The future of TERB.
- Thread starter Lash
- Start date
You are not a white knight for coming to the defense of an SP in some specific case, you are a white knight when you do that *every* single time even when the SP is clearly wrong.
If some woman hater guy comes on and starts mouthing off about how all women are bitches and laying into some SP I would not call you a white knight for telling him to fuck off. My posting history will tell you that I'll join you in telling him to fuck off, I'll probably be the first to.
There are however loads of threads where some SP is being rightly criticized for doing something stupid or wrong and if you want to know who the white knights are go review those threads and you will see certain regular posters on terb ALWAYS chime in with their "support" for the SP.
I don't know if this is a complaint or just an observation.
Does it bother you if some people choose not to review or do you accept they have valid reasons not to?
Me, I don't judge why anyone is on here - we all come for varying reasons and to say any of them are wrong is pointless.
Much like this thread.
Well, if its FULL DISCLOSURE, TERB competes with these "Wall Street" funded sites like Craigslist, Twitter, Facebook, and not one of them make any money. TERB does, I hope.
And TERB was way before those three companies I mentioned came about. vbulliten loves TERB. Me too.Hey, before you know it, Craigslist, Twitter, Facebook will completely collapse and TERB will be just fine.
Gyaos Baltar.
About the shilling... Yeah, it has gotten more sophisticated. There's far less Mr. 7 Posts giving a proverbial 11/10 review. I've long thought, and I've mentioned it before, that all reviews should disclose:
-Did the provider or their associates know or have reason to suspect that you were member of the TERB? YES / NO
-Did you receive any special promotion, discount, or other inducement from this provider or her associates? YES / NO
If every reviewer HAD to answer this it would make ferreting out the 'respectable shills' easier. It would also mean that instead of lies of omission they'd be forced to just plain lie, and they could be tripped up in that. If the questions are simple and broad enough, like above, with only a YES / NO option, it makes them hard to weasel out of... (Well I wouldn't really call the phone girl her associate!)
On shills:
Reviews should ALWAYS include a note about truth in advertising on objective topics:
-- Does she appear to be the age she claims to be?
-- Is she roughly the weight and height she claims?
-- Are her measurements generally correct?
-- Are the pictures she posts actually her?
-- Are the pictures recent?
This is the most important part of any review to me. Everything else is subjective and/or YMMV. I'm only vaguely interested in what services an SP provided to someone else becuase I figure it may well be more or less for me.
Things like "looks 9/10" are a little bit more interesting but also subjective, I might think 5/10 but the original review might still not be a shill.
However, if the shills lie about the OBJECTIVE stuff, then you can nail them to the wall for it: You said that was her but look here tineye says it's this asian AV model, and you said she looked 19, but I saw her and she looked 35 to me.
That's hard to shill about and not get caught. Shills like that will only get away with posting one or two reviews and then they are outed.
Reviews should ALWAYS include a note about truth in advertising on objective topics:
-- Does she appear to be the age she claims to be?
-- Is she roughly the weight and height she claims?
-- Are her measurements generally correct?
-- Are the pictures she posts actually her?
-- Are the pictures recent?
This is the most important part of any review to me. Everything else is subjective and/or YMMV. I'm only vaguely interested in what services an SP provided to someone else becuase I figure it may well be more or less for me.
Things like "looks 9/10" are a little bit more interesting but also subjective, I might think 5/10 but the original review might still not be a shill.
However, if the shills lie about the OBJECTIVE stuff, then you can nail them to the wall for it: You said that was her but look here tineye says it's this asian AV model, and you said she looked 19, but I saw her and she looked 35 to me.
That's hard to shill about and not get caught. Shills like that will only get away with posting one or two reviews and then they are outed.
A couple of quick comments.
1) Non-reviewers
Many non-reviewers do CONTRIBUTE to the general knowledge of the hobbyist. They provide advice/comments/info on a wide variety of issues ranging from health to finances to legality to best condoms to telephone etiquette, etc., etc.
