Why is this considered a review?

[Guest DickHo]

From a review of Taurean published today, 12/15.

 

Experience:

I rarely write reviews. On November 14th, I hired Taurean who was recommended to me by Tarvez. He showed up on time and we went to dinner and returned to the hotel. I do not want to go into details about the night but I had a great experience with him and look forward to seeing him in January 2010. Thanks Taurean - See you soon

[+ purplekow]

I rarely write reviews. On December 15th, I went to the movies and saw a movie recommended by a friend. The show started on time and then I went to the candy stand and then returned to my seat. I do not wish to go into details about the movie but I had a great experience at the movie and look forward to seeing another movie in January 2010. Thanks Loew's I will see you soon.

[Guest LeoWalker]

More accurately:

 

I rarely write reviews. On December 15th, I went to the movies and saw a movie recommended by a friend. The show started on time and then I went to the candy stand and then returned to my seat. I do not wish to go into details about the movie but I really enjoyed the movie and look forward to seeing another movie in January 2010. Thanks Loew's I will see you soon.

 

To state that the person enjoyed the "movie experience" does not state they enjoyed the movie, purplekow.

 

The reviewer was conveying that Taurean came through will all that was expected and he enjoyed being with him. The review seeks to establish credibility for Taurean...not to expose actual happenings to detail. You know, from this review, that at least one reviewer (who has reviewed others) found Taurean to be as described, came through with expectations, and is recommended to others. That should be respectable enough.

[+ purplekow]

Leo I beg to differ. The reviewer said he had a great experience with Taurean. He might have bought a winning lottery ticket or had sex with another escort while Taurean played solitaire. As quoted by the OP there is nothing that supports Taurean being responsible for the great experience.

[Txpaytoplay]

I suppose it's all in what you read into it.

[Guest LeoWalker]

I suppose it's all in what you read into it.

 

Agreed. I was trying to think of a way to say that while being non-argumentative...and you did well, thank you.

[+ azdr0710]

add me to the "this review is OK" bunch....

 

he is validating the escort as reliable, entertaining, and worth a repeat meet....these qualifications are about 75% of the battle, often, when trying to find a good guy to meet....he's now a "well-reviewed" escort on the list for future clients to consider

 

I know reviews don't have to go as far as, "he rammed his steel-like rod up my eagerly anticipating man-pussy"....and I know the much-maligned "what happened behind closed doors shall remain private" is certainly frowned upon....

 

not all of us can/want to hold readers spellbound with salacious details....a valid and vetted-by-Daddy endorsement of an escort is adequate for most....if a potential client needs further details, well, feel free to ask the now-endorsed escort your particular questions for your situation

[Bart]

Okay this is a pet peave. Yes the minimal is there but this is an escort review. Please did they even have sex. Did you noticed there is no sexual description of the escort. Top/bottom, kiss, anal, oral, masturbate. Was it muscle worship, massage, does he speak English? I did get he does out calls. His ad does not list kiss so I assume not.

 

I totally respect reviewers who do not want to go into detail of the sexual acts, but this review does not help decide whether I want to hire the escort or not. Given Daddy does not want reviews in the forum how would I attain the information from a 3rd party that the escort give/receive oral, body contact, general attitude of the escort.

 

So while I appreciate the reviewer taking the time to post a review, if we could have received about two or three more sentances it would be functional. From what was written, I gleened as much from the stats as I did from the written.

[Epigonos]

The bottom line guys is that Daddy posted the review being discussed as a review and as this is his site THAT MAKES IT A REVIEW. The fact that I and several other posters don't think much of it as review is irrelevant. Daddy thinks it is a review thus it is a review -- end of discussion.

[+ azdr0710]

how would I attain the information from a 3rd party that the escort give/receive oral, body contact, general attitude of the escort.

 

 

why get a 3rd party involved?!!....just call or email the now-well-reviewed escort yourself with all your concerns!...gee, gotta talk to him eventually, right?....you'll get your "general attitude" answer, too, at the same time!...jeez, guys, it's not that complicated!....

