Forum Reorganization

[Pay Pal]

Given what you wrote:

Category --> Sub Category -> Forum ------------> Threads

Alabama -> Birmingham ----> General Info ------> Threads
----------------------------> CraigList Reviews -> Threads
----------------------------> TER Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> TBD Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> Classified Ads ----> Threads
-----------> Mobile --------> General Info ------> Threads
----------------------------> CraigList Reviews -> Threads
----------------------------> TER Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> TBD Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> Classified Ads ----> Threads
-----------> Huntsville -----> General Info ------> Threads
----------------------------> CraigList Reviews -> Threads
----------------------------> TER Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> TBD Reviews -----> Threads
----------------------------> Classified Ads ----> Threads


I'd say it's close but I'd NOT separate Escort reviews under the various boards. It's not in keeping with your geographical sort.

I like the idea of State --> City --> Town (or area) and then

Escort Reviews
AMP Reviews
CraigList
Streetwalkers
Strip Clubs
...
etc.

So if Sally it reviewed on TER, maybe put a link and something to let the poster know but keep it where you'd go to look. If I'm looking for an AMP I don't want to have to look under TER, XYZ, etc.

I'm thinking the number of sites will just continue to grow anyway.

I am wondering though, I thought the mentioning of other sites, not to mention linking to them was a bit no no on this board. Why the change? I think it will make the board even more popular. Not sure that's a good thing. But the reorganization is. Thanks for your efforts. I'll vote yes on this one.

Well, I would vote yes if I could figure out how. Where's the link???

[Qmoto]

I think what you've got going here is one of the best resources anywhere. I'm also glad to see you're not just resting on your laurels and are continually looking to improve the site. So, in that spirit, I hope I can add a couple useful cents.

Basic organization by geography makes sense (since we're all impatient and want to know what we can get to right now). However, to reiterate what some of the others have mentioned, I think it would actually be MORE difficult to get all the information we're looking for if we have to check the CL, the TER, the TRB forums all separately. Other forums I've seen try to include some indication of what category a post falls into in the title (such as "REV" for reviews, "ISO" for information requests). If some simple convention were adopted to include "CL", "TER", "TRB", etc, it would be fairly simple to scan the posts by eye and see where most of the action is. If I'm going to be traveling to someplace new, I'm actually going to be interested in everything that's going on before forming a plan. I'd wager this will be fine for all but the most active forums.

Of course, the more I think about it, the more difficult I think it would be to get something volutary to work consistently. It's probably not a good idea to rely on everyone to put the right thing in their titles all the time. Maybe having a simple radio control on a submission page would work, where you ask the person submitting the report to classify the post into one of several basic categories: "Review from Craig's List", "Review from TER", "Experience in the wild", "Just adding to discussion", etc. Similar to the icons near the bottom, but place these at the top so they're more likely to be filled out.

Is there a good reason NOT to want to read everything that people are willing to share about the area? If so (and I just can't see it), would it be possible to filter a single forum? That would be more work, but it's just a suggestion.

Like I said, you've put together one of the most valuable resources out there. We appreciate it! Keep it up!

[Yet Another Guy]

I like the idea of reorganizing the forums somewhat - but I think on a geographic basis include under each locale the TBD, CL, TER et al advertisers under the geographic location INSTEAD of a separate set of forums for those advertising venues, that are then subdivided into the various states.

When I use the telephone book, I use it for a specific geography, and if you fragement the boards:

Advertising Venue/State/City (which is what I think was the proposal)

instead of

State/City/Advertising Venue

it becomes much more difficult to find reports in a specific location.

I agree with the poster who said breaking it down between AMPs, Escorts, and Streetwalkers. That makes sense, at least to me.

Just my .02, and thanks for your hard work and dedication to a fine site!

[EC Man]

Jackson (please forgive the informal saluation),

It goes without saying that you are doing a tremondous service as it stands. It is truly AWESOME all of the work you but into an essentially (I would imagine) out of pocket project.

I have a tendency to ramble, so the idea is an excellent idea. The only negative I can see is that it makes it easy for LE to bust craigs list girls.