They also provide guidance to newbies so that a new generation of TERBIES will enjoy the best of what this hobby has to offer while avoiding the worst.
2) Female participation
Many of us consider a woman to be much more than a pair of breasts and 3 orifices. She also has a brain and a personality. It is a good thing that this Board gives a voice to the ladies. Otherwise, it will be just like a male only lockerroom.
1) Non-reviewers
Many non-reviewers do CONTRIBUTE to the general knowledge of the hobbyist. They provide advice/comments/info on a wide variety of issues ranging from health to finances to legality to best condoms to telephone etiquette, etc., etc.
They also provide guidance to newbies so that a new generation of TERBIES will enjoy the best of what this hobby has to offer while avoiding the worst.
2) Female participation
Many of us consider a woman to be much more than a pair of breasts and 3 orifices. She also has a brain and a personality. It is a good thing that this Board gives a voice to the ladies. Otherwise, it will be just like a male only lockerroom.
Maybe instead of comments an "agree", "neutral" or "disagree" button, with results displayed below in poll format?
I've glad that my comments have sparked a little more discussion, and they've seemed to be taken in a non-hostile light.
To answer Brill, I think it was, who said this thread is pretty useless in the long run, I do agree with that sentiment. Like others alluded to, the board's present culture is what is, and no single discussion thread is going to change it. And actually, and I don't mean to single you out, but you do illustrate one of the trends that has been discussed. I believe (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that you don't see SPs or frequent MPs or SCs, which makes you a non-hobbyist. The primary value of the board to you is purely social. You like hanging in the lounge, joshing with your friends on here, and that's all good. But of course, you don't see the value or the need in changing the culture or the direction of the board because it suits you perfectly right now. There's alot more guys like you posting now, and so the impetus to change the status quo is not very high. For those who do have a little more invested in this board than the social aspect, I think this thread does have some use, in terms of pointing out some of the differences in the board versus previous times.
In terms of the so-called 'white knight' syndrome, I don't consider the posters on here who jump in and protect SPs who are being unfairly slagged and demeaned to be 'white knights'. Those are just decent guys, and I think that's one small benefit of having SPs becoming such a integral part of the community, in that it does curb some (emphasis on some) of the rampant misogyny on the board in that some of these guys actually have to defend their indefensible views, find they can't and then leave. I have no problem with non-hobbyists jumping into threads where guys are taking their insecurities out on women in general, or displacing it onto one particular women, and rightfully calling them out. I also have no problem with the obvious hateful and agenda-driven reviews of SPs that are negative and offensive, being questioned by hobbyists and non-hobbyists alike.That's fine and even honourable A quick example is the reviews of Roksi where she's referred as a 'fat pig'. These kind of reviews are disgusting and the people who post them should be publicly flogged (in the context of the forum)
What is a problem, and what I somewhat derogatorily refer to, as 'white knights' are those guys who take even offense to even the slightest criticism of a SP, no matter how inoffensive or politely worded, and find any little issue with a negative review, such as the posters ethnic background, him showing up five minutes late, or him being misinformed about the SP's appearance. You can almost set a script with most bad reviews, in particular those from newer posters. There's the initial review, then maybe one or two guys saying something like 'gee that sucks man, she's off my TDL' and then the cavalry comes into with guys saying 'wow, that's surprising, when I saw her, she did (alphabet soup) and it was transcendent' and 'maybe you (the reviewer) did this and that wrong, and that's why you had a bad session', then some ridiculous game of one-manship about which acronym the SP did, and that the SP apparently raced from the one session with the one guy, and the next with the other guy, occurs between two or more of the posters, which effectively hijacks the thread, and then the agency owner comes in and either completely discredits the OP or says 'check your PM' , and whatever legitimate issue with the SP that the reviewer had is forgotten, and it's almost chalked up as a positive review on the SP's hypothetical scorecard. It's textbook misdirection that politic ans and lawyers use, where they bring up irrelevant questions or issues in the hopes that it distracts the jury or public from the real issue at hand. From a marketing/public relations standpoint, it's pretty brilliant.
