discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
I guess you would have to try them to find out.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Einstein had a preference for big breasts.
discussion comment
6 years ago
It will depend on the age of the stripper. The younger ones will have children too young to appreciate the concept. The older ones will have children old enough to celebrate, but due to family dysfunction, if they do any appreciation at all, they still don't let it interfere with work.
I've been to HiLiter on several mother's days. There are fewer dancers, but you can still have a good time. It could be why some dancers ask regulars "what are you doing on mother's day? The are trying to get a feel for the day in advance so they can make a work decision.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Back in the early 80's I had a job that paid very well and had excellent benefits and bonuses. I used my windfall in the 2 years to buy JNJ, 0 coupon bonds and some art.
The bonds and JNJ did very well. I am still waiting for the artist to die to see if it drums up any interest in my art.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Rolling Stones,Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Alice Cooper, Steven Stills, Golden Earing, Yes, Traffic, Blue Oyster Cult, Black Sabbath. Billy Joel and Gordon Lightfoot at my college.
These are the ones I remember. I had an older sister that worked for the City Manager. It was fairly easy to get tickets back in the 70's through her.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
They are not using review ratings to judge a club for comparison. What proof do you have of shill reviews, other than you don't agree with the consensus?
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
This sounds like a bull shit story.
discussion comment
6 years ago
@25
Flood walls won't protect as much against stronger hurricanes.
My comment was tongue in cheek. There is so much talk about reducing our carbon footprint etc, but no talk about protecting against the perceived consequences. I am of the belief that we can't change our future impact enough to make a difference. If the talk was to change to protection, IMO it would become NIMBY.
I agree with Skibum, population control would be a better solution.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
Just a thought based on related threads. Rick thinks he deserve more weighting for his reviews due to his quantity to offset the shills and 1st timers.
Rick says Baby Dolls and other clubs have lots shill reviews. So if the shills get weighting for their quantities, the end result is nothing changes,
Just another reason why obsessing over a clubs rating on this forum is just plain stupid.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Let's start with the simple things. According to the current thinking, our coastal cities are in danger due to rising ocean levels. Since we can't agree on the cause, it still doesn't change the fact oceans are rising.
So let's get going on setting up coastal perimeters without development. Let's say, no business or residence within 5 miles of the ocean, and the area reverts to nature. After all, if we are so worried about the problem, this would be one of the quickest and easiest ways to start protecting ourselves from the future doom (12 yrs by some politicians).
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
Or, put another way, I don't agree with the ratings, everyone else must be wrong.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
Baby Dolls has 2,156 reviews, but you don't agree with their rating. Maybe your viewpoint is distorted.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
Review statistics are subject to so many biases they are only viewed as a guide.. Weighting based upon # of reviews will not significantly change ratings. I know you think you are super reviewer strip club expert, but in reality your view of a club is based upon a visit passing thru. Understanding that clubs vary between day and night and day of the week, anyone passing thru might be there at a good or bad time that is not indicative of the club overall.
If we want to weight ratings, (which really wouldn't change much), I propose that the people who visit the club more often receive a higher weighting than the traveler, after all, they know more about the club. But since I understand that weighting has little value I digress.
I think it boils down to the simple fact that you think your opinion on a club is more valuable than someone else, even though everyone goes for different reasons.
discussion comment
6 years ago
I had killer cheesecake at Jerry's. They do have good food.
discussion comment
6 years ago
I just returned from 5 days in Vegas. I had a good time at Spearment Rhino, got in without cover. Drinks are expensive after 9, and the girls are hot. Be patient and observant. I got what I wanted for about the same as I spend in Phx (not counting drinks). I don't gamble, but the casinos are good for people watching and spotting hookers.
Downtown is interesting in the evening. It has a wide variety of sights.
The burgers at Walhburgers (across from Bellagio) are good. The have lemonade I would highly recommend.
420 is legal. The dispensaries get crowded. There is a dispensary right across from Spearment Rhino.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
founderslip a dollar in her g-string for me
@founder
I think the menu issue may be due to the fact that in the older days, viewing was done via monitor and your eyes focused to the top.
I would guess now that most viewing today is via device, with people focusing on the bottom and scrolling to read and programming hasn't adapted.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
This has been an interesting thread.
I remember when I first stumbled upon TUSCL somewhere around 2007. There was a member that I remember as someone who wrote about visiting "jack shacks". I don't remember his username, but I do remember he was acquainted with many of the old timers and if I am not mistaken had even met Shadowcat. I always thought he was kind of creepy, and wondered about his TUSCL acquaintances who seemed to interact with him on a regular basis.
