Review Standards: Listing dancer names is not very impressive

I’ve seen a few reviews recently where the reviewer worked his screen name into the review not going to call him out this time but one of those reviews is is the one that sent me a nasty pm after I down voted it.

It just may be me, but sometimes I think people over think this strip club thing.

In regards to reviews, I only approve reviews with perfect grammar, sentence structure and paragraphs. With the exception of the one I just approved for Sugar 44.

On a unrelated topic, I can only think of 3 or 4 out of the maybe 200 clubs in NJ that post reliable lineups (GGR, PH Lounge, Johnny A's) Girls are attention whores by nature and every dancer wants to be the next Cardi B. With that said I always struggle to understand why more managers dont market thier talents instagram pages more and post lineups on instagram.

^ the next cardi b

Just imagine you could’ve smashed her in 2011-2013 for $150-800

I don't mind if he mentions dancers' names as long as it's not extras-related *and* he also talks about the rest of the club specifics - but I can't stand the RILs that wanna write a love-letter of their fave and don't mention anything else about the club.

I've actually haven't rejected too-many reviews as of late - I thought it could be bc the peer publishing process was having a good effect.

But I did reject one today that caught my eye - it caught my eye bc it was a duplicate submission - as I was checking to make sure it was a duplicate I noticed it was a very short review - went ahead and read it and it pretty-much had zero worthwhile info (just a couple of generic sentences).

I get the issue people are bringing up with prices for all the things, but for me I look at drink prices as "will I pay this much for my drink or not? will I pay this much for her drink or not?". "Do I feel like paying this cover or not?" If the answer is no (and it sometimes is), I forget about the number almost as soon as I hear it.

The other thing is drink prices are really volatile things. If a club is running a special on a liquor I actually like, my drink tab might be half the usual and that's what I'll remember. Plus I drink rail stuff when I can so I'm usually around $5 a drink in most clubs, even ones where the prices tend to be higher. It's been years since I've seen a dancer care if I drink cheap stuff, especially if I'm ok with spending a little more on a top shelf drink for her. I did have a dancer go into great detail about how unimpressive my phone was the other day, so much so that the customer beside me (a stranger) was cracking jokes about it after she walked off. They were funny jokes so I didn't take it personally, and it gave him a chance to shoot his shot with some flirting. That went less well, but I digress.

So I know that's not exactly what Rick was getting at in his post, but when I read over reviews before they get published my only real criteria is if I thought there was something helpful in it about the club. If it's false info about a club I've never been to, that's why locals have a chance to comment on reviews and throw the BS flag. There's detailed reviews I'll reject because telling me everything extraordinary about an amazing dancer (if she exists) tells me nothing about whether I'd like the club. Or writing a review that could easily be 50 other clubs tells me nothing about whether I'd like the club. It's all subjective, though. Sometimes a three line rant will get approved by me simply because it's helpful in my opinion to know that someone could get so pissed off about a place. Drink prices are just one of those things I'll agree to disagree on, because I use drinks in clubs more as a prop than anything else.

I went to a club recently and never knew the exact drink price. I forgot to ask. It was $7 a few months ago. Then they must have lowered the price down a dollar or a couple quarters or something. I only bought 2 or 3 drinks so no big deal. If I went to the club to drink and worry about drink prices, I missed the whole point of the visit. Since the exact price was not important to me, I don't remember the exact price.nobig deal. I just know it was higher than I wanted but I didn't go there to drink a lot of beer.

Since some on here reject reviews for the slightest reason, I didn't bother submitting any reviews . No reviews everyone is happy I guess.

@rick: I’ve rejected more reviews than I can count lately because the reviewer said absolutely nothing about the club itself.

There was one not too long ago that used about a thousand words or so to essentially say, “the club was dark; I met a dancer with big tits; we had sex.”

That shit will get rejected every damned time.

wallanon posted: "Drink prices are just one of those things I'll agree to disagree on, because I use drinks in clubs more as a prop than anything else."

