be deleted.
Should be taken down for naming a dancer with explicit acts, and for being an arrogant prick
Uhh
I have gotten to the point of rejecting any review with names
Arrogant prick is a good reason to remove the review
First of all, you guys are being pussies. He actually put some time into writing that review, which is why it’s pretty accurate.
Jk. Why is the guy who approved it getting so agitated?
I agree with you guys. I would hate if I was giving extras and a customer was putting my name and business on the site. At the end of the day don’t put my job or freedom on the line just because you want to brag.
@Boring why are we pussies because the reviewer is an arrooprick, this goes back on him, just because you can doesn’t mean you should.
No I just said that because the guy that approved the review called you guys pussies
No I just said that because the guy that approved the review called you guys pussies
I'd be willing to wager every single poster in this thread has made comments elsewhere stating how they think having a moderator would "ruin" this site. But the moment you see something you consider inappropriate, you go running to Mommy to make it stop.
^You agreed with him according to what you wrote
Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch one should remember the disclaimer on the home page of this site that "everything written here is a work of fiction" or in other words bullshit that can't be proven either true or false. So who knows if this review is true, partially true, what the reviewer fantasized he wished happened or just "Amber" getting some advertising from a friend. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I personally would not have explicitly named the dancer or explicitly stated the "services" but I still say keep the review up.
It should be common sense to anyone that's not an idiot ,or just doesn't give a fuck, that you don't out a dancer
The site is The Ultimate Strip Club List not The Ultimate Dancer List
^I totally agree one should not explicitly out a dancer unless you're warning she's a ROB. That said, dudes on here do want to know if a particular dancer is worth "dancing" with. That's part of what's useful about Tuscl. So it's a fine balance between writing something that could potentially get someone in trouble and writing something that not only is useful to another monger but also helps a dancer by maybe bringing in some business. But again it all boils down to the disclaimer that everything written here is "fantasy", YMMV often in a big way!
This club, as someone has already posted, is well known by everyone, including LE to offer sex for money, for at least 15 years. And nothing has happened.
^ there used to be all kinds of escort sites too for many years that had to suddenly shut down - as well as clubs that have operated for years and they go after it all of a sudden
I doubt if many, if any, dancers, are gonna appreciate their name being used in the context of extras bc "it brings her more business"
It amazes me that anyone thinks those "work of fiction" or "entertainment purposes" disclaimers mean anything at all to LE, the courts, or club management. A lot of sites shut down by FOSTA had similar verbiage.
A club or city may go for years being incredibly permissive with "no one caring", but it can change quickly.
That review is dumb.
FOSTA was designed to target sites where prostitutes were selling their services under the guise of being an "escort", like what was happening on Craigslist. It's not for targeting sites that publish bawdy stories about trips to strips clubs that read like letters to the editor published in Penthouse and Hustler back in the day. On the other hand if founder is working on some new thing for " verified " dancers and members to be able to "connect" (meet OTC) that could potentially run afoul of FOSTA.
"Amber" might not even work there after 4 months. Reading the review of Tropical Lei, people write reviews like that all the time. So for that club, he was not that out of line. I'm sure the approver is also a custy there and saw nothing wrong with it.
That said they are both being #1 assholes in how they are reacting to the "feedback" from others. I gave him some pretty evenhanded feedback. I'll see if he pounces on me too.
I just noticed something. The guy claiming to have approved the review is a 10 year old account with zero reviews. The OP has two reviews in 5 year. OP's few comments are about 80% about that club. "Approver" has one total comment before this review. My guess is OP and the guy claiming to approve it are one and the same guy.
RICO was originally enacted specifically to target organized crime. Since becoming law in the 1970s, its scope has expanded to include private sector financial crimes, pro sports, and several civil law cases.
Thinking that FOSTA exists in a narrow scope of enforcement is overly optimistic.
Yep....
To Goldmongers comment.
What’s it mean when he says “I can see what you guys look like”?
^FOSTA is limited by the First Amendment and the right of free speech, including speech that may at times be offensive and even lewd, such as porn. When ever any law affects a fundamental constitutional right, such as free speech, the law restricting such a right must both serve a compelling state purpose and be narrowly tailored to that compelling purpose. So it has to be used in a narrow scope. Any use beyond that will be struck down by the courts. In contrast RICO does not infringe on any fundamental rights and is well within the government's police powers and right to regulate interstate commerce.
Somebody refresh my memory. How many approvals needed to get published and how many rejections to get it deleted?
If the review is fake, then sure it needs to go. But if the review is genuine and the guy simply lacks discretion and common sense, then so do a lot of other TUSCLers where naming names and oversharing is concerned.
