tuscl

Acceptin/Rejecting Reviews and VIP status.

flagooner
Everything written by this member is a fact.
Saturday, March 16, 2019 5:45 AM
When evaluating reviews, I often find myself torn because there isn't much said about the club, but there is some info that would be nice to have shared. There is just so much lacking. My thought is to have a much lower bar to publish the review, but not immediately grant VIP status. After the review is published the members can click a "Was this Review Helpful" button. The member would then get the VIP status when the submission receives enough endorsements (maybe 5). I think this would create more posted content while not rewarding half-assed reviews. Thoughts? @founder, would this be feasible?

63 comments

  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    How many fruitcups for a passing grade ?
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Fuck you
  • King_Gambrinus
    •
    5 years ago
    We need a rubric
  • Warrior15
    •
    5 years ago
    I am always said that VIP status should be purchased. No free VIP status for Reviews.
  • sp
    •
    5 years ago
    I look at it this way. If a club has say 3 or more recent reviews and they have all the info I need about the club itself then the next review I'm "grading" only has info on the dancers or the VIP room action, then I approve the review. Reason being, when i look for a new club to go to, I look at all recent reviews to make my decision. There are some clubs that haven't been reviewed in months or even a year so I'd like to see those get more attention so the way we have it set up now works for me because I can reject the review and ask for more details just on the reason that we have no new info on that club. Personally, I get annoyed thinking that one of my reviews is going to get bounced because I don't put all of the club details in for my club that I visit weekly. Really, who wants to read my same dribble every month? LOL!
  • Jascoi
    •
    5 years ago
    I prefer that a review be informative and entertaining.
  • shadowcat
    •
    5 years ago
    We've got too many members wanting changes that are just too refined. Just accept what the system provides and approve or reject reviews based on what you think is providing useful information. Or at least truthful information.
  • mark94
    •
    5 years ago
    I used to have many months of VIP in the bank. Then, the new system was installed. I wrote a review, putting a fair amount of time into it. It was rejected. That pissed me off and I cut way back on the number of reviews I submit. My VIP status expires in a few weeks and I don’t know whether I’ll bother to submit a review to try and save it. It just seems like reviews are now tailored to meet the standards of a small number of active judges, each with seemingly arbitrary checklists, rather than adding value in a concise fashion. I think a clear statement about what we look for in reviews might fix this. For example: “ the purpose of reviews is to either provide new information that improves members ability to enjoy future visits or to update members on the current aspects of the club if there hasn’t been a recent report on club basics. Reviews will be approved if the information is likely to make for a more enjoyable club experience. There is a wide range of info that would accomplish this, including specific dancer recommendations, or warnings, recent security or LE activity, overall dance quality or value, dancer to customer ratio on different times and days. Reviews do not need to be lengthy to gain approval but they do need to have significant and worthwhile content. “
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    If you do not grant VIP for an approved review, then there will be far less reviews posted. Everything comes with a cost, including content for this site. If you revert to a system where VIP status is not given or guaranteed, then soon you'll be left with only consumers. Then even the paid consumers will start to drop off as review content becomes stale due to a lack of ongoing contributions.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    Mark posted: "I wrote a review, putting a fair amount of time into it. It was rejected. That pissed me off and I cut way back on the number of reviews I submit. " Next time put some cost numbers, a bit of info about the dancer crew in there and a little bit about how the visit went and you should be fine. Plenty of short reviews get approved as long as they are useful. The review standards are not exactly earth shattering around here. If your review was rejected, then it must have been pretty bad.
  • Nidan111
    •
    5 years ago
    I approve reviews when there is useful intel about the club. If one or two reviews already laid out the basics of design, cost, etc., then updated intel is most useful to me. I have a club that I initially reviewed based on several visits. Then, months later, the club “Extras” that are provided seemed to change. Actually, the dancers changed and hence the activities changed. The club layout and costs did not change.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    @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. [view link]
  • K
    •
    5 years ago
    I may regret this.. I am interested in what the veterans think of my latest (as yet unpublished) review of Gogo rama (GGR) in NJ
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    I approved it. I was less than thrilled that there was no cost information included in the review, but the detailed discussions about your historical interactions with different dancers looked like good intel.