Again, there are reviews where clearly the guy created the atmosphere for a terrible session through his attitude or hygiene, and there are reviews where there's simply a miscommunication between the SP and the reviewer, or between the agency and the reviewer
Even the best SP out there has their bad sessions, and I don't think SPs will deny that. But the guys jumping in to defend their ATFs against even the most discretely and inoffensive worded bad reviews do not help their cause or the board's cause. Quite frankly, I don't think SPs such as Gen or Noir need anyone's help in defending themselves or their reviews
And in many cases, the 'white knights' who believe that it's on them to defend their ATFs from bad reviews, are hoping that this will pay off for them down the road in some way
The 'white knight' syndrome also ties into the shilling, which is also tied into the review styles. Now again, this isn't a new phenomenon. I mentioned Bobbi in my earlier post about the previous iterations of TERB, and when she was active, she was accorded almost deity-like status (with good reason, I don't think she had a single negative review) and reviewers fell all over themselves praising her. There were many graphic reviews of the SPs back then, and there was the issue of those loyal to the top SPs of the time, ignoring and shooting down any negative reviews. One of the things I found a little distasteful was the squelching of any concerns regarding the morality of the plethora of EE escorts and the business practices of the EE agencies. So, yes, this is not a new phenomenon.
However what is a bit of a new phenomenon is the review styles. Now it feels like it's more about the client and how the client performed rather than how the SP performed. The late Phnine was the one who really advanced this concept with his review styles. And I will admit, before he was revealed as being less than scrupulously honest, I did enjoy some of his reviews. They were entertaining. However, alot of members didn't just enjoy his reviews, they almost idolized them, and even after his banishment, his review style has carried on. There's much more of a 'frat-boy' vibe around it now. Maybe, as another poster said, it seems like there's fewer girls being reviewed, and so there's less of a sense of adventure and discovery, and more of a sense of 'let's see how much more filthy this girl can be with ABC member than she was with EFG member'. I think there's also a sense that a member might feel like he's gotten exceptional service and then he feels the need to boast about it, and other members want to see if they can duplicate it.
I mean, the shilling has gotten to the point where even some of the more notorious alleged chillers such as king21 and FunnyFace, who were so blatant to some people in their shilling that their reviewers being questioned even by non-trolls, have split off from TERB to found their own board.
Personally, as I mentioned before, I am a little on the fence in that I do only see SPs who are well-reviewed, and simply by being the best-reviewed SPs on the board could be the recipients of shills, but I've never had a bad experience with any of them. While some of my sessions haven't been as transcendent or over-the-top as some of the reviews, I haven't been disappointed at all. Until I see a SP who has been totally misrepresented by a majority of reviews either in terms of looks or services, I can't really rip on shilling too much
However, in terms of what I believed to be the primary purpose of the board which was to act as a helpful and somewhat impartial resource for the average hobbyist, the shilling and minimizing of bad reviews is detrimental to the health of the board, I believe. Now this might not the purpose of the board anymore, and if so, that's fine.
Clearly I love to hear myself talk, and so obviously take what I've said with a giant grain of salt, but I guess there's food for thought for what it's worth
To answer Brill, I think it was, who said this thread is pretty useless in the long run, I do agree with that sentiment. Like others alluded to, the board's present culture is what is, and no single discussion thread is going to change it. And actually, and I don't mean to single you out, but you do illustrate one of the trends that has been discussed. I believe (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that you don't see SPs or frequent MPs or SCs, which makes you a non-hobbyist. The primary value of the board to you is purely social. You like hanging in the lounge, joshing with your friends on here, and that's all good. But of course, you don't see the value or the need in changing the culture or the direction of the board because it suits you perfectly right now. There's alot more guys like you posting now, and so the impetus to change the status quo is not very high. For those who do have a little more invested in this board than the social aspect, I think this thread does have some use, in terms of pointing out some of the differences in the board versus previous times.
