Comments by Riquewihr

$14 for *two* beers (one for me, one for her). I'd like to have read previous reviews before writing mine, but I was unable to. Thanks for everyone's kind words!

Let me be clear: I *DID* visit the club. In fact, I spent three days there. I could have written much, much more, but the longer the review is the more overwhelming and less useful it becomes.

I will take the commenters' advice to try the BT again during the day (next time I'm down there), so thank you for that suggestion. And to those of you who were civil, thank you for sharing your perspectives on my review. But for those who are dumping on my complaint about the unsolicited touching (in the *groin*!)--consider the double-standard at work here. They're allowed to touch me like that without consequences, but I'm not allowed to do the same?! It's the double-standard that's most offensive at all. One last thing: I don't mind commenters expressing their disagreement and since I'm from out of town, the regulars' perspectives are certainly quite valuable. But there's a right way to do that and a wrong way. Dolfan, DSpec816, and dha did it the right way. The more inhospitable the locals are to an out-of-towner review and the less welcome that reviewer is made, the less likely that that reviewer will post any more reviews at all--which rather undermines the whole purpose of TUSCL, doesn't it? Signing off now.

Yes, I *did* go to the club and this is *not* satire. Just because someone didn't like the club that doesn't mean the review is fake. Cut the snark, and respect your fellow contributors' honest opinions.

For once I agree with desertscrub. Best not to admit to having violated the law.

Let me be crystal clear about this: I *did* pay a visit (actually, three), and I *did* write a real review (I never, ever write fake ones). And yes, I'm an out-of-towner.

No, this is not a club promotion. Based on what I myself have seen at this club, the review is completely accurate. Some adjudicators seem to think that any review that speaks positively of a club must be shill review or club ad. Such is *not* the case. Trolling others' reviews as a matter of routine does not do anybody any good. Adjudicators would do well to implementing this rule of thumb: unless you yourself have actually been to the club and seen and tried it for yourself, have a bit of faith that the reviewers know more than you do.

If there's a second stage then I guess I never noticed it. My point, though, was that I found the place to be somewhat cramped when busy. As to pricing, durations, etc., I can only recount what I saw and experienced--and it was my third visit. Perhaps my experiences have been atypical. But those were what I got, so I stand by the key points of my review.

I've second thoughts about my assessment of the cleanliness. In retrospect, the club *was* reasonably clean. It's just that the interior is run down. But again, the real value is in the private dance--which is quite expensive but well worth it.

No, believe me, it's not a shill review.