"How many approvals needed to get published and how many rejections to get it deleted?"
Last I read it was best of five.
^^^It was 3 or 3 whichever was first
@ChiliPalmer - I think a moderator would be amazing!
Tropical Lei is a straight brothel. You walk in, pick a gal, and off to the back for extras. This review is reminiscent of what the user probably submitted to BonedIn as the term FFZ (Free to fly zone) is a popular term. Nothing wrong with this review, it's accurate and again, this is a brothel masquerading as a club. You dont go to the Lei to hang out...
"The Review is basically a Review of a stripper there, not really a Review of the club."
I can appreciate the need for some discretion. However, I feel reviewing dancers is an important function of the site. I travel a lot. Through this site I knew specific dancers to look for the first time I went to HiLiter or Blue Moon in Phoenix. I knew who reasonably provide the type of dance I was looking for when I went to Detroit. Not every club is like Tropical Lei or Diamond Dolls in Pompano were virtually everyone is DTF. So thinning the herd through a positive dancer review is meaningful to me. I don't know where that fine line of discretion vs details lies. Pretty sure Billy Joel for $.1/2 roses isn't fooling anyone.
Well said Justin T... I agree 100% with your comment above. Anyone who auto rejects names is not helpful to many (maybe even most) users here IMHO...
Why is everybody getting so worked up? One guy writes an idiot review, another idiot (perhaps the same idiot) approves it. Other posters express their disapproval, and it went downhill from there. OP should have learned about writing better reviews, but even PC got more pissed off than I have seen from him before.
I don't reject reviews just because they use dancer names. I will reject a review, though, if it connects a dancer by name to extras.
TUSCL is becoming the Goldilocks site. Put in too little detail and the review is rejected. Put in too much detail, or the wrong kind of detail, and the review is deleted. Leave the whole thing up to a group of volunteers who each have their own standards.
At what point will people get frustrated and stop submitting reviews ?
"At what point will people get frustrated and stop submitting reviews ?"
Probably never so long as the incentive is a free month of access to the reviews. It took too long under the old system for reviews to get published, which is why it went to the vote system. The things people object to really aren't that big of a deal. And they're obvious.
Just because "Amber" sucked customer Bozo's cock bareback doesn't mean he needs to tell the world about it. If some guys just can't help but overshare, then that's on them, but there's probably lots of other guys who would mind if "Amber" has to move on because it's now too public that the management is looking the other way on her. Maybe not all the managers are as permissive, and "Amber" only dances when "Don Pablo" is managing because she can suck n' fuck and he doesn't care so long as he gets his cut. Then Bozo just burned "Amber" and "Don Pablo", and maybe they both go. Maybe all the manager's are letting things go but the owner doesn't know. Lot's of shit goes sideways when info is too easy to come by. This site has PMs for a reason.
For me, I tend to think I'm fairly lax on what I approve for reviews. If it looks like someone put in a decent effort and the review looks legit, then it gets a pass from me. If a review has zero information, is obviously fake, or would get a dancer I'd like burned from a club I'd like, then no.
I would have rejected that review (and it looks familiar, so maybe I did). Not just for the explicit details though. There’s almost nothing about the club. I would have rejected it even if it hadn’t been explicit.
“TUSCL is becoming the Goldilocks site.”
The only detail anybody is griping about is tying names to extras. And also of writing reviews that are so generic it could be about many other clubs.
In one of the review comments, somebody mentioned that even putting in asterisks+a physical description was enough to out somebody. I agree with that person. I’ve read a club review where somebody did that once and I knew who the reviewer was talking about. ——— Plus, from an individual’s self-interest perspective: if/when more dancers appear on the site, it would be very much in one’s interest to not only choose to avoid names, but also go after those who do.
Anyone notice how much strippercutie’s $250 FS claims easily baited several of us dancers (including me). tuscl.net
Yes this site may be more friendly about different types of sex work than, say, stripperweb. But there is still a certain taboo. And if one wants to attract more of the type of dancers people here would consider “fun”, then discretion would be a very good idea.
^ Descretion is always the better part of valor.
Maybe we should require all members that judge the reviews for approval or rejection, read the review guidelines first. :)
I dont mind the names, I've mentioned BonedIn before. Imagine having yelp reviews of the individual dancers...
Meanwhile, I could speculate that a lot of these gals that may object to having their names pointed out in reviews, these are the same ones shoving dildos up their coochies on webcams.
Idk, this thread seems like its attacking some guy who was just trying to be informative.
If you look at the comments on the review the guy basically acknowledged he cribbed the details from other reviews. There's more going on here than old TUSCLer griping.
He even titles the Review " Amber " .