In terms of the so-called 'white knight' syndrome, I don't consider the posters on here who jump in and protect SPs who are being unfairly slagged and demeaned to be 'white knights'. Those are just decent guys, and I think that's one small benefit of having SPs becoming such a integral part of the community, in that it does curb some (emphasis on some) of the rampant misogyny on the board in that some of these guys actually have to defend their indefensible views, find they can't and then leave. I have no problem with non-hobbyists jumping into threads where guys are taking their insecurities out on women in general, or displacing it onto one particular women, and rightfully calling them out. I also have no problem with the obvious hateful and agenda-driven reviews of SPs that are negative and offensive, being questioned by hobbyists and non-hobbyists alike.That's fine and even honourable A quick example is the reviews of Roksi where she's referred as a 'fat pig'. These kind of reviews are disgusting and the people who post them should be publicly flogged (in the context of the forum)
What is a problem, and what I somewhat derogatorily refer to, as 'white knights' are those guys who take even offense to even the slightest criticism of a SP, no matter how inoffensive or politely worded, and find any little issue with a negative review, such as the posters ethnic background, him showing up five minutes late, or him being misinformed about the SP's appearance. You can almost set a script with most bad reviews, in particular those from newer posters. There's the initial review, then maybe one or two guys saying something like 'gee that sucks man, she's off my TDL' and then the cavalry comes into with guys saying 'wow, that's surprising, when I saw her, she did (alphabet soup) and it was transcendent' and 'maybe you (the reviewer) did this and that wrong, and that's why you had a bad session', then some ridiculous game of one-manship about which acronym the SP did, and that the SP apparently raced from the one session with the one guy, and the next with the other guy, occurs between two or more of the posters, which effectively hijacks the thread, and then the agency owner comes in and either completely discredits the OP or says 'check your PM' , and whatever legitimate issue with the SP that the reviewer had is forgotten, and it's almost chalked up as a positive review on the SP's hypothetical scorecard. It's textbook misdirection that politic ans and lawyers use, where they bring up irrelevant questions or issues in the hopes that it distracts the jury or public from the real issue at hand. From a marketing/public relations standpoint, it's pretty brilliant.
Again, there are reviews where clearly the guy created the atmosphere for a terrible session through his attitude or hygiene, and there are reviews where there's simply a miscommunication between the SP and the reviewer, or between the agency and the reviewer
Even the best SP out there has their bad sessions, and I don't think SPs will deny that. But the guys jumping in to defend their ATFs against even the most discretely and inoffensive worded bad reviews do not help their cause or the board's cause. Quite frankly, I don't think SPs such as Gen or Noir need anyone's help in defending themselves or their reviews
And in many cases, the 'white knights' who believe that it's on them to defend their ATFs from bad reviews, are hoping that this will pay off for them down the road in some way
The 'white knight' syndrome also ties into the shilling, which is also tied into the review styles. Now again, this isn't a new phenomenon. I mentioned Bobbi in my earlier post about the previous iterations of TERB, and when she was active, she was accorded almost deity-like status (with good reason, I don't think she had a single negative review) and reviewers fell all over themselves praising her. There were many graphic reviews of the SPs back then, and there was the issue of those loyal to the top SPs of the time, ignoring and shooting down any negative reviews. One of the things I found a little distasteful was the squelching of any concerns regarding the morality of the plethora of EE escorts and the business practices of the EE agencies. So, yes, this is not a new phenomenon.