I hear that I suppose, but a review without cost intel is much less useful for the average strip club goer. Most club hounds, especially those who go out at night, buy drinks and pay cover charges at clubs. For them, the almost silent majority around these parts, the value proposition for a club hinges a great deal on the cost of drinks and entry. At certain tourist trap clubs that overcharge at the bar and play games with alcohol amounts, a hound could easily ring up a $300+ bar tab buying drinks for himself and a dancer or two, where the same drinks may cost him less than half that at a less gimmicky place.

Then of course there is the price of dances. I've lost track of how many reviews, where guys claim to go back for LDs or rooms, don't even have this information. I don't think I need to spell out why this is important information. If he never went back then so be it, but anyone claiming to have done so should be able to recall the damage.

Also, to your point about locals making comments if a review is fake, I'd rather catch a fake review before it is published if possible.

Prices indicate many other things also and they can vary widely in a city. In my city prices range from close to $75 vs. $10 before you sit down, that’s essential information for me. Plus quoting prices in a review adds credibility and immediacy.

I hate reviews that are obviously about a trip he made there a couple years ago, usually because he wants VIP to plan for an upcoming bachelor party or something.

A generic review with no intel on a club should be rejected. I don't contribute to accepting or rejecting a review om any club that I haven't personally visited. For those that do review all reviews (visited or not) - perhaps there should be some more intel about how recent or often all clubs are reviewed. For instance, last time I looked on TUSCL there were no Panama City FL or Panama City Beach FL clubs that had been reviewed since July 2017. I'd hate to see a review that has moderate intel get rejected on seldom reviewed clubs. Some info (including the fact that they are open for business) is more important than Rick's drink price:)!


On another note, feel free to end the age old "Enter The C-------/Exit The C------ " reviews!

Drink prices are very important to include because they impact overall nightly budget. Same with cover, lap dance prices, valet and VIP. Yes, it gets repetitive with clubs like Follies that get reviewed 2-3x per day. For less reviewed clubs it’s more important. It doesn’t take much time to put in a sentence that covers it.

^Agreed. Also, as we know, most clubs are not reviewed as often as Follies.

I only ever review when I feel I have something to add to all the information that's already out there. Most of the club websites have the info on entry, drink prices, dance prices, etc. That's why I find it so hard to review. It's the same shit, different day. If something unusual happened, then I want to add that but then you have to be careful about revealing too much. Extras....better not mention the lady or she could get in trouble, or the club could get in trouble.

See what I mean?

Reviews have guidelines, not rules, it's up to the peer review system to determine not only are guidelines met but does the review add to site.

I'm not a stickler on pricing because I don't monger on a budget but I understand how it is useful information, so if there is enough other useful Intel I would approve the review.

Unless it is obviously fake, there is no real harm caused by a review that doesn't give the details that the overly obsessed want to see. Unless pricing is out of the ordinary, I would rather read about the vibe and experience. If a club is reviewed frequently, the average reasonable person would read several reviews to get a better idea of the club. If a club isn't reviewed frequently, the average reasonable person would consider the club a crapshoot.

I agree no names should be given in u.s clubs reviews

AZ, what good is a review full of generic crap that might not even be real?

I always thought it might be a good idea to give more weight to a judge, that had some familiarity with the club in question, gives you a more complete picture for example, one of us south Florida guys weighing in on our own clubs, not saying I don't want to hear what the west coast thinks about our club, but is the west coast reviewer, seeing what the club is like, and able to convey his impression to someone from another region.

I’d rather see a review that has one point of important information ( like naming a ROB ) than one that uses a thousand words to tell us information that has already been reported ( drink prices, club layout, .....).

The current review system seems to reword reviewers with not much new to say but lots of words to say it.

I prefer that a review be informative and entertaining.

A review homogenized down to “l left happy” is useless, some club goers get thrilled that a stripper talked to them while wearing sexy clothes, so they leave happy.

Comments like “negotiated a bj for $50” is vastly different information than “she got oral for only $250 (plus $150 for the room)”. Stating prices paid for what service received makes both these statements eminently more useful than “then she sang Billy Joel”.

@mark: Things change, all the time. Clubs increase drink prices or play with drink specials, dancers come and go. etc., etc. The new system rewards reviewers who provide specific intel rather than generic crap.

