“ATF” Ad Rejection Option

I don't mind a mix of type of reviews, especially for a club that gets a lot of reviews.
a little personal experience kinda sheds light on what's possible at a particular place.

I agree with that but if it’s all personal experience it’s giving the people on the board a warped view. I recently went to a dead club and had a good time for a hour but the club was till dead and I had to make that clear in my post in order to give accurate info. My personal time was probably an 8 but the actual club was like a 3. And we are supposed to be reviewing the club.

I agree. Should give a flavor of the overall experience, not just your session. Some reviews make no mention of any other dancers there, let alone what they are like.

Just click not enough details and put a remark in the box.

I don't want to wade too far into into the side of the argument about if those reviews should be published or not, but even if you want to downvote them you don't need a checkbox. Just type in the reason in the comment box and click reject. The canned responses are just there to make it easier to reject reviews with common issues. It also helps provide some consistency in feedback to the submitter. If you want to use the not enough details checkbox, you can still use the comments to add some detail. If you can't take the time to explain to the submitter what they did wrong, don't adjudicate unpublished reviews.

I will dip a toe in the other argument and add that I'm not a fan of the reviews that focus too much on the reviewers experience without linking it back to general info. But that doesn't mean they aren't useful. As as example, I couldn't care less if Harry fucked Sally cowgirl to start and then he hit it from behind and he took off the condom to cum on her tits. But I can infer the room was large enough to move around in and probably some other things from that story.

And probably most importantly as several folks repeated in the discussion about monotony, for clubs that don't get a lot of reviews I'd absolutely take this kind of review over nothing. I'd be afraid of those sort of reviews getting downvoted by sticklers if there was a checkbox for "Personal story" or something similar. And for clubs that get lots of reviews, personal stories might actually be more useful than a rehashing of the same basic club info.

Yeah, vote the way you want to. That's why the system is set up that way. It someone posts that Sally fucked his brains out again just like she does every Tuesday, then aside from using the name being a foul we know that guys get fucked there and Sally may in fact fuck if she wants to.

Or you can just read the last line in what Dolfan wrote and just +1 it.

Don't really want to get to the point where we have like 20 checkboxes lol. I'd just select not enough details and comment "more dancer descriptions"

Everyone has their opinion, that’s why there is a vote. 99 times out of a hundred I’m reading a review about a club I’ve been to many times and I’m curious as to what a specific dancers is or isn’t doing. So the individual experience is useful to me, but obviously not to the guy who is in from out of town for the first time.

"Not enough details" can cover a variety of problems in addition to being too focused on ATF experience. My pet peeve is reviews that just have generic info without any details of what happened during the visit. For all we know, the author could just be summarizing what's in the club listing without having actually visited the club.

I'm going to take a contrary view here. The physical aspects of a club change infrequently, and are always described in some other review. Dance staff in most clubs change all the time. A bad club with one first-rate dancer will go to the top of my list every time.

At my age, I'm going to be able to sample about one dancer per visit (two, if the first was disappointing). Therefore (a) I can only comment on one dancer in my review, and (b) I'm mostly using your review to decide which dancers to look for.

I think reviews should be written and judged in context. If previous reviews (including your own) have thoroughly explained that the stage is to the left of the bar, please skip that part. Conversely, if you discover someone who is really good or bad in private, that's useful information.

I'd say, if your experience was similar to the last review, you should just write a comment on it with any differences in your experience, and any additional information.

For me and perhaps others, it only takes one good dancer to make for a good night at the club. So, if somebody only got dances with one dancer, that could still be helpful. But, I would be suspicious of a review that didn't have info on dancer ethnicity mix, proportion of slender, average, BBW, cougar dancers seen out on the floor. I don't generally find the 1-10 ratings very helpful.

I'll take any "real" review with at least on bit of info that I found useful. Lately, I see "fake" reviews or ChatGPT reviews - and I'd reject them when I see them.
If you are looking for a Papi calibre review, each club would only get 1 or 2 reviews a year.
Multiple so called "incomplete" reviews help compose a general vibe of that club.

Each review is just one part of the universe of reviews for a particular club. This thread is dancing around the “it’s all relative” aspect of a review site. Yes, a complete review that ticks all the boxes is great, but it’s not necessary for a lot of the well known clubs.

People look for different things in a review. That’s ok. The voting process does a good job sorting that out. A rejected review can be revised and resubmitted. I’m fine with all of the various types of reviews including the ATF review. It tells me something about the club, which when combined with other reviews gives me some info to decide whether to go to that club or somewhere else. That’s my standard.