Comments by AZFourTwenty (page 2)

Copy and paste looks much better in the comment before you post it.

And the reviewer has not resubmitted his review yet. A couple of days ago Eccohombre was rejected and didn't resubmit. I guess we are doing a good job suppressing reviews on a site that has reviews as the primary revenue source.

And if he is new and doesn't return? We lose another potential reviewer. I just find it amusing that so many people that will never visit the club need more details. And since in the grand scheme of things reviews drive revenue, any review supports the business model. It still seems to me that the only members trying to raise the bar to their standard are those that are so obsessed with this site they are on it 24/7 and have to comment on everything because they have no other interests.

Now what if that was his first review? He hasn't seen reviews in VIP to compare to yet. He probably didn't spend the time to look at the guidelines. If he resubmits, will it have changed his experience? I was able to glean he had a good time. If people wanted more details they could PM him or write review comments. He could resubmit with a 1,000 word essay, that would satisfy the 95%+ of the members that will never visit the club. His short review probably spoke volumes to the locals and regulars of the club if he was already VIP.

I just can't stop tonight, Rick's arguments are so lame. Rick, let me get this straight. You are adamant about details like pricing and layout because those details can help you spot fake reviews. Are you that unaware of the multitude of sources out there to get the details? It's not that much of a secret. Members are approving reviews of clubs they have never been in, and I am sure you are one of them. How do you spot fake details? You could be approving fake reviews because they provided details you like to see. It's probably a safe bet that the majority of fake reviews are for high traffic clubs. If a shill review gets though, so be it. It benefits Founder and harms no one.

That's right, I am so good I have been taught how to spot fake reviews. That's comical in so many ways. Wasn't it SCPandit that posted a shit load of fake reviews over a year? I bet Founder would give a fuck if he begins losing reviews/reviewers since they drive his revenue stream. If you read the OP's reviews, they seem pretty informative for a place in a small town in Pa that had 11 reviews last year, and he was 4 of them. I really don't think rejecting them for not listing prices is pretty dumb.

The problem is, everybody has a different opinion on what is and isn't quality.

Rick, you really are a self absorbed prick. I have been clubbing over 35 yrs. The fact that you have been a member longer doesn't mean you have any magical insight or more valuable opinion. Based on some of your topics, I get the feeling you still haven't figured this strip club thing out. And I am not talking about shill and obviously fake reviews. As I have always positioned, I am talking about rejecting reviews because they don't have pricing or irrelevant to most detail. I guess that since you have changed direction you know you have been overzealous. Again, as of this posting, the OP has not resubmitted.

They are guidelines, not requirements.

While he implemented the current process, he maybe wasn't expecting overzealous review Nazi's. I saw someone suggest a while back to just post reviews later in the day to avoid the East Coast rejections.

@Rogertex- that's because you are able to think for yourself. It basically comes down to the few reviewers (one who refers to himself as "super reviewer"), being so obsessed with TUSCL 24/7 that they have to micro-manage everything and think that their system is superior, or the majority of members who are here to enjoy strip clubs in their own way. It appears to me that the philosophy of Founder is to let each member choose what to read or write themselves. Hence, the ignore feature and review guidelines, not requirements.

I would accept it also. Since it is anonymous, you have no idea if it is a first review or not. What harm would it cause if published?

@Rick: ambience and ambiance are basically the same. If your calling a review without pricing and excessive detail a shit review, then your are IMO doing a disservice to TUSCL. I think the members are astute enough to determine their own level of shit, and don't need others to do it for them. It wasn't that long ago that Rick the self-absorbed called out DrEvil for identifying a shit hole in 15 minutes. To Rick he should have given it more time. That just shows that some people like standing in shit longer than others. Again, my argument is against the principle. After all, I believe Founder stated that his biggest revenue driver is reviews. Why would we want to do anything to make reviews more cumbersome?

Regarding Nazi's, when I first read Rick's comments, for some reason I thought of the old soup Nazi from Seinfeld. I am amazed at how many of you completely miss the point. I have never had a review rejected, so I am not bitter or upset. My point is that trying to enforce stricter standards on reviewers is going to result in fewer reviews. Case in point, Eccohombre started a thread about being rejected. He was responsible for 4 of the 11 reviews on the club Papi Chulu highlighted. Well he got rejected and as of this post has not resubmitted. Tell me how that benefits TUSCL? Regarding my trip. My point was that I am taking a trip for my enjoyment. I want to visit a club and then write a review based upon what appealed to me. But if I have to spend even the smallest amount of time trying to make sure I have all of the "intel" that to me is useless but will satisfy the review Nazi's, then it is no longer worth the effort. Regarding subpar intel. The clubs I frequent are high traffic with a large following, there really is no need for excessive detail. I have asked this repeatedly in the past. Who has been harmed by a so called bad review? Having pricing in every review benefits what? Prices/specials change constantly within a club. Does it really matter if the beer is $5 or $6? And I think TUSCL is evolving past its prime.

Because the review Nazi's can't think outside of the box. They think the average reader would rather see regurgitated information and not be concerned with the experience.

I just rejected 2 reviews for lack of content. While they listed prices and tried to fit the guidelines, there was no real information about the club vibe and experience which I find more relevant. Cookie cutter reviews are boring and worthless IMO. I guess you can't please everyone.

Jimmy, I agree with you. People only get butt hurt here when someone posts a review without drink pricing.

It seems like he will continue to be tolerated until he submits reviews without pricing.

This club had 11 reviews last year, 4 of them by the OP. We should be glad he is submitting anything about the club. But let's chase him away because the review doesn't meet the standards of the review Nazi's. I read his reviews and was able to get a fair idea of the type of experience to expect. I think most members have the ability to be infer a clubs atmosphere without being told specifics. I know the Nazi's are upset because he doesn't say if a drink costs $5 or $6 or whatever. But then again, they probably don't have the ability to use intuition and experience to expect that drink prices in a small town strip club with infrequent visits/reviews would probably would be in the $5-6 range. Prices are so important, even though they are listed on the club summary, they still have to be told.

Sounds like the review Nazi's have been active.

Oops, I meant we will end up ranking clubs based on review criteria.

And how would this benefit anyone? You are now suggesting that ratings be influenced by members who have never visited the club? We will end ranking clubs based upon how the review met their criteria, not the ambience of the club. IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current system.

I don't see them looking at me, but I do hear their voices.

If you have a college degree in this economy, and you have been unemployed for a long period of time, you either studied the wrong things or you are stupid. From what I hear OAC has a degree from a prestigious college and was a bartender for seven years. After being exposed to the public, it is obvious she was unemployed not because of her field of study, but because of her lack of intelligence and sense.

We recently had a member post that he had been faking reviews for over a year. His reviews passed the standards. If a person with a little common sense wanted to they could easily fake reviews. An informed person faking reviews vs an uninformed person posting honest reviews that don't meet your standard. No one can determine by reading a review if it is fake or not unless it is obvious nonsense. The system (not Rick's system, but the review system) doesn't appear broken, except in your eyes. Hell Rick, it wasn't that long ago that you railed against a member for taking only 15 minutes to determine a club was a shit hole, and it didn't agree with your view of the club. Anyway, this discussion is getting ridiculous. I am off to enjoy the day.