Accuracy of reviews

[marcanthony]

I just wanna give a shout out to TY for carefully scanning through the reviews every night to sort out the wheat from the chaffe.

It's a thankless job, but it sure is an important one.

Why the sudden mention of this?

Just because someone pointed out to me the review from todays date on Hooboy's site for Enrique in Tuscon, AZ. The reviewer states that he checked Enrique's ID and he is 18.

The same reviewer wrote a review in 2003 for Enrique, when according to him now, he would have been 15. At that time, he said Enrique was in his 20's.

Thank you for your good work here....

Not saying that nothing will slip by you... but I don't think that would have.

[Guest BostonGuy]

Mark,

I believe that the real error is that the newest review is for a different "Enrique" than the person described by the other reviews.

If you check the stats, you'll find the other two reviews discuss someone who is 5'10", cut and in his 20s. The new view discusses someone who is 5'8", uncut and 18. I think Daddy didn't realize that it's a different person.

Rather than discuss it here, though, it would probably be a kindness for you to post the error at the site where it occurred.

And, yes, I agree: fact-checking is a good thing and it's good that TY is being careful.

Regards,

BG

[marcanthony]

>If you check the stats, you'll find the other two reviews

>discuss someone who is 5'10", cut and in his 20s. The

>new view discusses someone who is 5'8", uncut and 18. I

>think Daddy didn't realize that it's a different person.

I guess that would be a believable explanation if it wasn't the exact same reviewer posting a review with the exact same contact info.

>

>Rather than discuss it here, though, it would probably be a

>kindness for you to post the error at the site where it

>occurred.

Again, this would be good advice if I posted on that other site. I have not for quite a while now, and for reasons I have explained before, will not start now.

>

>And, yes, I agree: fact-checking is a good thing and it's good

>that TY is being careful.

And this is why I wanted to praise TY... and yes you are an intelligent person so I won't insult you by lying and pretending that I didn't miss the opportunity to get in little dig elsewhere either.

>

>Regards,

>BG

Always great to hear from you, BG!

[KYTOP]

I believe the mistakes (on Hooboy today he has Tony Cummings in Tampa) and appearance of reviews that don't even appear to get proof read on the other site, have to with Daddy's automating of the review process. You submit, it goes in que, and post on schedule in 2 weeks.

If you don't actually read and verify what is actually sent end you will end up with some mistakes.

Thanks TY for trying to get it right here. As the # of reviews increase, I hope you'll still have a personal review of each submitted.

[Guest StevenDraker]

Tony Cummings in Tampa posted on Jume 2nd

:+

Accurately yours,

Steven Draker ~

website www.hotsexystud.com/uk

reviews www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/steven_draker_brussels.html

[TampaYankee]

>If you don't actually read and verify what is actually sent

>end you will end up with some mistakes.

>

>Thanks TY for trying to get it right here.

Thanks guys, for the vote of confidence. It is appreciated. I can see that the effort will grow as the database grows and the rate of incoming reviews increase. I cannot say that nothing will ever get by me but I do try to give due care to each review.

IMO the toughest issue is determining if there is sufficient information content to accept a review. I don't wish to fill the database with a bunch of PR announcments devoid of information content other than an announcment "He's open for business and he is a great time". Throwing chaff in with the wheat was one of my peeves with other sites. I settle for the criterion: does the review convey some substantative information about the escort that a client is better off knowing than not knowing.

The second toughest part is trying to ferret out the fake and self-reviews. Some are obvious and an easy call. Others seem likely, yet there is no definitive evidence to make the call. In these cases I have to rely on readers to differentiate between the reviews that convey the clients experience from those reviews that highlight the escort's services. Reviews should stress the former and self-reviews tend to stress the latter. However there are enamored yet legitimate clients that tend to focus on the escort in breadth rather than focus on the experience. This is where the reviewer track record is helpful in assessing the veracity of the review.

Presently, our rejection rate is running close to 25%, one of every four on average. This causes days without new reviews. We are dedicated to creating a credible database of reliable information without resorting to useless chaff to 'stuff our stats', or by adopting the philosophy of publishing everything and letting the reader ferret out the wheat from the chaff. (That makes it easier to process the reviews but at increased reader effort and frustration to locate valuable information.)

When I was on the client side of the fence I was looking for a library of solid information, not just a field in which to prospect for nuggets where I can find them. Both perspectives may have their place but one is more friendly to more users IMO even if at added effort to provide. Our goal is to provide a service beyond a simple repository of unfiltered anonymous remarks.

As the # of reviews

>increase, I hope you'll still have a personal review of each

>submitted.

I cannot conceive of a way to automate the reviews without totally compromising the integrity of the database. Each review requires an individual read to validate as well as to correlate with the existing database.

Consistency is also an issue if more than one person processes reviews. Different people make different calls. We keep the review process under a single individual. I will continue to give each one individual attention.

[AdamSmith]

Building the premium brand takes time and trouble but is well worth it, from this consumer's viewpoint.

[TotallyOz]

>I just wanna give a shout out to TY for carefully scanning

>through the reviews every night to sort out the wheat from the

>chaffe.

>

>It's a thankless job, but it sure is an important one.

>Thank you for your good work here....

I agree with you Marc. TY does an amazing job with the site. He is just simply incredible. I come at most things from a business perspective and therefore he and I don't see eye on eye on some things. However, TY made it clear from the start that he had a vision for the site and he has not strayed from it. He works hard and he does everything with integrity. He is not out for a fast buck. He is in for the long haul and the decisions he makes with the site are ones that benefit the end user and not the bank account.

I have always been impressed with him. The longer I know him, the more I want to know him. He truly is a great guy but more importantly, a man with integrity. Thank you TY for all your hard work with this site!

[Guest stef]

Wonderful Job TY ;-)

Stef

http://www.steflacoste.com

[Guest BewareofNick]

Of course, it could also be that we might have another Scott Adler situation here where there were reviews of him from when he was underage. Took forever for Daddy to pull those down.