  • shadowcat
    •
    5 years ago
    WTF rickdugan? You just posted a topic "Review Standards: Listing dancer names is not very impressive". That is what this review is.
  • mark94
    •
    5 years ago
    Rick: I’m impressed that you knew what was wrong with my rejected review without ever having read it.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    LOL shadow. Yes, but he did a lot more than that. He provided his individual experiences with a number of these girls. That's useful information, assuming it's accurate.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    @mark: I don't need to know the specifics. The approval standards are so low around here that it must have been real shit. I've posted 16 reviews under the new system and never had a problem. So stop complaining and just do better already. I've given you some sound advice and an example in this thread and 25 gave you some simple advice in another. This is not that hard.
  • K
    •
    5 years ago
    The costs are listed in the details of the club. All look to be accurate so I did not think there is a need to discuss. I will in the future if veterans think it is important.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    ^Very, especially since the cost info in the summary section is not updated on a regular basis - if ever.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    I very often find the costs in the summaries to be Rong, clubs are always screwing around liquor prices, sometimes to take advantage of inexperienced mongers, sometimes using 2 4 1s to get more traffic in the door.
  • K
    •
    5 years ago
    In this case the prices are correct. I have always addressed issues in the description by using the reporting a problem button but will try to remember to list the prices in future reviews.
  • shadowcat
    •
    5 years ago
    The "reporting a problem" function does not work too well. Over a 2 week period I twice submitted a club name change and a club closed report and nothing changed until I sent Founder a PM. I think he gets too busy to take care of the small shit.
  • AZFourTwenty
    •
    5 years ago
    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.
  • mjx01
    •
    5 years ago
    "If you do not grant VIP for an approved review, then there will be far less reviews posted." - Exactly!
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    "If all you can do is obsess about reviews and ratings, you need to get a life outside of TUSCL." _________ LOL! yep!
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    However, @WarrenBoy will tell you that you spelled "obsess" incorrectly.
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    oh wait, never mind!
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Sphincter
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    Yeah, rodent-boy, I made a mistake.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ "Mark posted: "I wrote a review, putting a fair amount of time into it. It was rejected. That pissed me off and I cut way back on the number of reviews I submit. " Under that scenario the review would probably get posted. Then as more people read it for intel it would have more opportunity to gain votes for VIP
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    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.
  • K
    •
    5 years ago
    No one said my reviewed sucked or should be denied because I did not include the prices. They explained why they wished I had included that info. it will take me thirty seconds to include it in future reviews. I think the general consensus is to provide details to prove you went to the club and to be helpful. Simply stating you went, had a good time and bambi is hot proves nothing, adds nothing and should not be rewarded. As for the accuracy of my reviews, there are some other members that can speak to that. not so humble brag... I have a young hot Baltic blonde waiting in the next room for me to take her to lunch. I hope you all have a day at least half as good as I think mine will be.
  • mark94
    •
    5 years ago
    “Review Nazis”. LOL
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    Flag, under your scenario, shit would return and the granting of VIP status would be skewed to those who had the most troll accounts and/or who reviewed clubs with the most reader traffic. Then, with no guarantee of VIP status, many would stop posting them altogether. Beware the laws of unintended consequences.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ maybe, but no more than now. Those troll accounts would still need VIP status to approve and endorse.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    ^And plenty do. You're also turning it into a popularity contest, which is exactly what the whole anonymous review thing was designed to prevent.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Also "Then, with no guarantee of VIP status, many would stop posting them altogether. " There is no guarantee now, but at least a higher percentage could get posted. That could enable more to get VIP. Once posted it wouldn't get removed so if a few people don't think it is worthy it wouldn't prevent others from saying yes. Thnnk outside the box.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    You can't know how it would play out without a test. I'm not saying founder should change things, just that I think it should be considered.