[02no]

IE: If you were to look for other services, restaurants, hotels, activities etc. You look in guides under State, town.

I would not want to wade through a lot of reports from areas I don't get to. I am even thankful that you wisely realized that Tacoma is separate from Seattle.

However, it might be reasonable to separate street reviews from other, shall we say 'indoor' activities. It does seem that indoor and outdoor sportsters are very different markets, (even if the providers work both.) AFAIK, the craigslisters operate more like escort, classified ad paper and MPs. You make an appointment (which requires some advanced planning,) and usually meet inside somewhere.

Street action tends to be spontaneous, even if the hobbiest makes plans to cruise the connects are much more random.

And of course there is a very large price difference, again, even if the provider works both markets. Its not unusual for a 'call' girl to charge an appointment a couple hundred but when business is slow, to take a stroll and do the same service for a fraction of the cost.

[Member #4581]

Jackson,

I'd vote to reorgainize by geographical boundries. If I'm going to wherever I prefer not to wade 375+ pages to find the action in aparticular locale. Keep up the good work.

Gerry in VT

[Damon Pythias]

I believe the new organizational plan is a good idea. Thank you for the improvements you have made to the site. Your proposed reorganization shows some real insight in to web site usability. It will save time and be of benefit to all.

[Member #2652]

Jackson,

I like your suggested new organizational format. It looks like it will save time and be more specific when seeking information. I like the ability to breakout categories such as massage parlors, since I would never be interested in SWs.

Member 2652

[Jay in TX]

I think the reorganization would be a good thing. It will be especially helpful when trying to get specific information.

Great idea Jackson.

Jay

[Mike Smythe]

I find the current organization awkward, especically when I want to research a particular city. So, I'm in favor of your proposed reorganization.

Mike

[Best Tx Monger]

Jackson,

Rather small request here but I have the following to bring forth. I recently voted on the poll. I voted ' No Decision ' on the poll.

Well now I cannot vote on whether I will like the new revamped Geography format to either a yes or a no. I think that if you vote 'no decision' at the time, you should be able to revise your decision later on and take that vote away from the no decision and tack it on to the appropiate one.

-007

[Paul in WV]

Jackson, Thanks for all you do on the site. Absolutely, geography is the way to go. I agree with Scoup and others though that I would keep the strands limited to geography. Breaking up the sw's, independents, etc would make it harder to find those golden nuggets that appear in the posts. Geography though with separate strands for lots of cities with CL mixed into it would be great. Paul

[Member #1705]

I think your ideaas are right on target. Sounds wonderful and I look forward to the changes. They will help us guys choose good providers and send business to the better providers in an area.

[Older Guy]

Jackson,

Currently I use the state name link to look at all the cities in a certain state and use the last report date to determine if I've seen all reports prior to that date. I then click the city name to look at the last report date under city threads to decide whether to look at the thread. The reason I look at the forum in this manner is that I am most interested in information about the states and cities I have a reasonable expectation of visiting. For example if I lived in Cleveland, I'd be interested in the other Ohio cities and cities in the surrounding states plus maybe Illinois, New York, Nevada, Florida, and California. The current state of affairs in say North Dakota would not normally be of interest to me unless I had to go to Fargo for some reason.

I like your idea of using the international setup with cities listed after the state starting with a list of standard threads like Nevada, General info, CraigsList, TER, TBD, Classified Ads, Las Vegas, Reno, Carson City, Northern Nevada, Other areas (listing of city or location in sub menu), followed by a standard thread list under each city like Las Vegas, Street Walkers, Massage Parlors, Agency girls, Independent incall/outcall providers, General Info 2005, and a list of other threads like currently under each city for subjects that don't fit under the standard threads.

A setup listing state names like in paragraph above could be the format of the xxx.usasexguide.info/forum/index.php? page instead of a listing of the all the current new reports. Adding a new reports heading item could place the new reports on a priority with the individual states.

Just my 2¢.

Stay safe,
OG

[Katfish991]

I go straight to all forums to do my searches