Review Submissions
 

I may have touched on this subject before but I want to be more clear.
My attachment shows a screen shot of part of the submissions form. It shows Services. Now, I'm one of the laziest when it comes to reading. When I see the services checked in this list, I am encouraged by the review. Then after begrudgingly reading the session comment, I find that the monger did not partake in the checked off service. Or worse, makes no mention of the service.
Sometimes, you can assume that a service wasn't taken by the tip given. Or after reading the session comments, the monger was just into a HJ. I just want to know. Should this checked list reflect what services were received or what services the provider offered?
IMO selecting yes on the list for Sex/FS should mean you received the service. That would be the same for other services. I can pretty much understand a list that is checked "No" to HJ and "Yes" to FS. That means you have a horny monger and a willing provider that gets right to it.
I want to ask both admin and the membership. Should the list of services represent what was performed during the session? Or, should the list indicate what is offered by the provider?

http://www.mpreviews.com/addreviews....com/addreviews

Hi Deezguy,

To try to answer your question, the profile details, which are listed above all reviews, are typically updated based upon the most current reviewers submission. Sometimes, if a provider is already in our database, a reviewer will leave some of the pre-populated fields as is, which is why the review might not always match the checked off categories. There is also reviewer error e.g they meant to click on legit but selected the service field right below it by mistake.

The profile details give a general idea of what services are provided and therefore won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time. Please use the contact link and provide us with a name and phone number and the discrepancy if something is way off. The member reviews are there to give an even more detailed account, so as a rule of thumb choose written review descriptions over the provider detail boxes.

I was concerned with individual reviewer submissions. I realize profile details may change with time.
I read a recent review. In services, it listed FS as yes. In the comment section, the reviewer mentioned that she did provide FS but he was not interested and tipped for one of her other services. Apparently in services, he attempted to us know that FS is available but in the comment section, he declined.
So, my question is should the service be checked yes because it's available or no because the service was not received. My thinking is it should be "no" because the service did not take place. Marking the service "yes" because it is available would make the actual tip given incongruous with the service listed (e.g. $50 tip and FS checked as yes).
Yes, it is best that you choose written review descriptions over the provider detail boxes but there have been some descriptions that have no mention of services listed. I guess caveat emptor.

For the reason of the example you gave I subscribe to the theory that the reviews are more representative and there more useful if the reviewer selects the actual services received and the detail description backs up his selections. However I have seen reviews come out for very populated providers whose former checked services are different than what I selected, but this is rare.

The problem with selecting services you did not receive but may have been offered or inferred requires an explanation in the details that may be confusing or get lost in the translation, therefore I just stick with what I received in the services section, to try to make a more accurate review.

(Deez, I am really glad you brought this up again.)

I'm a purist. I want to SEARCH the data base for information that is Pure....NOT SPECULATION. I do NOT like reading a review, and checking it against the "checked" items, and getting a mixed or false report. It is perfectly fine with me if a review makes statements of "offered" or "suggested" services. (That is what the YMMV is for.) But IF IT DIDN'T happen, I don't like it CLICKED. It screws with the Search Feature.

Well put NicetoKnow. Search function database works with actual received services.

I can't count how many times I've rolled up expecting anal and not even getting a handy....sheesh.

Just kidding, but yeah speculation is bs

We can't control which services member's check off. There is obviously no way for us to verify this. If you see an individual mark off categories that do not reflect his review, the best thing to do is leave a comment and give him a chance to respond. Also, providers change their services offered and it does vary by client so it's difficult to set these things in stone.

Yes, this a public forum. None of us can control which services member's check off. Some of us are looking for carification as to how services should be checked off. Perhaps members will read your guidelines adhere them in future postings.

There are a few exceptions, where the dumb girl will read off a menu of services. I've had some of the young and dumb (but very pretty) Viet girls offer me BBFS and Anal for $60-$100 over the price of CFS. I would never partake in that because I don't want to risk catching an STD, plus the pussy is naturally better lubricated than a smelly ass-hole. So in these cases, it would be useful for other mongers who like Anal to know that this little slut will do anything for money and I'll click on Anal so that you mongers can search for her as an Anal provider.

But for the most part what happens here is someone posts a fake review with services that the provider doesn't offer, then the lazy guy that posts a real review for a HE he actually got just leaves the defaults of the previous review.

Also, keep in mind that some of the Asian providers (especially in AAMPS and foot massage places) will only offer FS to other Asian clients, but to White guys will only do HE.