My memory is still fuzzy on this, but I do seem to remember he was incarcerated for child pornography. I stopped following TUSCL for a while because my impression of the few people who post 24/7 was that they were sketchy and I did not have any inclination to interact with them on any level.
Today, I still seem to have misgivings about the people who post 24/7.
That aside, from what I have gleaned from this discussion, I tend to agree with dufus Dugan.
discussion comment
6 years ago
This was the point of my discussion a week ago. Increasing review standards will lead to fewer reviews. You guys have successfully reduced reviews and traffic to a site that has a revenue model dependent on reviews and traffic.
You haven't weeded out fake reviews, but you have reduced reviews for places that get few reviews to begin with because the members in those areas don't have the same desire to give details as those that spend their whole day checking TUSCL for reviews of clubs they will never visit.
Good job guys. TUSCL is no more useful than it was before the review crackdown, it has now become less useful.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Regarding Founder and the integrity of the site. SCPandit admitted to faking 25 reviews, did Founder get butthurt?
discussion comment
6 years ago
For the umpteenth time, I have not had any reviews rejected. If the current HiLiter review gets rejected that's fine. IMO the HiLiter review had more useful info for the people actually going to the club. You guys are so self absorbed you keep missing my central point and that is that becoming overly anal on reviews is going to reduce traffic and reviews in the long run. We have already seen recent examples of this. Why do we want to make reviews cumbersome to some, to appeal to those that will never visit the club? The TUSCL revenue model is based upon traffic and reviews. One common argument was that it prevents fakes. Shit, SCPandit posted over 25 fake reviews in a year. What did it harm? You can't stop fake reviews, but your new standards will stop genuine reviews.
The only people butt hurt are those that after 3-4 days of posting on this topic and still don't get my point because their heads are so far up their asses.
And Rick of "the system", in all my years of clubbing, I think you are the only person I have been associated with that has to completely fabricate a new persona to pick up heroin addicts in a strip club.
Most of us can just be ourselves and pick up strippers. But I guess your normal persona is so undesirable you need to create a new one.
discussion comment
6 years ago
But according to Rick the self absorbed, he and others have been trained to spot fake reviews and providing regurgitated details prevents them. My position has always been that relating one's experience is more useful than regurgitating details, and the length of a review is not important. There are many different perspectives on the subject. I can live with mine. If it keeps me from remaining a member, I am fine with that also. With the exception of the members who are obsessed with this board, I think most members are here for entertainment and are casual users.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
I don't even waste my time reading lengthy reviews.
discussion comment
6 years ago
It is truly amazing how many people comment, but don't answer the question and make inaccurate assumptions instead.
I think most members when reviewing which club to visit for a new city would gravitate to the clubs with the most reviews as the first qualifier. Then they would probably look at the club info page and then scan reviews. Each member would then make their own determination of the appeal of the club. At least that is the process that I would use. My selection was the top 5 reviewed clubs for Seattle, although for this purpose, the city is irrelevant. I seriously doubt the majority of members would focus on the least reviewed club.
Regarding CC, it is possible that it is a newer club. Review of the club info page or reviews might indicate that. As this was a sample city, even though it may apply in this case it probably isn't common amongst most cities.
Regarding quantity vs quality, having twice as many reviews as your nearest competitor, is IMO a pretty good indicator of where to start. The local members in most markets probably outweigh the out of towners and know their clubs the best, but yet they are probably the least likely to want to write an essay every time they visit the club.
Regarding my reviews, for the umpteenth time I have not had any reviews rejected. When I visit a club, I like to write my review when I get home. I don't spend a lot of time trying to structure it, I just relate my experience. As I have said before, if I have to spend any time trying to think of what to say and structure to satisfy overzealous reviewers I will just stop reviewing as it takes away from my experience.
I find it comical that a common response is that basically if a person doesn't want to rise to our standard for reviews we don't want his review. Some people will adapt and others will say fine and go away. In a business model that generates income based on traffic and reviews, why do we want to reduce them?
Every review that is published has the ability to have comments. If you have a problem with a review, make a comment. Let the member for himself determine the validity of the review.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Somehow I get the impression you think this review was written by Eccohombre. His review was for a place in PA earlier.
discussion comment
6 years ago
@Subraman, I did not say base your decision on the table, I said base your decision based upon the information provided by TUSCL. That would include looking at reviews.