This is the second thread in which you tried to blame others for your own failure to post something useful. How about instead of whining, you just do better, like posting something that makes us believe you actually visited the club? I have not had a single review rejected under the new system and I posted several in that time. Same too with many others. Plenty of short reviews get approved if they seem to contain specific useful intel, which obviously yours did not if it was rejected.

@mark: Here is an example of a short and sweet review that I and 2 others approved yesterday. It gave the state of affairs at the time, a bit about his specific interactions with the girls and the cost of his drink. It was no masterpiece to be sure, but it was enough to make the cut.

https://www.tuscl.net/app/rev.php?id=350…

I think instead of whining about a review not being approved, if you’re serious, do a better job and rewrite your review taking the time to add something that might be missing. I use a checklist to make sure I’ve covered the basics and try to add an anecdote showing how that particular visit went down, don’t ever mention names unless there’s a ROB situation, and avoid mental errors and omissions by proof reading.

This excessive concern over reviews that appeal to the review Nazi's is ridiculous. TUSCL probably has a few hundred active reviewers with different perspectives and objectives in their visits. I could give a fuck if drinks are $6 or $7 in a club. I don't visit clubs based upon the drink price, and not everyone drinks the same thing. IMO the reviews are what is to be expected for a cross section of clubs and demographics. As I have stated before, just because a review doesn't meet your standard doesn't mean it won't be useful to someone else.

I ask again, has anyone been harmed by a bad review? All of this pettiness over reviews will only tend to reduce the population of reviewers. Then we will be left with fewer reviewers and reviewed clubs. When that happens, I imagine the topic will turn to "what can be done to get more reviewers?"

If all you can do is obsess about reviews and ratings, you need to get a life outside of TUSCL.

AZ, you're spinning yourself as part o the oppressed majority when, in reality, you're part of the small but vocal minority. I haven't seen a drop off in review numbers since the change several months ago, but I HAVE seen an improvement in the quality of what is posted. I think that most people have adjusted. Also, supporting your contention with a melodramatic "review Nazis" characterization is very silly given how low the review approval bar remains. If you can't get a review published here, then it really must suck ass.

Sorry Rick, I have not had any reviews rejected. Based upon the comments regarding reviews, my position does not appear to be the minority. And again. who has been harmed by a review that doesn't meet your standards? And you really have no idea if the volume of reviews has changed. And yes, the review bar is low, but the review Nazi's want to raise it. What will that accomplish? When I first joined TUSCL I would see several unpublished reviews when I logged in. Now I see only a few if any. Is that because of fewer reviews or faster approvals/rejections? Only Founder knows that answer, anything else is speculation.

It still appears to me that you are the vocal minority, and it still appears to me based upon comments posted, raising the bar would result in less participation. Less participation results in less growth and information.

I think the review process is faster I don’t really see fewer published reviews I do notice that most reviews seem to be published within an hour of posting, not data just anecdotal, my own observations.

Rick, you seem to have declared yourself the final arbiter of what is, and is not, an acceptable review. You list some simple rules that will result in approval.

The problem is, the standards are set by whichever 3 VIP members vote first. There are no defined standards so each indidual sets his own. Depending on the luck of the draw, or the phase of the moon, a review may or not be approved.

So, unless I missed Founder declaring you the Review Judge, your standards only apply to, at most, one vote out of three.

What I’m suggesting is Founder declare a more objective standard or guideline that takes some of the randomness out of the current system.

@Mark94 try posting the same review at a different time, I notice that some folks like myself are more active early in the morning, but I typically don’t vote on questionable reviews for clubs I don’t have first hand knowledge of. If I’m not sure I defer to vote leaving it to folks that may be more knowledgeable about a particular club, but that’s me.

We recently had a member post that he had been faking reviews for over a year. His reviews passed the standards. If a person with a little common sense wanted to they could easily fake reviews. An informed person faking reviews vs an uninformed person posting honest reviews that don't meet your standard. No one can determine by reading a review if it is fake or not unless it is obvious nonsense.

The system (not Rick's system, but the review system) doesn't appear broken, except in your eyes. Hell Rick, it wasn't that long ago that you railed against a member
for taking only 15 minutes to determine a club was a shit hole, and it didn't agree with your view of the club.

Anyway, this discussion is getting ridiculous. I am off to enjoy the day.