Just out of curiosity, by how long should a review be delayed for it to appear credible? Meaning do you guys find a review done today for a visit done 3 months ago credible? Who waits that long to review unless it's a comment to reinforce another punter's statement!

Vouching for another clients review is fine I think as long as its valid.As for a review months later...May I ask,why wait so long?

Some GM's may do this to punt their punt with punte, and if this is credible or not - not if you ask me, and you did.
Others wait long so they cannot be linked to their Nick on here, valid except for Nick of course.
Credible? Depends on the poster's Nick... or James, or Why!

On 2015-12-09 19:47:41 Amber Jade said:
Vouching for another clients review is fine I think as long as its valid.As for a review months later...May I ask,why wait so long?

Many reasons, the most important of which is to create some distance between the act and the review so that it is more difficult for the WG to tie a forum name to a human. For example I waited several months after visiting Tatum because she seemed extremely unstable to me and just the kind of person who, in a coked up frenzy, may just decide to splatter my name, or phone, or registration all over the place. That bell cannot be unrung. I still want fellow punters to know of the experience, so I still want to review, I just don't want to run the risk of being destroyed in the process.

Most of the reviews are a blow by blow kind of scenario, so I'm pretty sure that any sane WG will be able to link those with a specific face.

The reviews I've done (not that many) have been a few weeks (2 or 3 weeks) after the visit purely to protect my identity...so that's sort of my reason for a slightly delayed review