However what is a bit of a new phenomenon is the review styles. Now it feels like it's more about the client and how the client performed rather than how the SP performed. The late Phnine was the one who really advanced this concept with his review styles. And I will admit, before he was revealed as being less than scrupulously honest, I did enjoy some of his reviews. They were entertaining. However, alot of members didn't just enjoy his reviews, they almost idolized them, and even after his banishment, his review style has carried on. There's much more of a 'frat-boy' vibe around it now. Maybe, as another poster said, it seems like there's fewer girls being reviewed, and so there's less of a sense of adventure and discovery, and more of a sense of 'let's see how much more filthy this girl can be with ABC member than she was with EFG member'. I think there's also a sense that a member might feel like he's gotten exceptional service and then he feels the need to boast about it, and other members want to see if they can duplicate it.
I mean, the shilling has gotten to the point where even some of the more notorious alleged chillers such as king21 and FunnyFace, who were so blatant to some people in their shilling that their reviewers being questioned even by non-trolls, have split off from TERB to found their own board.
Personally, as I mentioned before, I am a little on the fence in that I do only see SPs who are well-reviewed, and simply by being the best-reviewed SPs on the board could be the recipients of shills, but I've never had a bad experience with any of them. While some of my sessions haven't been as transcendent or over-the-top as some of the reviews, I haven't been disappointed at all. Until I see a SP who has been totally misrepresented by a majority of reviews either in terms of looks or services, I can't really rip on shilling too much
However, in terms of what I believed to be the primary purpose of the board which was to act as a helpful and somewhat impartial resource for the average hobbyist, the shilling and minimizing of bad reviews is detrimental to the health of the board, I believe. Now this might not the purpose of the board anymore, and if so, that's fine.
Clearly I love to hear myself talk, and so obviously take what I've said with a giant grain of salt, but I guess there's food for thought for what it's worth
If that were ever to be the case, I imagine it would be beneficial to have a list to fill in the blanks, because there are invariably items that one reviewer omits that another thinks is important. A couple of questions I have seen in response to reviews:
Did she have tattoos?
Did she have smokers breath?
One guy might want cbj while another only sees girls who provide bbbj
Other descriptions that guys might want to be aware of that they maybe couldn't ascertain unless you are able to leave comments/questions.
There are generally more questions than one reviewer is able to answer, and allowing an open forum gives multiple clients to fill in the blanks.
Whichever way it unfolds, there will always be someone who dislikes the format.
Very good point.
Having the ladies post has also lead me to see a few that I would have not bothered with and more importantly has lead me to pass on a few that I knew I would not enjoy spending time with.
TERB or more correctly the lounge is always a more fun and interesting place when there are Lady Terbs posting. Unfortuantely there are but a few that we can count on these days.
I find that unfortunate. I do find the reviews to be of use when I'm trying to determine which SP I'd like to see. On the other hand, they've also steered me away from some ladies I was interested in. (ie Becky of Mirage, interested yes, but in the reviews she sounds like a wild cat, which mightn't be the best for me)
Myself, I don't see me writing reviews...
1) Because I'm not comfortable with it. IMO, what happens between a SP and myself is between the SP and me. Now if someone asks a question about a SP I've been with, I will chime in with my opinion but again I'll keep it rather general. (ie "Yes, Angel is a very nice girl, and I quite enjoyed my time with her")(And I know I've not enjoyed your agency's hospitality yet, Cydney) I don't have a problem with others doing it, but for me, no.
2) I'm inexperienced. To be blunt I don't know a good fuck from a bad fuck. Given my history, any fuck is a good fuck.
I've seen several escorts, one of them was the person who told me about terb. I've gone to strip clubs for 34 years, but never tried an MP. I used to post reviews but I recognize they weren't too helpful because I gave them all high scores and I avoided hurting anyone's feelings with any negative points, who needs another gushing shill?
I see the value in improving the board, who doesn't?
Guys not being allowed to post in the escort advertising section was long overdue. How about making a checklist for each reviewer, maybe a template to follow would add info that's often lacking.
This is my last post on terb.
Reviewers are not posting reviews on this board because some slugs (like yourself) does nothing to this board other than bitching about reviews and reviewers. With your 33 posts in 7 years you made alot for this board.
So since i am leaving you guys can take good deep breath.. and say finally!
