Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

TinMan · 01-10-2010, 03:32 AM

I know they are allowed, and with the passing of ASPD even encouraged, but do we really need all the old reviews...I mean, like 2+ year-old reviews? When they are that old, I find them of little relevance. Hell, I have a hard enough time justifying a review of an experience that is several months old, much less several years.

Can't you just go see the chick again and write a new review? I've started doing that...much more fun to compare old and new sessions!

veloztec · 01-10-2010, 07:35 AM

I agree that more recent reviews are better for reposting... Good point.

Soxguy · 01-10-2010, 08:58 AM

Tinman, I agree. I clicked on a review and was pretty interested until I saw the encounter was two years ago. That's three eternities in the hobby world. Some of the providers are only active or in this area for a few months. I grabbed some of my reviews from aspd last week before the blackout. I'll probably repost some, but only recent ones.

Hercules · 01-10-2010, 09:25 AM

I whole-heartedly agree. When doing research I don't even take into account what happened more then 6 mths ago. Things change too quickly in this business.

TheWanderer · 01-10-2010, 09:40 AM

I agree completely TinMan. A session from earlier this year is okay, but I have seen 2007 and 2008 editions.
Looks like guys are just padding their resume for whatever reason.

Guest060812 · 01-10-2010, 09:44 AM

It'd be nice if the reviews could be sorted by or searched by date. Is that possible?

KohanaKoa · 01-10-2010, 09:56 AM

I agree and have posted this on several other threads here concerning old reviews. There needs to be an archive if a review is older than October 1, 2009, that is 90 days from the first of the year. Also those older reviews should not count towards the users review count on ECCIE.

mtabsw · 01-10-2010, 10:04 AM

I can't speak for all, but I only reposted on girls who are still active and still provide the same level of service. I didn't have a cred agenda, I for one look at a well-documented history of solid reviews.

I suppose there is never an absolute guarantee, and definitely no way everyone would be 100% pleased, but if anyone visits a provider I reposted on and has a negative experience i'd be astonished.

rakuguy · 01-10-2010, 10:18 AM

While I can see the value in building the database here with past reviews of providers that are still around and available the large influx of old reviews does clearly bury the more recent reviews/info that is relied upon far more. There doesn't appear to be a way to tell which is old or new till you open it though when you see a dozen reviews by the same member at the top of a forum you can safely bet they are old reviews being moved over.

Probably not much can be done about it now and this may simply be a temporary inconvenience (growing pains) as the posting of aged reviews from the old venue tails off...and it will in time. It might have been better to have created an archive forum to deposit these in but it might be a bit late for that now. You've got new mods coming on board who need some time to adjust to the new environment. The existing staff has had their hands full responding to the flood of new members. They've all got a lot on their plate now so I'd just be patient for the time being.

Maybe going forward they could advise members transferring reviews to type the date of the session in the review title as a courtesy if they are over 3 months old. This might help in the short term. At least then members would know at a glance without having to pull it up first.

fun.time.hobbyist · 01-10-2010, 10:27 AM

I tend to agree with the posting of old reviews. I recently did a repost of a review. However, the encounter was 2 months ago and is something I consider relatively recent. I don't see the value in a review that is more than 1 year old. If the lady has been around that long, most people either know her as good or bad. I do think some of the people rushing over from the departed ASPD are trying to play catch up or beef up their review count in order to be more respected on this board. I think the big difference is here, the board is much different than ASPD, and the older members don't take issue with new members. I find it much more helpful and friendly here when compared to ASPD.

TinMan · 01-10-2010, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fun.time.hobbyist

However, the encounter was 2 months ago and is something I consider relatively recent. I don't see the value in a review that is more than 1 year old.

Agreed, and stated as much in my original post. I have a few reviews from late last year that I think have value. Nothing from 2007 or earlier is particularly useful, IMO.

As far as beefing up review counts, after I hit triple digits on the other board I stopped bragging about it. I think some women were looking at me as if my dick had rotted off.

Guest100610-3 · 01-10-2010, 05:13 PM

The ones that are really getting hurt here are the providers. Kelly made a very valid point in a post awhile back. She stated that she had a new review up on one day and the next morning it was on page 4.
So isn't the constant posting of old reviews defeating the purpose here, I looked through the review pages when this all got started, a few ladies had reviews up that had happened that day on the day before, they where lost in a snow storm of old review, some as far back as has been already stated 2 years ago, most where 5 to 6 months old but still the real info IMHO is being lost on the effort to build review count.
May be it will all settle down in a week or so and we can get back to sharing useful important and up to date info on the fine ladies we have here.

ithyphallicus · 01-10-2010, 10:22 PM

I was actually pretty cool to the idea of posting old reviews from ASPD but after finding one of my reviews copied and pasted verbatim here by another handle I'm pretty much against it now. I wonder how many of these "reposts" are even accurate?

Randall Creed · 01-11-2010, 10:57 PM

I see both sides of the coin on this.

You have guys who was on ASPD for 3-4 years with a couple dozen reviews, but say, only 3 in the last 2 months. Then you have guys who are fairly brand new to the hobby, say 3-4 months and let's say, 10 reviews. Hobbyist A had 1,500 posts on ASPD, but only has 15 here. Newbie hobbyist has 25 posts and those 10 reviews. The guy that's only 3-4 months into hobbying has 'seniority' over the other hobbyist. That seniority doesn't mean a thing outside of this board, but at the same time the first hobbyist has been in the game for years. Odds are good that the newbie learned from a guy like the first hobbyist, on things like board presence and how to write reviews in a respectable manner. Now because of the timing of the situation (one board closing, another opening), the veteran hobbyist's 'footprint' has vanished because the other board went under.

Again, seniority means nothing outside of the board. Let's put this in a restaurant scenario (there's a point in here somewhere. I'm trying to get around to it). Hobbyist A has worked at BK for 3-4 years and worked his way up to the management chain. Newbie worked at the same restaurant for 3 weeks, but quit since the place was going under anyway. Hobbyist A is aware of the restaurant going under, but he can't just up and quit. He's pretty much gotta hang around until the joint all but goes under. Meanwhile, Newbie has already put in an application at a new food place and started working there a month ago. Now comes Hobbyist A to the the food joint. Is it fair to Hobbyist A to shred his 'resume`', as if he never existed in the restaurant world? Is he going to be a floor mopper when he walks through the door despite his management skills from the other restaurant?

Grabbing a well known handle here, for example, just to illustrate my point. Let's say SP Hunter only had 3 reviews showing on this board. Come on! 99% of us from the old board know who he is. How silly does it look that he would have fewer reviews than a guy who first time hobbied in October?

This stretch where old reviews are clogging up front pages of new reviews is going to pass. Once the changeover has smoothed over, the new reviews are going to have their rightful place. Sure, reviews from 2007 are probably a little too far back. A 6-month 'aging' on reposting reviews is pretty fair, in my opinion. That should be enough to establish some degree of seniority to the old guard...whatever that means.

Admittedly, it does suck feeling like a freshman on a new board, but only time can really fix that.

TinMan · 01-12-2010, 02:40 AM

I was a Top 50 poster on the old board, and was a member for over 8 year. I learned long ago that "seeking fame on a silly whore board" (apologies to SP...it really is one of the great sig lines of all time) is a worthless endeavor. Frankly, I enjoy my semi-anonymity.

This board exists, at least for the men, first and foremost for the sharing of pertinent information about the hobby. Old reviews don't fit that definition, and IMO do nothing to add to your "street cred".

I believe the window has now closed for having old reviews count towards review totals, so perhaps this thread itself is now old news?