It is excellent advice. But taking a slightly different tack, I think forums are of limited utility for doing any kind research on an outfitter, even before booking, for a number of reasons. All of which are based on my observations of another forum, not this one, over several years.

Posters tend to become targets for forum regulars. This goes for the person raising the question, and doubly for anybody who answers the question with negative feedback on the PH. Generally the PH has a fan club, and if someone responds to a request for information with a less than positive report the fan club goes into attack mode. They subject the guy to an internet rectal exam about what he did wrong to mess up the hunt. Because their favorite PH couldn't be the one at fault.

The main objective of a lot of posters isn't to help anybody out by providing information; it's to demonstrate just how superior they are because they would never make the stupid mistakes the idiot they're ganging up on made.

It doesn't matter what the client does; he's an idiot. If the guy didn't check out the PH ahead of time, then he's an idiot for not acting with due diligence. On the other hand, if the guy had a bad hunt despite checking references and researching the outfitter ahead of time, then he's an idiot for not performing enough due diligence.

But suppose the guy had a bad hunt because despite checking references, researching the PH, exchanging e-mails to make his requirements clear, the PH screwed up the hunt by changing his arrangements just before he got on the plane? Then the client's an idiot for not getting the PH to commit to anything in writing.

What if the guy had a bad hunt despite checking references, researching the PH, exchanging e-mails to make his requirements clear, having the PH commit IN WRITING to his conditions, because the PH still changed things on him at the last minute?

Guess what!

Now the client is an idiot for being an uptight ass who's trying to micromanage everything, instead of going with the flow like all the "cool" regulars. Doesn't he know that the PH has his best interests at heart, and all the regulars had some of their best hunts ever because of last minute changes imposed on them by their PHs! The ungrateful bastard!

Apparently the standard is that the client is wrong because he didn't do his homework, until it becomes apparent the client did do his homework, at which point the new standard becomes the client is wrong because he's a real hard-to-please prick who just doesn't know how to relax and have fun.

Apparently some people find that sort of environment off-putting. So I doubt I'd ask for feedback on a PH in a public forum. Who needs a bunch of glowing reports from the peanut gallery? I'd rather ask for people who've hunted with a particular PH to PM me so we could talk offline, as I'd really rather get an honest evaluation and that's more likely to happen privately.