Great question, really depends if something has materially changed between visit and review. Anything pre pandemic is an automatic nix. A couple months isn't necessarily a deal breaker but it's pushing it. Dancers turn over quickly.
During the height of Covid , I wrote a Review of the Men's Club of Houston. There were virtually no review being submitted then as all the clubs were closed. I wrote the Review in jest thinking it would get rejected. I even said in my opening line that it was a Review of a visit from 5 years earlier. I was shocked it got approved.
I try to do Reviews within a few days of my actual visit. Details get fuzzy if I wait too long. I don't think a month is too long. But maybe six months is.
I'd say within a few weeks is fine. After that, it gets sketchy. If its a place that doesn't get many reviews, something is always better than nothing. But if you're piling on yet another review for a club that is already heavily reviewed the bar IMO should be higher.
I'd also say it depends on the style of your review. A story type review ages quick, but a review based on generalities and facts holds up a bit better over time.
I'll hold a review at least a week or two even if it's written out. If it's a noteworthy visit even longer. But then again I've only written one review the entire year so far...
If the seasons have changed between your visit and your review, then it probably shouldn't be posted. I'd say that a month is pushing it. A lot of these old reviews get submitted because the reviewer wants to get their VIP star back. I've rejected reviews that started with "This is from last winter...". Sometimes a review will batch together several reviews over time. If at least one of those visits was recent and has good info, then I don't mind the older information.
On the flip side, some guys prefer to wait a few days, or even a week or two, before they post so as to hinder the ability of other PLs, managers, or dancers to connect their review to who they are in the real world. I get that, but the review should still happen within a week or two. Or, learn how to write a review that doesn't allow you to be identified.
A tip for anyone perusing reviews... If you read a review and think "Hey, I know which guy that is.", either keep it to yourself or send a PM if you must. Don't post a comment like, "Hey, man. Were you the tall dark-haired white guy in a blue button-down shirt that was sitting with Bambi at the bar for a half hour before going to VIP? I want to ask some questions about the green late-model Camry you drove into the lot. How's that ride?"
Yes, I'm exaggerating, but not by a lot based on some of the comments I've seen in response to some guys' reviews. If someone is good enough to write and post a review on the same day they visited, and you happened to be there on the same day then keep it to yourself. Your fellow PLs require varying levels of discretion.
Within reason, whenever you can. A late review is better than no review, as long as you note how long it's been since your visit. If your review is months or years late, don't bother.
I generally wrote my reviews 3-5 days out from a visit, occasionally I might hold it a bit longer if I had gone with another PL and knew he was going to write a review, so I could proof mine against his before I posted. I think any review more than 60 days old is irrelevant, and I tend to give more credence to guys who post on the message boards.
IMO it depends. A review can provide useful info even if it’s a couple months later. I’ve occasionally held reviews to protect my anonymity or because I visited a club on two occasions and had a completely different experience that I thought would be better split into two. I try to write my reviews so they don’t depend on hyper contemporaneous accuracy to be valuable, and I’ll read other more recent reviews before posting to confirm my info is still good. A good, useful review is good and useful no matter when it’s written. It’s also true that a review can be so stale it’s not useful. Use your judgment.
Some of these clubs don’t get reviewed in years I’m not sweating a month where let’s be honest it’s all gonna be the same shit, most places it’s been the same fucking shit for years and years.
I'd say at most 3-months "on average" - as was mentioned above if it's a club that doesn't get a lot of reviews then one can give more slack in terms of timing and quality of the review - if it's a club that is reviewed frequently and w/ good reviews, then probably less-slack in terms of tardiness and quality.
if it's a good/well-written 3-month-old review of a well-reviewed reviewed club I'd probably approve it - if it's a so-so 3-month-old review of a well-reviewed club then I may be more apt to decline-it - if it's a so-so/ok 3-month-old review of a club not reviewed much I'll likely approve it.
I believe that it should be submitted a soon as the reviewer has the time. I have read many reviews that I personally know are no longer valid because there have been changes made at the club that are not reflected in the review. If you are concerned about outing yourself in a review leave out any info that might give you away. I don't worry about that shit and post the actual time and date of my visit. In over 25 years of writing reviews for this site, it has never bitten me in the ass.
If clubs aren’t actively getting reviews, there’s probably a reason, like they have no dancers, or the place feels dangerous, or smells like piss. So yeah, I appreciate anyone who takes one for the team and reviews an under the radar club.
I would say less than a month is great. Then it starts depending on the club. For thinly reviewed clubs I would prefer a three month old review than nothing.
I consider anything older than three months old news.
"In over 25 years of writing reviews for this site, it has never bitten me in the ass."
It's because you're open with your affiliation. Which works for you and that's great. I have enough issues with dancers causing problems with each other (and headaches for me) without them knowing more on what I post about the hobby.
23 comments
I try to do Reviews within a few days of my actual visit. Details get fuzzy if I wait too long. I don't think a month is too long. But maybe six months is.
I'd also say it depends on the style of your review. A story type review ages quick, but a review based on generalities and facts holds up a bit better over time.
On the flip side, some guys prefer to wait a few days, or even a week or two, before they post so as to hinder the ability of other PLs, managers, or dancers to connect their review to who they are in the real world. I get that, but the review should still happen within a week or two. Or, learn how to write a review that doesn't allow you to be identified.
A tip for anyone perusing reviews... If you read a review and think "Hey, I know which guy that is.", either keep it to yourself or send a PM if you must. Don't post a comment like, "Hey, man. Were you the tall dark-haired white guy in a blue button-down shirt that was sitting with Bambi at the bar for a half hour before going to VIP? I want to ask some questions about the green late-model Camry you drove into the lot. How's that ride?"
Yes, I'm exaggerating, but not by a lot based on some of the comments I've seen in response to some guys' reviews. If someone is good enough to write and post a review on the same day they visited, and you happened to be there on the same day then keep it to yourself. Your fellow PLs require varying levels of discretion.
if it's a good/well-written 3-month-old review of a well-reviewed reviewed club I'd probably approve it - if it's a so-so 3-month-old review of a well-reviewed club then I may be more apt to decline-it - if it's a so-so/ok 3-month-old review of a club not reviewed much I'll likely approve it.
I consider anything older than three months old news.
It's because you're open with your affiliation. Which works for you and that's great. I have enough issues with dancers causing problems with each other (and headaches for me) without them knowing more on what I post about the hobby.