Opinions Wanted

I think that 2 years is plenty. Although I wish that I could recall a review from 7 years ago. I don't much care for the 3 category rating system but I can live with it.

Here is my (soft) bitch. I would like to see the Discussion Board revert back to when the latest post brings that topic back to the top.

Two years is more than enough, and if you have bandwidth problems, then cut it down to one. Things (women, ownership) change at clubs so frequently that ever yearold reviews may be hopelessly irrelevant. Thanks for seeking input, though.

One or two years is plenty. They certainly do change quickly so older info is not usually relevant. Keep up the good work. Thanks.

I like seeing all reviews. I understand that things can change, but I also find it interesting and sometimes enjoyably nostalgic to read old reviews. I certainly don't base my visits on old reviews, but they are still fun to read. Maybe make them available in an "archive" link for each club? Heck, I'd love to see some of my old reviews from nearly 10 years ago.

2 years is fine, Mr. Founder. Thanks for your hard work, btw.

Two years is enough if not too much. Many time the review is due to a bad experience with a particular girl and I don't know too many places were the turnover doesn't change out all but the best in that time frame.

I say keep the older reviews but don't use them in the rating formula. Maybe do a declining weighted average over time

Having 2 years of reviews is plenty. I think the new rating systsm is good. Because these are personal opinions by the club goers this is not scientific studies, the values are going to be swayed by what eacj person wants/expects in a club. But If a club consistantly is a 4 or 5 overall, someoen who drops an 8 or 9 on that club is not going to sway the overall average that much.

I have no problems with any of the functionality of this site, its is well developed and a good reference.

I say, like Philip A. Stein, you should KEEP the older reviews and give access to them, for nostalgia's sakes; but you shouldn't ADD them into the cumulative numerical totals.

Thanks for all the work you do on this site!

I second the motion for THANKS.

Two years is more than enough for reviews to be available, and as for computing the ratings, I think one year is plenty. A weighted exponential average might be the best way to average the reviews. Not sure what to use for alpha.

Ultimately, the best solution will probably be the one you personally feel best about. Responses through this board are bound to be all over the map.

Keep two years. I rarely submit reviews, but rating system seems fine. Nice site, I visit several times a week. Best $49 I ever spent on anything having to do with SC's.

I'd say it's too much, but that would really destroy some posts from some clubs. The way they change, more than two months is practically worthless.

I think 2 years is fine. Having older reviews available as an archive on the site would be cool, but not necessary IMHO. I definitely don't think older reviews should be included in the rating.

2 years is fine. However if there are no reviews, you might want to keep at least one or two older reviews active if the club is still in business. I would wonder why no one rated it in the last 2 years though.

"Should All reviews be included in the ratings? Or should just 1 year? 2 years?"

I don't have a problem with keeping it to two years or so. It is true that a review from ages ago sometimes has nothing to do with what's going on at a club now. Also, the three-tiered rating system that you implemented a while back I'm sure has changed the meanings of the rating some...whether it's for the better or worse though I'll leave to someone else.

The Top 40 Lists appear to be majorly fucked up now (clubs have mysteriously dropped off the list, etc.)...what was changed recently?? Maybe you should significantly up the number ratings (reviewers?) that need to be in place before a club ends up on the Top 40 lists...

"Heck, I'd love to see some of my old reviews from nearly 10 years ago."

I thought clicking on a person's name brought up ALL their reviews, ever?? Yours go back to 2004 right now zorro.

2 years is fine, but in a situation that leaves no review for a club consider retaining an older review for that club. I'm with shadowcat on the return to the way individual club chat once was highlighted on the front page. Club chat has disappeared with that home page interface in my area of interest.

2 yr. look-back on reviews OK with me- do like to see older reviews by individual reviewer member profile, though.

Two years with a minimum of 2 reviews. There are some clubs that very seldom get reviewed that I have visited and found to be very high mileage. Keeping 2 old reviews would possibly give a flavor for those clubs.

I would say 1 year if there are at least 10 reviews. If less than 10 in one year, publish the last 10 or as many as there are available, no matter how far back they go.

I would think that one year would be plenty for ratings. BTW, the 3 part rating system is a big improvement.

I would post all available reviews for a club. I also would like to see the discussion board go back to it's original style. It is useless in ti's current format.

The ratings and 1 or 2 year reviews are fine. How about a glossary for the many and varied abbreviations used?

bitchcat, there is a link to the gloss at the bottom of every page.

Shadowcat,

Just click on "last reply" and the posts are sorted by time with the last post on top. I too liked the old board until I discovered this.....so not a problem.

And I like what rob0411 said......No point in keeping every review from places like the Flight Club or Mons Venus. There would be hundreds of reviews (too many). But the less popular clubs, with only a few reviews, it would be nice to have them all. You would need to determine some sensible number, whether it be 10, 25, or 50...whatever.

Founder, you do a good job with this site; thanks.

For ratings, 1-2 years is plenty. For archival sake, keeping all the reviews viewable in some form is desirable.

As others have said, don't use the old ones in the ratings, but keep access to them available.

david120: Thanks us old dogs can still be trained.

Can you just provide links to the maps instead of drawing the map for each club? I think it would speed up the system. I read the reviews a lot more often than I ever need the maps.

For ratings / rankings, I think two years is fine. Like serveral have already mentioned, I would also like to see the older reviews viewable in an archive or something. And Rob0411's suggestion of only showing the map, when requested is an excellent idea. Perhaps it could be a setting that one could turn on / off. (like the nice feature "hide / show review snippets")