new review policy

There Is no new policy as far as I know. Founder’s review guidelines are the same as they have always been, at least for the five years I have been here. There are however a few review Nazis that seem to take pleasure in trying to shoot down reviews. But it’s hard to say what the issue with your review was without seeing it. Why don’t you post it here and I’ll sure you will get some feedback.

Fair enough, here it is, if it helps others then lets go for it


"OK, I guess I need more specifics in this review, so here it is.

Came into the club at 5:30 PM, spent about one hour in the club. The number of girls during shift changeover is not large, maybe 8 ladies, but it was a mix of daytime and night time dancers which, at Pandora's is two very different clubs.

Got two dances from night girls who just showed up, a dark haired, then blonde with A boobs. She was a good dance. handsy and provided a good grind. The other night girl, an AA with lots of white features, very pretty, was not so good. Little touch and kind of distant. Was trying to offer more for more money, but I was not biting.

The two day ladies where much more aggressive. Both were older (30s) blondes with bolt on's. Both offered extra's, essentially three for 100, or until I was done. I was not much for that on this day and just too the $30 dances and they were very nice, lots of hands and two way touching.

Decent visit and worth another try."

I would have approved it. To be perfectly honest, I don’t think it’s a great review, but you shouldn’t have to write a great review to get it approved. I think it provides some useful information, which is my minimum standard. Why don’t you post the disapprovals also? I’m betting it’s the usual suspects.

Protip: Just add some pricing details to everything to get a quick approval. List cover price, dance/VIP prices and time length, and maybe drink prices. Once you satisfy just those, the review Nazis usually back off.

The review system involves luck of the draw. Some people are tough . Some are easy. That, in my opinion, is the major flaw in the current process. It sounds like you submitted your review, both times, before the review Nazis signed on.

I may have been one who rejected it. I am
Not a hard ass rejector. I look at these as though I have never been to the club. This particular club, that is in fact the case...I have never been there.

I look for Descriptions on
Safety
Entry fee
Bar prices
Staff attitude
Overall layout and vibe of club
Girls and their prices.

Keep in mind that all clubs have girls and just talking about them is probably not going to get much approved.

I saw your redone review and just approved it.

Some of my past reviews are very detailed, others not so much. I'm not looking for special treatment, but there has to be some consistency in the process and feedback should be more specific to make changes.

Anyway, won't stop me from from clubbing!

Reviews didn't used to get vetted and anything would get posted no matter how shitty it was and many TUSCLers were fed up with so many shitty reviews getting posted so Founder put in a system where TUSCLers with VIP get to vote on which reviews get posted - 3 up-votes and review gets published, 3 down-votes and it gets rejected.

I just went back and took a look. Much better simply because it gives me, a potential customer, a better idea of the vibe. Parking, bottomless soda, $20 cover charge, a shitter that is seedy as fuck. I approved. Lol

I'll add to Papi's comment that old system had auto reject feature if submission came in with less than a minimum number of characters (200, I think it was.) That would seem to imply that reviews coming in with minimum number of characters, or greater would result in automatic approval, which resulted in a lot of short deficient reviews slipping through.

Founders review guidelines have been in place for a long time, just not rigorously enforced. Those are guidelines, not government specs for F35 fighter. IMO, they're still put up for a reason. So the more closely review adheres to guidelines, the more likely it will be approved.

What TFP said