I have come to the conclusion that a certain reviewer likes getting a réaction out of his "reviews" Not to mention either he doesn't have a wife at home or he sleeps on a couch that she fumigates to kill the bugs he brings home because she likes his money.
Yet somehow his bizarre reviews are published time and again without even one minnow up his ass.
The stories he recounts might be an occasional fluke, but certainly far from possible unless he is visiting brothels he imagines are strip clubs....
But the wide open policy not of his whores but of this site is what keeps this amalgamation of knowledge from a multitude of PL's alive , current, and actually useful.
Thus we take the good, the bad, the eclectic, and the too bizarre to be true, to build a picture of what we can expect when we make a real visit
Replies (33)Latest
Is this a riddle?
If founder has been making you take minnows up the ass in order to publish your reviews, that means A) He's weirder than I thought, and B) You're very special to him, because I also don't get that rarefied display of affection.
Are we supposed to guess who this unnamed reviewer is? There are any number of reviews that could potentially meet the the vague description of the offending reviews, including possibly some of mine. But I guess it’s not me since I haven’t written a review in almost three years.
@doctorevil Not you for sure...I have learned alot of useful intel from your missives ...besides aren't you in the TUSCL hall of fame with shadowcat?
@ruhroh, ha! Is that hall of fame or hall of shame?
@doctorevil. I guess that depends how successful the last foray was 🤣
Real life is stranger than fiction. Don’t underestimate the power of hormones.
Baristafan?
@Lex Luthor
""""Baristafan 4 days ago Reply People block others so they can't comment on threads. Bitches if you ask me""
Says Mr do as I say not as I do
There was a thread recently about this site being too peaceful.
Call whoever out and let the flame wars begin 😎
@nicespice I think maybe it's a meta-troll. The OP hopes dozens of TUSCLers will wonder if they are the target.
Same. Not sure why this is anonymous? OP wrote it as if we’d all know who it was, presumably so we could discuss? I let my vip privileges lapse, but this thread has the potential to be interesting. Call them out.
@Hank Moody. the winner to figure it out was lex luthor....see above.....but seems might be a few guilty consciences lol. I started to put the name at first but saw that note at bottom about being civil so thought I would try it for once
There is a point or 2 I will make in a later comment or maybe in an article
@ruhroh Just ignore the trolls. Giving them attention is just feeding them.
@Hank Moody The problem is some of these trolls are downvoting well written reviews because they match fit their style of writing ... while expecting their fantasy works of fiction to be read and accepted..Hypocrisy
Minnow is a prime example....16000. that's SIXTEEN THOUSAND reviews he has rejected but yet he expects us to read his drivel...give me a break. When 2 or 3 kids in a class flunk its the kids when over 80% fail....IT'S THE TEACHER...Thankfully founder lowered the acceptance to 4 else this site would be so dead you would have to put a fork in it. That is my points...if you are going to let fantasy fiction pose as a review then let the other real reviews through that have a different style.
@ruhroh I dunno. I get your sentiment but disagree that it matters. If you can’t get 4 out of 7 to approve, it’s not Minnow’s fault. Sure, there are some misses but generally we have too many shitty reviews getting approved and not legit reviews failing. If someone takes it personally when a review gets published because they get a downvote grow a thicker skin. Dugan started a whole flame thread on this but that was probably just his persona on here. I had a guy downvote 4 reviews because I visited a series of clubs while on a guys’ trip so he accused me of being gay. lol. It just doesn’t matter that much. I’ve campaigned to founder to restore the 5/2 approval standard to get better reviews, but he’s made his call on that.
@Hank Moody I'm fine with 4 and my reviews get approved. It just seems in general that reviews are being downvoted lately because of the writing style not being a boring clinical documentary in its designated format. Hell one I saw got downvoted because (clutching pearls) the club was described after the fun stuff was recounted. Must have been AI...OFC this is not personal by the adjudicator be cause they cant see the authors name. I just downvoted one today that Was 1 paragraph. "club good" was all I got out of it, I did not however downvote or make fun of a guy that struggles with English as a second language. His English was much better than my Chinese and he shared valuable intel about a ROB
Still living rent free in the barking dog's mind. That's ruhroh's nickname.
@minnow Well, you do have a 19% review approval rate. Hey @founder, how about the top and bottom 40 approval rates?
@minnow Thanks man....I was trying to think of a good example for you, the little boy that cried wolf was my first thought but actually a yapping chihuahua barking at everything and nothing fits quite nicely. Very few of my reviews are rejected and most are published fairly quickly. Sorry to burst your bubble but this is more about the direction of having open reviews than your effect on my reviews. I like the 4 and it's smart because so many forums like eccie just don't have the volumes of content un multiple locations that is found here. Also I wish we could still see the rejected reviews...just one factoid in an otherwise crappy review can make the difference between a good or crappy visit. Isn't that the purpose of this site?
@minnow if everyone graded like you did then we would be in the same boat as eccie
"": This board is dead. I wish others would contribute""
"" I'm beginning to see why so few people post on this board. My post was not approved by the mods because they said"""
ruhroh isn't the only one getting a name from the Jetsons
Where are you guys finding the statistics such as 19% approval rate or 16,000 reviews rejected?
@misterorange those stats show at the bottom of each posters profile page. Click on the user name. You, for instance, have rejected 78% of submissions you’ve acted on I think.
@623 Ahh, got it. I didn't scroll down that far. I guess I have a high percentage because I reject awful reviews, but many I think are somewhat sub-par to mediocre, I tend to not vote on at all. I leave it to others. It's like I don't think it's bad enough to be rejected, but I don't want to put my seal of approval on it either!
@623 I guess the real tell is the percentage against the outcome. For example, of the reviews you rejected, only 2% got published, so most adjudicators agreed. Probably a couple squeaked by from the rubber stamp approvers.
@misterorange Where as with Minnow. almost 7000 reviews he rejected were approved.
These are all good stats to determine if it was the review or the reviewer that is the problem. I still think we should be able to see the rejected reviews at least for a couple of months before they are deleted. The listed reasons why can be a learning tool
@founder - It would be interesting to see consolidated stats on number of rejected reviews vs accepted reviews for the whole site, maybe by month or year to see if there is a trend toward better or worse reviews coming in. Also, you could then figure out if your (and others) adjudication stats are better or worse than the rest of the community.
@623 Great discussion based on facts not feelings
minnow's reviews are way above average. So we shouldn't assume the downvotes are in bad faith. A single downvote can't block a review. If we had a bunch of Simon Cowells, it would likely be a problem. But it's not an urgent issue while we have just one. The older the last approved review for a club is, the less strict you should be in adjudicating a newly written one.
@ilbbaicnl
I have never and won't state that minnows reviews are bad, they aren't.
BUT to hold everyone to his personal standards could be the death of a robust site, if his practice of downvoting 81% of our reviews cay he's hold with others
I don’t mind Minnow’s rejections as much as I do those who approve reviews with minimal information. I think it good to have reviewers with different criteria particularly on those reviews that are marginal. To give my viewpoint some background, of my last 25 reviews, Minnow reviewed 3, passing 2 and rejecting one, which got published. Even though I didn’t like Minnow’s rejection, I understood why. I would say if you don’t want your review to be rejected, follow Founder’s review guidelines.
Join the conversation
Sign in to reply to this discussion.