Can we say for sure that each and every review is genuine?
Are a minority inflating their numbers? This isn’t beyond the realms of possibility. Just a question for discussion and not aimed at anyone. It’s been on my mind a while.
By all means be concerned for fake reviews as far as they are being lodged to inflate review counts but if you're going to toss out the accusation then state your own grounds for suspicion. All of us would have to be subject to that lens:
So how many of your reviews are fake?
Why should we consider you less suspect than anyone else?
What's your criteria for suspicion? Just that someone visits more women than you think is fair/reasonable/plausible/affordable based on your own punting restrictions or your judgement about how much sex any punter might/should want to pay for? Doesn't seem reasonable does it?
That they're lodging them simply to maintain useful/full access to the site?
What about pimps/SPs touting or trolling? Unless we're certain about spotting all of these efforts then they adulterate our efforts to spot others posting un/believable fakes.
Perhaps we do have fantasists here getting their kicks from metaphorical willy waving by inflating the number of notches on their bedposts, but how many of them exist in a normal population let alone a punting one? Who's done the definitive studies on that? Incel studies?
The data is incomplete as far as just looking at all the contributions here because it is certain that plenty of punters here aren't reviewing, it is certain that many punters who do contribute punt more often than they review so punting budgets are generally unknown.
Every punt is YMMV, maybe less variance with super reliable SPs but still not certain.
A fluffy or WK review may be overly favouring of an SP but it could still be a valid review of a real event. Yet more mud in the review count water.
A neutral or neg could be trolling of an SP but unless the reviewer is so inept in camouflaging their feelings and motives or keeping their story consistent there's not a lot we can be certain about.
And there's still the possibility that an SP will challenge the review in person or by proxy for whatever good or bad motive she may have.
And what about WKs who challenge negs about their darlings, kinda ruins our baselines for suspecting negs right?
Repeated posting of walks, ghostings or cancellations might be suspect but apart from inflating review count how does that really raise a punter's standing?
Ultimately though, why should review count even matter if we're here to collate truthfulness about SP services?
Review count should only be a consequence of everyone here doing their bit to increase the credible knowledge pool about the SPs available.