[Okliehomo]

Details, details, details...

 

I agree. Who needs that? Way too much information. If the guy shows up on time and doesn't take a 45 minute phone call and then a 30 minute shit, and even looks remotely like his pictures then, I am all good. No worries.

 

And those guys that feel the need to just go on and on and on with all the *****y (sorry, I meant gory) details... what is up with them? Kind of sad, really.

 

Okie

[Mark Gordon]

I agree. Who needs that? Way too much information. If the guy shows up on time and doesn't take a 45 minute phone call and then a 30 minute shit, and even looks remotely like his pictures then, I am all good. No worries.

 

And those guys that feel the need to just go on and on and on with all the *****y (sorry, I meant gory) details... what is up with them? Kind of sad, really.

 

Okie

 

You're a hoot, Okie! Of course, not everyone has their own personal DVD from which to transcribe a blow-by-blow account of the encounter. I think the chance to write a pornographic review must be part of the appeal of hiring for you.

[Guest DickHo]

I'm sorry to disagree. I don't need the blow by blow description but I like to know that the dick is the size advertised, the pictures accurately depict the person, the dick got hard, stayed hard and he was a skilled top. I've encountered "real" people that could not perform at all and looked nothing like their pictures but were given recommended reviews here.

[tenderloin]

why get a 3rd party involved?!!....just call or email the now-well-reviewed escort yourself with all your concerns!...gee, gotta talk to him eventually, right?....you'll get your "general attitude" answer, too, at the same time!...jeez, guys, it's not that complicated!....

 

Sorry, I am with those who want more detail. I have had a few experiences where an escort has been just a little coy over the phone - once I've gone through the trouble of getting to his place in a state of severe horniness, I learn that his idea of kissing means the little air-kiss you give grandma, bottoming is out of the question, and the moment someone cums the game is over. Escorts don't help themselves by being unclear about what the will and won't do (biggest pet peeve: "tops" who who fill their sites with pics of their butt).

 

It is possible (and many on this board have done it) to post a review with sufficient detail that doesn't read like a cheap novel. Easy rule of thumb: keep the use of adjectives and adverbs to a minimum. I don't need to read that your "throbbing cock devoured his luscious hole like the thrusting pistons in a formula one racecar -- we went for hours and gallons of cum flew in all directions"; a simple "he bottomed for me and it was great" will do.

[HoseMaster]

I don't need to read that your "throbbing cock devoured his luscious hole like the thrusting pistons in a formula one racecar -- we went for hours and gallons of cum flew in all directions"; a simple "he bottomed for me and it was great" will do.

 

Sorry, but THAT was too funny!

[BaronArtz]

You guys crack me up. So funny. But believe it or not, it IS hard to find reliable black or blatino escorts in Manhattan. The PRO section on adam4adam has 100s of listings - nearly all of which include fake pics, photoshopped appendages with elephantine proportions and escort names that change all the time. While I would have liked a bit more detail in the review of 'Taurean', I can appreciate what apparently did not happen. He was not an undercover cop. He didn't steal your wallet. He didn't snitch your watch. He didn't vomit on the oriental carpet. He was not too stoned or too drunk to perform. I mean, that alone makes this review meaningful to some extent.

[Guest DickHo]

He was not too stoned or too drunk to perform.

 

We don't know that and that is precisely what I want to know.

[+ deej]

He was not too stoned or too drunk to perform.

 

We don't know that and that is precisely what I want to know.

 

I suppose there's room enough for this interpretation.

 

IIRC (and I'm not going back to look), the review said the escort left the client satisfied. It COULD be argued that this client likes them too drunk or stoned to perform, sure. I guess.

 

Seems a little outlandish though. (Quite a bit out there, actually.)

[Guest DickHo]

"I do not want to go into details about the night but I had a great experience with him and look forward to seeing him in January 2010."

 

Don't want to beat this horse anymore, but "having a great experience" doesn't tell me anything about the guy's sexual preferences or abilities.