Architecture

I think you have a point.

SPOT ON!

No one is asking for architecture, but the review should include basic size, look, and atmosphere without much fuss. It's also useful to describe the size / privacy of the dancing areas.

Also, each review should try to stand on its own and not require that a reader flip through a bunch of reviews to get information. If everyone skips over describing the basic feel of the the club, then nobody is describing the basic feel of the club.

I've reviewed lots of "unpublished reviews" and never rejected one because of the absence of details on the club layout or architecture. But there are some physical descriptions that I find helpful such as: parking (valet? adequacy? price?), private dance facilities, size and privacy, seating options (bar, booth, table, etc.). I agree with Ishmael that physical details are less important than details on the talent, the stage show, the private dance costs and mileage.

Sometimes the club description also helps getting closer to the talent. Like where are the best seats to see the girls from. Basic layout helps.

I think this is overblown. I have never had that problem. If the layout has been amply covered, I just say so in the review and then add whatever additional tidbits I think will be helpful. I for one don't need a descriptive blueprint of the place, but general notes about relative comfort level are nice to have. For example, the older I get, the less inclined I am to spend hours jammed body to body at the bar sitting on a hard stool.

I don't include detailed physical descriptions of strip club interiors in my reviews. I've never had a review rejected and never had a complaint about lack of such information. Most complaints of my reviews have involved lack of detailed price or mileage information.

The review should focus on what made the visit pleasant or unpleasant. Some aspects of the physical interior can influence that like uncleanliness, tables too close together, amount of privacy in the lap dance area or poor view of the stage from the tables. Whether the bar is on the right side or left side or if the walls have wood paneling doesn't really make a difference. It's possible for a review to be too long from being loaded up with too much information.

I think one of the problems is that first of the “reject” options when adjudicating unpublished reviews is “not enough club details.” Some review writers who get cited for that think that means “club architecture.” It doesn’t. It means, as others have pointed out, that there are details that make it helpful for the reader to assess what it might be like to visit there, such as specific costs of various things, general make-up of the dance crew, a sense of mileage available, etc. Maybe there’s a better descriptor than “not enough club details,” but I’m not sure what that would be. I’ll leave it to others here to come up with suggestions.

I climbed 32 steps to the entrance from the parking lot.

It was 18 paces to the bar, which is made out of black granite.

The stage is 42 by 58 and it 4 feet off the floor.

The VIP rooms are 8 by 10 and although it reminded me of the prison cell I was in during 2003 it is a pleasant room.



These are all details scrubby needs to know about or you’re getting tagged a club ad!!!!!!

As usual my brother from a hairless ape mother is correct. However, this rick reserves the right to comment extensively on any clubs designed by Calatrava. I haven’t found any but if any of you know of any please let me know. ROAR!!!

I think eastcosters comment summed it up. I think there is a misunderstanding that "Club Details" means "Layout and physical description" I put little to no descriptions of the club architecture in my reviews and can't remember even getting downvoted, much less rejected on that basis. I've also voted on quite a few unpublished reviews and absolutely never once downvoted a review because the reviewer failed to describe the relative position of the stage to the entryway or any similar architectural details. This is true regardless of if the layout has been previously reviewed or not, or if the reviewer points out the fact that it has been or not.

When I select not enough club details it's because the reviewer failed to describe ANYTHING about the club. Usually it's a useless review like "I had a great time, Bambi was super hot and the manger Joe was really great. We'll come in again just to see him." If they described the dance options, that's good enough. If they described the talent, that works too. I'd approve a review that focused on the layout, but I'd probably make some comment about this not being Love it or List it or some other DIY Network show & encourage the reviewer to focus more on the strippers next time.

On a bit of a side note, I wouldn't oppose getting rid of the "Checkbox" rejection reasons and making people write a reason for rejection in their own words. I'd also not object to the same requirement for approving reviews. Maybe putting a little thought and effort into why you're voting the way you are would help avoid these sort of discussions.

People know a good review when they see it. If something got downvoted, you can always PM the person who did it. Sometimes it is just a difference of opinion and that's how life works.

I think that I would be rejecting less reviews if the newbies would just read the review guidelines.

I have a question for Dolphin. You said “ I had a great time, Bambi was super hot and the manger Joe was really great. We'll come in again just to see him."

First, let me give you mad respect for being one of the few non-hairless ape poster. And it must be hard for you to type given that you are a badass sea creature.

That said, what kind of weirdo goes to the club to see the frickin’ manager?

Whatever. Put what you want in a review. If it gets rejected, don’t be a bitch and cry about it. Just revise and resubmit. Different people want different details. It’s ok for reactions to be varied. A review approved 5-2 gets 4 weeks of free VIP just like a review approved 7-0.

I am puzzled why reviews that say "I was there for an hour, didn't see anything appealing so I left " get approved. I've seen quite a few of those. Another baffling response I sometimes see is "too explicit." A good review should be explicit. Leaving a dancers name out of course, reviews that say "I received CFS for 300" are good reviews. Obviously YMMV on your cost but those are the kinds of details that should be in a review. If it's a club where FS or BJ isnt offered, then state where your hands went, where her hands went, or if it was an air dance.

Description of the VIP space is good. Is it cramped, spacious,well lit, really dark, is seating a folding chair, couch, isolated ,out in the open etc. There is no need to include cover charges and valet cost in a review because that information is already listed in the club profile. If you find that the prices are different, submit an update.

Reviews of the "architecture," I don't care about. Descriptions of the VIP area and level of privacy are important.

Descriptions of the girls and mileage are mandatory. I won't approve without them. That's the #1 thing I look for on any review. It's the difference between a strip club and any other bar.

If you stopped into a place, had a beer, noticed but didn't describe 3 dancers, then walked out, you don't have enough info to write a review.

The layout aspect gets too much focus both ways. First, who really cares about layout? We’re not there for the layout. It’s laughable when I am describing a club that hasn’t changed layout in decades. At the same time t’s just a minor artifact of the tuscl experience. It takes 20 seconds to write and then you can talk about what everyone wants to read about: the girls. Not really important or high value, but not a difficult box to tick.

Example:

"Spacious, upscale club with two bars and three stages. VIP rooms are comfortable but not a lot of privacy. Lapdance booths also not very private."

That's it. As far as I can tell that's the "heavy lift" most guys look for in terms of describing the club. No one is asking for the number of barstools or the width of the bar tops.

Isn’t an architect just an art school drop out with a tilty desk and a big ruler

Dolfan said: I think there is a misunderstanding that "Club Details" means "Layout and physical description"

That is exactly what I think the person who says not enough details is talking about. Maybe that needs to be changed to something more specific.

The parking lot was outside, and the bathroom was inside. Wish it was outside cause inside it stinks 😕

I need to know the shape of the bar! Is it a rectangle? Those are my favorites!

I think there are relevant and unimportant details.

How's the seating? Are the views good? Can you sit at the bar and see the stage? Is the lap dance area spacious? Well separated?

If the parking lot is crowed or unsafe, I want to know. If the bathroom will give you a contagious disease or make you pass out from the stench, I want to know. ( I ask where it is anyway, I won't remember where a review said it was.) Presence or absence of bathroom troll is useful info. If parking or bathroom are not mentioned, I assume they are acceptable. I'll take a shabby club with good dancers, over the reverse, any day of the week.

Clearly it's a subject that got people talking. Thanks for the feedback folks (most of it anyway ;))