Review Score Inflation

[Special K]

Number inflation

I agree with the Cock here. There's far too much number inflation within this board now. I thought moving to the 10 point system would give a little more leeway to reviewers to assess a ladies beauty, but this is just absurd.

I can honestly say in my private and hobbying life I've been with well over 500 ladies and not one of them warranted a perfect 10 score for beauty. Let's be realistic in our ratings here guys.

My .02,

SK

 

[EagerBeaver]

Grade Inflation

I agree with the comments on numerical grade inflation. It seems as though it is mainly coming from less experienced posters who are posting in the heat of the afterglow of the session. There have been a number of such reviews, not just in the thread, and they are reflective of IRS (Irresponsible Reviewer Syndrome). All shills have IRS, but a lot of legit newbies do as well, but fortunately the condition is treatable. The treatment is for one of you more savvy posters to go out there, meet the lady, and post a more objective, empirical assessment to counteract the IRS. It is like a much needed splash of cold water in the face of the IRS sufferer, and he will later thank you for it.

 

[tmgol]

As a new poster around here I have three thoughts.

First, I really wish the board was more welcoming of newbies. I might be inclined to talk more about my experiences, instead of babbling in the NHL thread...but at the expense of getting jumped on if my remarks are too positive? Why bother?

Second, I agree that a rating system does little good if people hand out a ton of 10s. But no matter what system or scale or scheme you devise, you're never going to get rid of some fundamental facts: This is an endeavor that is highly private and personal, and one's impressions and preferences can't help but be extremely subjective. Therefore, context, reading between the lines, and trying to get a sense for who on this board most closely shares one's tastes, are all going to be essential for making sense out of what's posted here. Even if you design an elegant and precise 250-point scale...and even if you impose the death penalty on anyone who hands out a score higher than 216 out of 250 more than once in a lifetime.

Third, if this discussion continues I think it needs its own new thread. Goodness it can be hard to locate the relevant useful information about a lady for all the chatter sometimes.

 

[daydreamer41]

The judges are biased. Olga Korbit couldn't walk a straight line and got a perfect 10 on the balance beam. She even fell twice. I can't remember.

Please define what a 10 is:

Starting from

3: Rosie O'Donnell at any age?
6: Cher at 50?
7: Sandra Bullock in her mid 30s?
8: Farrah Fawcet in her prime?
9:
10:

 

[tmgol]

Starting from

3: Rosie O'Donnell at any age?
6: Cher at 50?
7: Sandra Bullock in her mid 30s?
8: Farrah Fawcet in her prime?
9:
10:

But surely you should start from:

1: Janet Reno

 

[daydreamer41]

Is Janet Reno a woman? I don't even think Bill C. really thought that.

 

[Lion Heart]

I agree with tmgol. Scoring someone's appearance, personality or even services is highly subjective and very much relative. No one can please every one, every time or every where. Let's face it, most of us as judges are bias whatever the system or guidelines.

However, using the appreciation "average" of different reviewers, you may get a sense who's really good looking, has the best attitude and provides the best services. Combined with the narrative part, reviews provide very good hints of who's best suited to your tastes and needs.

Lion Heart

 

[tmgol]

Do all guys out there really think "a Heidi Klum or an Elle McPherson" is a 10?

No...but we're contractually obligated to claim so. It's there in the bylaws of the International Fraternity of Red-Blooded Males.

Me, I struggle the most with having to find Britney Spears or Pamela Anderson appealing...but I have to at least try, otherwise they'll take my membership card.

What about the girl one guy gave a 8 and the other guy gave a 5, you know, that occurance that happens in every other review thread on this forum? Which guy is blind or ignorant to beauty, the one who gave her an 8 or the one who gave her a 5?

A careful reading of this forum has revealed the answer to your question to me.

The guy who gave her an 8 is clearly a shill.

The guy who gave her a 5 is obviously just getting back at her for a sub-standard session, which just as obviously was his fault because he has a hygiene problem.

Simple as 3.1415927.

(P.S. For you, Chloë, the cool scale has to go all the way up to 11. )

(P.P.S. The above is satire...I want to make it clear that I am not accusing any individual of being a shill, having a hygiene problem, being a Yankees fan, or any other sort of ugly behavior.)

 

[tmgol]

People who frequent this board are not going to run across a large number of turkeys if they do their homework. And that means that there are going to be a lot of 8-9-10s...and that this narrow range of scores isn't going to do people much good, especially since personal tastes can vary so widely.

(And if there were a lot of lower scores, I'm not sure how useful that would be either. I really don't much care whether a provider is given a 3, versus a 5 or a 1.5...I'm not calling for her in any case!)

There are two underlying questions I'm trying to answer when I sort through reviews. Is the provider a good choice in general, and is she my type in particular? If a reliable reviewer says that he would recommend and/or repeat, that answers the first part of the question. I really don't much care what numbers he assigns after that.

Answering the second part can be much more difficult. Perhaps folks around here would consider putting together a standard list of characteristics that could be included in positive reviews. Not "good vs. bad" distinctions, so much as "is she this way or that way?" distinctions. What I have in mind would look kind of like this (it's just an off-the-top-of-my-head first draft right now):

LOOK:  Girl-next-door  [--X-------]  Stripper
              Natural  [----X-----]  Enhanced/Decorated
               Zaftig  [---X------]  Skinny

PERSONALITY:      Shy  [------X---]  Wild
                 Warm  [--X-------]  Distant
         Intellectual  [---X------]  Not

SERVICES:     Liberal  [-----X----]  Safe
               Tender  [--X-------]  Nasty
              Passive  [----X-----]  Aggressive

What do you all think? Would this have potential? Would it be just too much? Would it start a whole new round of interesting fights around here?

 

[flyboy]

I have never seen a 5 given except in anger. If one was given I would assume it was for someone with rabies .

I just gave an SP a 5, and I was not angry and it was not meant to be a derrogatory evaluation. it was just that felt that she was quite average, and 5 (being exactly halfway between 0 and 10) was what I believed to be the number that would best represent "average".

I also question the point of having a 10 point sstem if people are going to interpret 5 as being the lowest possible score.

As to the philosophical aspects of this thread:

I believe that there are some people in this world - both male and female - who are undeniable stunning beauties. To meet them in person is that have your breath taken away. I further believe that when this is the case, not even one person out of a 100 would disagree that the person has "something".

Even further, I put it to you that it can not be simply physical, it will be a mix of physical, attitude, and inner self.

However the rating scale used on merb explicitly seperates attitude from physical. So be it, some men really do not care about attitude, they truely just want good looks, this scale works for both those guys and myself in that respect.

Fly