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    ^^You know rodent-boy, maybe you should concentrate more on leaving your kid an inheritance instead of pissing your money away on strippers. I think the board will survive without your dumbfuck guidelines.
  • AZFourTwenty
    •
    5 years ago
    TUSCL has been around for a few years and appears to be growing. The growth has been due to the ease of access. It is not in the best interest of the site IMO to make access more difficult. Founder in his infinite wisdom gave us the ignore function to weed out people we don't trust/believe etc. so the user can make decisions for himself. We don't need others telling us what we should or should not see. And again, who has been harmed by a bad review?
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    So much drama, hey guys they're reviews, back off a bit it's not life changing, have a fruitcup and relax.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    Flag, then you come back full circle to a combination of more crap and less incentive to post. I don't think it takes a seer to guess at how that plays out. Look no further than SCL to see what happens when there is no hard coded incentive to post good content. Their little Yelp of strip clubs experiment has gone to shit.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    You are correct rick, far be it from me to disagree with you.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ LOL
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    25, you're LOL'ing a bitch comment.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    I'm all in favor of improvements to this site. IMHO founder has made a number of improvements, minus removing the club rating weightings. But I struggle to wrap my arms around why anyone would want encourage more shit content while simultaneously discouraging content providers from posting good intel by taking away their only real incentive. If I was trying to find a better way to turn this place to shit, I couldn't easily imagine one. It's like trying to fix a stubbed toe by amputating the foot.
  • mark94
    •
    5 years ago
    I finally figured out who controls the review process [view link]
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    5 years ago
    IMO the reviews have improved - but there will always be a catch-22. I agree with Warrior in that offering free VIP is a major reason for half-ass/shitty reviews, when you give stuff for free many people are gonna abuse-it/milk-it (writing a review bc you get free VIP will often not be as good as writting a review bc you want to write a review, and yes this is not universal but a big part of the problem IMO). But - since reviews aren't free to read there needs to be an incentive o/w the rwview section would IMO die bc most people probably don't want to pay to read stuff on the internet (or don't wsnt the paper trail although one can get around that using a gift csrd).
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    @Rick lighten up a bit it was a funny comment sorry if your oxen was gored but still it was funny
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    5 years ago
    The review guidelines used to be kinda generic and perhaps a reason for kinda generic reviews - but I just looked at the guidelines and they seem more explicit now - although I assume most people may not bother with the guidelines.
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    5 years ago
    IMO a review is to provide as much information about the club as possible - too many reviewers write a review for themselves instead of the reader - i.e. they just talk about themselves and how awesome his fave Bambi is - not saying that shouldn't be in the review but not be the only thing in the review. IMO a review should be written from the POV of someone who's never been there and doesn't know anything about the club - saying things like prices is not a big deal bc "it's been covered b/f" or not needed bc "you've already read it a 100-times", is lame IMO - someone unfamiliar with the club shouldn't have to read 5+ reviews to be able to verify the dance-cost bc most that write reviews will then just say "it's been covered b/f" and just kick the can down the road - also most people reading TUSCL are not on TUSCL all the time for them to already know the details (they're either infrequent users, or there are new readera all the time). A review is to provide pertinent info to those that don't know, not to say go dig for it in other/previous reviews - and providing pertinent info should probably just take a measly paragraph - just bc you know the club inside out and been clubbing for years doesn't mean mean the bulk of the readers are in the same-boat and likely they aren't - reviews should be to help those not in the know. IMO a review should always cover the basics of the club: - cover - dancer-crew (not just the chick you hung out with) - dance price - overall dance mileage (and don't be a smartass and say "hey my fave likes me better so I get better-mileage so it's subjective") - VIP cost if u did VIP (at least state what the club charges for using VIP) - drink costs - layout and parking are nice to know particularly for clubs where it's an issue but these 2 are IMO not as important
  • IceyLoco
    •
    5 years ago
    When I had VIP, the only reviews I didn't approve were ones that mentioned names, whether dancer or staff... I think its not right to place those in an online review without someone knowing because of the way it can potentially misrepresent them. I also didn't approve reviews that read like club ads ...ie ones that went like "come here they have the hottest girls and the best happy hours, a pitcher for X from 4 to 7, half price entry if you come in your own car" things that read like a club website. Other than that, I approved everything because a review is a subjective personal experience... the number of details or lack of is a personal choice. Some people may be bad writers, whatever. I don't think making it harder to get VIP status is beneficial to the website at all... For one, anyone can get it if they pay. Secondly, making people wait or jump through hoops to get it will just turn people off. I think OPs intent is to just keep VIP a private little club for a certain clique on here.
  • mjx01
    •
    5 years ago
    Guess I should clarify my earlier post... if there is no incentive to write review, people will stop writing review and the well dries up.
  • IceyLoco
    •
    5 years ago
    The incentive is VIP status perhaps, but making it harder than just writing a review will have the opposite effect
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ you lost VIP because you posted content that you had no right to post and violated privacy policies. Founder was generous allowing you back in, as far as I’m concerned you are just a phony and a fraud nothing you say has any credibility with any long term posters. A little bit of truth is hard for you
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    This is my last comment on this thread. 1. You are all a bunch of fucktards. 2. My proposal would not make it harder to get VIP status. The bar to be published would be significantly lowered creating more content. Once posted any VIP member can view it and provide an endorsement if they see value giving that post even more potential to earn VIP 3. You all are a bunch of fucktards. 4. This suggestion will probably never get implemented because it is just too brilliant.
  • IceyLoco
    •
    5 years ago
    I didn't but keep making shit up. The VIP thing is pathetic as is, very few are taking what little incentive there is to write reviews. Changing or complicating it is stupid.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    ^Not making shit up you were kicked off the board for posting the VIP discussions on the front room facts matter liar should I pm @founder and have it confirmed
  • Dolfan
    •
    5 years ago
    To try and restate what was originally proposed, are you basically saying you want the # of VIP's who approve a review for VIP credit to go from 3 to 5 & saying that the review should be published immediately. I know that's not exactly what you said, but that seems to be fundamentally what you're proposing. I don't see that making much difference, either to the quality of the content nor the incentive to write reviews. I do think it still leaves the crap reviews in the list, which fucks up the signal to noise ratio. I do think there is value in some sort ability to rate reviews as helpful/accurate/good/whatever beyond simply publishing them or not. Even if that rating has nothing to do with VIP status/credit. I like the "top positive review" and "top critical review" function I've seen on other sites, most recent review / most relevant review kinda sorting is also useful. Maybe you could add bonus VIP time for positive feedback on a review. Also maybe not worth the effort. I also think the signal to noise ratio is the thing we'd be best served trying to improve. That's where I think the value from the rating of stuff comes in; in the ability to filter/sort content to get to what I want. I know there's a fair amount of risk in that approach though, with the potential of a vocal minority controlling the ratings and skewing content to their way of thinking. There's also the mechanics of making the site simple to use.
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    5 years ago
    @Dolfan may have a good suggestion - perhaps once a review is published, there can be a 1-5 star rating and the results can be used as a filter option when reading a club's reviews.
  • AZFourTwenty
    •
    5 years ago
    And how would this benefit anyone? You are now suggesting that ratings be influenced by members who have never visited the club? We will end ranking clubs based upon how the review met their criteria, not the ambience of the club. IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current system.
  • AZFourTwenty
    •
    5 years ago
    Oops, I meant we will end up ranking clubs based on review criteria.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion