Are leeches on here offended by the term 'leech'?

[Marmalade]

All very well, the contributors of the future 

Except most aren’t. 

[Marmalade]

We need some kind of marketing/awareness campaign for this.

'Real punters don't leech'

Or whine.

Or go “eeewwww go gentle on me pleeeease!”


Personally leeches that never post don’t bother me unless they’re spies but there’s no way of knowing unless the tech spots them. 

First reviews can be a mild initiation of fire with a few exceptions but that’s ok. Join any group and it’s polite to absorb the zeitgeist. For punting, it’s a tad inappropriate to come on as a wuss, or to treat the group like a public information service. I think most of them get it. To make a lot of posts or queries without giving anything back over several is bound to get a wtf reaction unless you have a magic charm.

From memory, the rules on politeness are simple and something like you can say “your posts look like a bit of an arse and a leech” but not “you are a complete fucking leeching arsehole and your mother’s syphilitic festering cunt should never have let you out…” which would make the venerable mods a tad twitchy!
But I’m paraphrasing …. 

[Laudanum]

If you’re feeling a lack of attention in the form of people not ‘condemning’ you any more I’m sure we could be persuaded to give it another shot.

Only one review in four years??!!

There. Feel better now?

That's more like it!

[Cullen]

In my experience on here, it's a sad irony that the posters who whinge and whine the most about other members not posting enough are the posters I'd like to hear less from. It takes a special type of personality, for example, to have their piss boiled by a new member asking more experienced posters to go easy on his first review - especially when that new member has probably seen just how pedantic, intimidating, unforgiving, unreasonable and downright miserable some of those more experienced posters are.

[daviemac]

In my experience on here, it's a sad irony that the posters who whinge and whine the most about other members not posting enough are the posters I'd like to hear less from. It takes a special type of personality, for example, to have their piss boiled by a new member asking more experienced posters to go easy on his first review - especially when that new member has probably seen just how pedantic, intimidating, unforgiving, unreasonable and downright miserable some of those more experienced posters are.

If this is an attempt to endear yourself to the membership, it's failed.

[sparkus]

In my experience on here, it's a sad irony that the posters who whinge and whine the most about other members not posting enough are the posters I'd like to hear less from. It takes a special type of personality, for example, to have their piss boiled by a new member asking more experienced posters to go easy on his first review - especially when that new member has probably seen just how pedantic, intimidating, unforgiving, unreasonable and downright miserable some of those more experienced posters are.

 

My point was that first time reviewers aren't mauled and are mostly given encouragement and thanks for the intel, so why ask for forgiveness in advance?

[Cullen]

My point was that first time reviewers aren't mauled and are mostly given encouragement and thanks for the intel, so why ask for forgiveness in advance?

 

I did exactly that on my first review here because, not being used to writing reviews (much less talking about my sexual exploits with strangers to other strangers) I rambled on a bit. It was just an introduction, a half-joking mitigation to the review that followed. I didn't think for one second that there's posters here that would be fuming about that forewarning! I mean, fucks sake!

Worth pointing out too, that on many occasions, far from being encouraged, I've seen new reviewers criticised for omitting info, not sticking to a template and other minor misdemeanours. It's a minority of posters that do this, but they can be prominent and vocal.

I'd hardly be surprised if potential contributors are put off from offering reviews and info because of the behaviour of some of the long-standing posters here. Perhaps you're too long in the tooth here to remember, but this place can be quite intimidating for new members, and the way that a lot of them are leapt on at the slightest opportunity is hardly encouraging or helpful to the site in the long run.

[willie loman]

I did exactly that on my first review here because, not being used to writing reviews (much less talking about my sexual exploits with strangers to other strangers) I rambled on a bit. It was just an introduction, a half-joking mitigation to the review that followed. I didn't think for one second that there's posters here that would be fuming about that forewarning! I mean, fucks sake!

Worth pointing out too, that on many occasions, far from being encouraged, I've seen new reviewers criticised for omitting info, not sticking to a template and other minor misdemeanours. It's a minority of posters that do this, but they can be prominent and vocal.

I'd hardly be surprised if potential contributors are put off from offering reviews and info because of the behaviour of some of the long-standing posters here. Perhaps you're too long in the tooth here to remember, but this place can be quite intimidating for new members, and the way that a lot of them are leapt on at the slightest opportunity is hardly encouraging or helpful to the site in the long run.

basically agree with you, a lot of show us your medals clowns on this forum.

[daviemac]

I did exactly that on my first review here because, not being used to writing reviews (much less talking about my sexual exploits with strangers to other strangers) I rambled on a bit. It was just an introduction, a half-joking mitigation to the review that followed. I didn't think for one second that there's posters here that would be fuming about that forewarning! I mean, fucks sake!

Worth pointing out too, that on many occasions, far from being encouraged, I've seen new reviewers criticised for omitting info, not sticking to a template and other minor misdemeanours. It's a minority of posters that do this, but they can be prominent and vocal.

I'd hardly be surprised if potential contributors are put off from offering reviews and info because of the behaviour of some of the long-standing posters here. Perhaps you're too long in the tooth here to remember, but this place can be quite intimidating for new members, and the way that a lot of them are leapt on at the slightest opportunity is hardly encouraging or helpful to the site in the long run.

On your first review there was one comment, on your second review one new member asked what you meant by 'dry riding' and a longstanding member posted a link to the review you mentioned.   What in that is likely to put you off posting again.

[tynetunnel]

I did exactly that on my first review here because, not being used to writing reviews (much less talking about my sexual exploits with strangers to other strangers) I rambled on a bit. It was just an introduction, a half-joking mitigation to the review that followed. I didn't think for one second that there's posters here that would be fuming about that forewarning! I mean, fucks sake!

Your review of Natasha of Olina’s  (your first) garnered just one comment, which stated that all girls from Olina’s do a great job. Nobody gave you any stick for ‘rambling’ and nobody appeared to be ‘fumimg’

What can often irritate members is when people review and don’t provide all the required information (as discussed in rule 4) - it clearly states what is required. Barely a day goes by when I don’t see a review without a link to the WG’s AW or wherever - inevitably Finchy has to come along and provide the link so we all know who has actually been reviewed!

It doesn’t have to be rocket science, there’s no reason people should feel intimidated. Just take a few moments to check all the basics are included (rule 4) and check for typos etc. Some might say my first review rambled a bit. Others might be less kind and say that i ramble in them all 

[GingerNuts]

basically agree with you, a lot of show us your medals clowns on this forum.

Whereas some members are just clowns.

[willie loman]

Whereas some members are just clowns.

surprised you didnt include an emoticon in your post, trademark of the arsehole.

[LLPunting]

I did exactly that on my first review here because, not being used to writing reviews (much less talking about my sexual exploits with strangers to other strangers) I rambled on a bit. It was just an introduction, a half-joking mitigation to the review that followed. I didn't think for one second that there's posters here that would be fuming about that forewarning! I mean, fucks sake!

Worth pointing out too, that on many occasions, far from being encouraged, I've seen new reviewers criticised for omitting info, not sticking to a template and other minor misdemeanours. It's a minority of posters that do this, but they can be prominent and vocal.

I'd hardly be surprised if potential contributors are put off from offering reviews and info because of the behaviour of some of the long-standing posters here. Perhaps you're too long in the tooth here to remember, but this place can be quite intimidating for new members, and the way that a lot of them are leapt on at the slightest opportunity is hardly encouraging or helpful to the site in the long run.

It takes very little observational skill to note what is informative in a review and what the collective would like to know at a minimum, and even if you miss something out someone will ask, perhaps in an unfriendly tone from the other side of the Internet, and all you have to do is answer dispassionately if you have no inclination for trading shit.  ANY person hesitant about making a debut in a new community would be wise to observe and note what works and what doesn't, makes no difference if you're starting a new job, going to a new local pub or joining a new club.  The foolish who choose not to take these simple mitigative actions to protect their fragile feelings and guide their contributions deserve a put down, especially if they post asking for info and recommendations with no attempt to establish any credibility as a contributing punter.  Besides, a put down is still a terse instruction on how to do better, it's not a "drag you outside and beat you senseless in the car park" get outta town warning.

More than a few "smarter" virgins have introduced themselves recently in seemingly sincere and credible fashion, with various opening gambits, and have been readily accepted. 

This isn't like school where you might be "forced" to attend and speak up.  You come here voluntarily seeking information and are clearly informed by both the rules and behaviours that are pretty quickly apparent that selfish cunts aren't tolerated.  Similarly you're not forced to participate in any of the incidental banter, you either choose to stay or you leave to go about everything else that's more interesting and less nauseating in your life on the other side of a screen.

Passing the "exam" here is as easy as scoring an A* in a self-assessed GCSE where you're coached on the answers for months and given a model answer to copy.  ALL you need to do is pay attention while under no duress from anyone other than your own anxieties, which we are not responsible for.  Nobody gives you grief unless you court it.

[LLPunting]

On your first review there was one comment, on your second review one new member asked what you meant by 'dry riding' and a longstanding member posted a link to the review you mentioned.   What in that is likely to put you off posting again.

Perhaps "Cullen" has been here before and "suffered"  more at the fingertips of the baying crowd?

[GingerNuts]

surprised you didnt include an emoticon in your post, trademark of the arsehole.

I made a general comment, did it touch a raw nerve?

[Cullen]

On your first review there was one comment, on your second review one new member asked what you meant by 'dry riding' and a longstanding member posted a link to the review you mentioned.   What in that is likely to put you off posting again.

I wasn't talking about myself being put off, I've not been treated badly myself, but that other new members could be put off, by reading unreasonable comments and criticism to others reviews. And it's not just reviews is it. Every other time someone starts a new topic it's no more than a couple of posts in before someone is asking, often in a condescending manner, why they don't just search for one of the five year old threads on a similar subject. There's a handful of posters that, IMO, behave in a very snidey, passive aggressive manner towards others, often those with lower post counts. I could go on, but I'd like to think you're already aware of this behaviour. If you think it's fine and don't think it's liable to put some off posting, that's your prerogative.

[Cullen]

Perhaps "Cullen" has been here before and "suffered"  more at the fingertips of the baying crowd?

I haven't actually, but I'll take this opportunity to say that you epitomise the type of poster I've been referring to on this thread.

[willie loman]

I made a general comment, did it touch a raw nerve?

i am not totally sure what disingenuous means but i think thats what your post is.

[stampjones]

i am not totally sure what disingenuous means but i think thats what your post is.

Nope you just read it as a personal dig. Maybe it was, I dont know, but you could also read it as a general comment as claimed which was in fact building on your original comment. Seems strange that you reacted so strongly?

[willie loman]

Nope you just read it as a personal dig. Maybe it was, I dont know, but you could also read it as a general comment as claimed which was in fact building on your original comment. Seems strange that you reacted so strongly?

its fairly clear that it was a personal dig, why else would he post it immediately after my post?

[stampjones]

its fairly clear that it was a personal dig, why else would he post it immediately after my post?

Well I read it as taking what you said and expanding on it. Like I say, I have no idea what he meant, but you can definitely read it both ways

[willie loman]

Well I read it as taking what you said and expanding on it. Like I say, I have no idea what he meant, but you can definitely read it both ways

but your money would be on?

[daviemac]

I wasn't talking about myself being put off, I've not been treated badly myself, but that other new members could be put off, by reading unreasonable comments and criticism to others reviews. And it's not just reviews is it. Every other time someone starts a new topic it's no more than a couple of posts in before someone is asking, often in a condescending manner, why they don't just search for one of the five year old threads on a similar subject. There's a handful of posters that, IMO, behave in a very snidey, passive aggressive manner towards others, often those with lower post counts. I could go on, but I'd like to think you're already aware of this behaviour. If you think it's fine and don't think it's liable to put some off posting, that's your prerogative.

What puzzles me is how you know what would put someone else off posting.

The trouble is people want things served up on a platter for them, many a time I've seem someone start a thread to ask a question on the main board when if they'd looked 4 posts down there's a thread already running on the subject.

There's an example here of a member of 2 years just being lazy - https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=321085.msg3347563#msg3347563 and posting a question without the simplest of searches.

Then you get the one's who ask a question, someone gives an answer only to be told 'tried that', another answer and again another 'tried that' it gets frustrating.

The easiest way when asking for advice is state where you have already tried then there's no repeats.

On the subject of reviews there are certain things that are required to be included.
Link to advert - required
How long was booked - required
Price paid - required

They are just the most popular things that get missed out, we then get onto the actually details of the meeting which quite often is lacking. If those who post those sort of reviews took a step back and read through what they were posting and just think does it actually give enough info to be of value.

[LLPunting]

I haven't actually, but I'll take this opportunity to say that you epitomise the type of poster I've been referring to on this thread.

Perhaps not actively signed up but as you admitted on your debut you'd been a long time lurker and as your experience has shown, by being one of the "smarter" ones, your sharing with the community has been largely welcomed, valued and appreciated.

If you go back to the various "heinous crimes of bullying" you will find that pretty much all have been for people who have blatantly not bothered to search the forum for existing discussion or leads to the kind of things they're after.  We aren't here to pimp our favourite lovelies, we do our bit by writing down our experience for everyone else's reference and consideration, which takes at least a little time and goodwill.  If you cannot understand the sense of frustration when lazy, unthinking people demand to be spoon-fed their punting pleasure at no risk to themselves then you are no doubt a more forgiving man than I, better though?  Unopinionated?  Not judgemental?  Doubtful, given your postings.

I am a shameless grump in this community because there are an awful lot of people here taking advantage of a very few, very generous souls, regardless of how abrasive or nurturing they may be.  I blunder and bluster about and get into disagreements with most of them but I respect every single one of them for sharing.
If you wish to ignore us ball-breakers then do so, you're completely empowered and entitled to, but you'd be wiping out (mini-)reviews and leads on over a thousand SPs across the entire spectrum of those working with just the first half-dozen of us opinionated types you censor.  There are no victims here, there're just the "I've paid an SP for sex and I'll share how that with you" lot and then there're the "i use sex-workers but I don't want to talk about it (or waste my money)" crew.

[GingerNuts]

its fairly clear that it was a personal dig, why else would he post it immediately after my post?

I posted after your post because I was referencing your comment about "a lot of show us your medals clowns" and I stated there were some members who are just clowns. You could substitute many other words for clown in your post and I'd have responded the same.

[Cullen]

Your review of Natasha of Olina’s  (your first) garnered just one comment, which stated that all girls from Olina’s do a great job. Nobody gave you any stick for ‘rambling’ and nobody appeared to be ‘fumimg’

What can often irritate members is when people review and don’t provide all the required information (as discussed in rule 4) - it clearly states what is required. Barely a day goes by when I don’t see a review without a link to the WG’s AW or wherever - inevitably Finchy has to come along and provide the link so we all know who has actually been reviewed!

It doesn’t have to be rocket science, there’s no reason people should feel intimidated. Just take a few moments to check all the basics are included (rule 4) and check for typos etc. Some might say my first review rambled a bit. Others might be less kind and say that i ramble in them all 

Seeing as both you and Dave took something from that paragraph that I didn't intend perhaps I could've explained myself better there!

I wasn't suggesting that anyone took exception to anything in that review (or anything in any of my postings). I was pointing out to a poster (Sparkus - who said their pissed was boiled when they see newbies asking for forgiveness), that I did that in my first review, why I did it and why I couldn't see why anyone would be fuming about me asking for forgiveness in advance of my review.

[LLPunting]

its fairly clear that it was a personal dig, why else would he post it immediately after my post?

Because this is a written forum bound by the linearity of time and the ambiguity of the written word where none of us give or take the time to qualify our statements in the moment we post them.  If you really wanted to be engaging in a conversation with your offender then you'd ask him to clarify rather than presume an insult.

Despite my history with you I took his comment to be an accusatory witticism directed at the collective not just you.

[stampjones]

Seeing as both you and Dave took something from that paragraph that I didn't intend perhaps I could've explained myself better there!

I wasn't suggesting that anyone took exception to anything in that review (or anything in any of my postings). I was pointing out to a poster (Sparkus - who said their pissed was boiled when they see newbies asking for forgiveness), that I did that in my first review, why I did it and why I couldn't see why anyone would be fuming about me asking for forgiveness in advance of my review.

So you’re not actually annoyed about new users being picked on or aggressive comments, what actually drives you crazy is people writing about what drives them crazy?

[daviemac]

Seeing as both you and Dave took something from that paragraph that I didn't intend perhaps I could've explained myself better there!

I wasn't suggesting that anyone took exception to anything in that review (or anything in any of my postings). I was pointing out to a poster (Sparkus - who said their pissed was boiled when they see newbies asking for forgiveness), that I did that in my first review, why I did it and why I couldn't see why anyone would be fuming about me asking for forgiveness in advance of my review.

Your reviews show that there is no need to say something like "first review be gentle" and it is annoying.

[Cullen]

What puzzles me is how you know what would put someone else off posting.

The trouble is people want things served up on a platter for them, many a time I've seem someone start a thread to ask a question on the main board when if they'd looked 4 posts down there's a thread already running on the subject.

There's an example here of a member of 2 years just being lazy - https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=321085.msg3347563#msg3347563 and posting a question without the simplest of searches.

Then you get the one's who ask a question, someone gives an answer only to be told 'tried that', another answer and again another 'tried that' it gets frustrating.

The easiest way when asking for advice is state where you have already tried then there's no repeats.

On the subject of reviews there are certain things that are required to be included.
Link to advert - required
How long was booked - required
Price paid - required

They are just the most popular things that get missed out, we then get onto the actually details of the meeting which quite often is lacking. If those who post those sort of reviews took a step back and read through what they were posting and just think does it actually give enough info to be of value.

I don't know what would put people off posting, and never claimed to. But I can offer a view as to why some posters might be put off - and I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that lurkers, potential contributors, might read some of the responses to other new posters contributions and decide against it. As I've said above, this is an intimidating place. It was for me, still is in some respects. Coming on here to talk about very private and intimate topics with total strangers is going to be, and that's before you're also dealing with seasoned posters who've long-forgotten their own first day nerves (if they ever had them) digging them out at the first opportunity.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just more sensitive to it as a relative newcomer.

[Cullen]

So you’re not actually annoyed about new users being picked on or aggressive comments, what actually drives you crazy is people writing about what drives them crazy?

?

I've said in every post on this thread what 'drives me crazy'.

[stampjones]

?

I've said in every post on this thread what 'drives me crazy'.

Indeed you have, and yet your complaint against Sparkus is that he wrote what drives him crazy?

[Cullen]

Your reviews show that there is no need to say something like "first review be gentle" and it is annoying.

I think there's plenty of things more piss-boiling than a nervous newbie asking for forgiveness when offering up their first review to the forum. The attitude of some of the more long-standing posters to those newbies, for one.

And before someone gets the wrong end of the stick again - I'm not referring to how people have treated me.

[Cullen]

Indeed you have, and yet your complaint against Sparkus is that he wrote what drives him crazy?

Yes, but I'm taking issue with more than that, as my posts here show.

[sparkus]

Seeing as both you and Dave took something from that paragraph that I didn't intend perhaps I could've explained myself better there!

I wasn't suggesting that anyone took exception to anything in that review (or anything in any of my postings). I was pointing out to a poster (Sparkus - who said their pissed was boiled when they see newbies asking for forgiveness), that I did that in my first review, why I did it and why I couldn't see why anyone would be fuming about me asking for forgiveness in advance of my review.

I'd obviously touched a raw nerve there but on the other hand I do appreciate you actually taking the time to state why you prefaced your own first review with such a comment.

The "boils my piss" comment of mine here was perhaps a little in jest (hey, it's my "special kind of personality"), but what I was getting it is that it's fast becoming a trite and repetitive way to start first reviews when it's very doubtful that anyone would take exception to the contents.

There are far more egregious sinners on here, as others have detailed, such as:

- people who can't be bothered to include basic details in their reviews (and as I've said before, it actually does boil my piss when they don't bother to include a physical description or refer to resemblance to profile pics e.g. 'She had a great figure' - even then if I pull people up about that I do it gently and constructively)
- people who've been silent members of the site for years and whose sole contribution is a request for intel after all that time (a number of them recently)

We've also had one member state this week that he doesn't feel the need to review his positive experiences with WGs, just the negative ones.  Bully for you, keep them all for yourself!

[sparkus]

I think there's plenty of things more piss-boiling than a nervous newbie asking for forgiveness when offering up their first review to the forum. The attitude of some of the more long-standing posters to those newbies, for one.

And before someone gets the wrong end of the stick again - I'm not referring to how people have treated me.

Sorry, but what do you have to be "nervous" about? It's an anonymous forum.  You're not having your homework marked in front of the class.  If anyone criticised my reviews then I'd take the criticism on board if justified and I'd tell them to take a running jump if not, in fact in my first review on here there was a lot of debate about issues of trust etc. https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=139716.0

[daviemac]

I think there's plenty of things more piss-boiling than a nervous newbie asking for forgiveness when offering up their first review to the forum. The attitude of some of the more long-standing posters to those newbies, for one.

And before someone gets the wrong end of the stick again - I'm not referring to how people have treated me.

I'll tell you what is starting to 'boil my piss' and that is yet another newbie coming on and whinging about what they perceive to be wrong with the site.

You have never stopped talking about what you think will affect other members but does not affect you and in doing so are insinuating the site is not moderated efficiently.

[Liverpool]

Cullen refers to those members who dig out other members for not reviewing or questioning reviews.

On reviews I take them as read and as a forum helper, if the detail isn't there, I will ask for the details. I've never given anyone a hard time for missed details (as far as I can remember).

As for leeches I will dig them out. If you've been a member for a couple of years and all 6 posts are questions or trying to organise a MMF meet that will never be referred to again on UKP, then I will ask where their review is.

When I joined UKP I saw it as a 2 way street, you take away information, you give it back through reviews or whatever. Hopefully I have done that and will look to continue to do that.

[Marmalade]

Yes, but I'm taking issue with more than that, as my posts here show.

You’re getting far too emotional mate. Just take a step back and put down the spade.

Honestly, nobody cares that much about personalities. (Well, except maybe you, at the moment, but it’ll pass). What counts is whether a poster is contributing material that people find valuable. What do I care if Sparkus is the grumpiest cunt on the forum (he’s not by the way) if he posts stuff I find useful?

If you think someone’s being a piss-head on a thread just ignore them.

I understand what you mean about all this ‘oh so personal’ stuff but you’ll get over that too. It’ll sink in that stuff on here is useful, can save you money and get you better punts, and most of that stuff was ‘personal’ to the guy who wrote it. So common decency persuades to contribute in kind. The stuff that we call “personal” is any details that could personally identify you. For security sake, don’t post that. Post stuff about the prossie, a link so we know who you’re on about, how much, how long, and if you enjoyed it. Personal facts about her in her role as a prossie. Not you.

Ok? Now settle in and leave the bellyaching and opinions about the forum until you’ve found your feet a bit more. Or you’ll look a bit of a pratt.

Just trying to help you out a bit buddy. Hope you don’t take it the wrong way. 

[Cunning Punt]

I don't think they will be offended.
Because they most probably have a genuine reason for not contributing.
EG Fear of being caught out, worried in case this website gets hacked, joining this forum but not punting, not being confident in writing reviews, embarrassment in paying for sex etc.
Not sticking up for them, I'm just guessing.

Those are excuses not genuine reasons. There is no reason for members not to contribute.

This is an anonymous forum and members won't get caught out by posting basic info - just don't put personal info that identifies yourself. Writing basic reviews is not difficult; just read previous reviews and put the essentials, then take advice when it is given without taking it too personally even it is on the firm side.

So to answer the OP's question: some will be, others won't but that's irrelevant because the fact is they are leeches so deserve to be called that. And, frankly, who gives a shit if they are offended? Good if they are!

[LLPunting]

...
Honestly, nobody cares that much about personalities. (Well, except maybe you, at the moment, but it’ll pass). What counts is whether a poster is contributing material that people find valuable. What do I care if Sparkus is the grumpiest cunt on the forum (he’s not by the way) if he posts stuff I find useful?
...

Sparkus? Grumpy?  He probably farts more aggressively than he posts!
Thanks for the askance acknowledgment BTW 

[Cullen]

Reading back over my comments last night, I could've perhaps been a tad more diplomatic in my choice of words, and I apologise to anyone who may have been put out by them, particularly sparkus and LLPunting, who are both valuable contributors. I also apologise to Dave for any suggestion the forum isn't being moderated properly. Any complaint about how individuals present themselves isn't meant as a criticism of the site itself, and I say this as someone who's modded and helped out on other, unrelated forums in the past.

I do understand the need to get members contributing as a site like this relies on people chipping in and not just relying on the efforts of others. Since I joined at the turn of the year I've tried to contribute where I can, not just in proper reviews but in other posts on threads like the Olde Axe and the Soho ones where I've talked about my adventures and the girls I've met. I do this because I realise this place is an invaluable resource for my punting needs and I'm not a leech!

I also understand why some posters get frustrated when others don't contribute or follow the rules etc. I guess my gripe coming into this thread was that I'd seen a lot of instances of 'newbies' getting what I would call unnecessary stick and also being treated differently for being new members - something I'd come across elsewhere and, as I said above, something I am perhaps more (too) sensitive to than others due to my own status on here - and that this treatment (how I perceive it at least) of newcomers could be counter-productive in putting them off from contributing at all if they feel intimidated. Again, I'm not referring to how I've been treated, which has been fine.

I've laid out my thoughts on this subject and don't really want to discuss it any further. If others disagree then great, debate is what this forum is about after all, after the important business of finding out what SPs take a facial for less than £120 and if they've got suspiciously big hands.

[Malvolio]

Given what this site is about, there's bound to be plenty of banter / testosterone flying around.  Just remember it's only words on a screen - nobody knows or cares who you actually are.

[seeker]

Sharing is caring 
If your willing to take you should also be willing to give ,
If none of us shared our punting experiences
There would be no ukp
And that would be a sad day .

[sparkus]

Sharing is caring 
If your willing to take you should also be willing to give ,
If none of us shared our punting experiences
There would be no ukp
And that would be a sad day .

Some examples of recent refusals to review:

- won't review rub and tug experiences because they're not punts (even mods couldn't persuade him otherwise)
- only wants to post his negative experiences as warnings for others, too busy to post positive ones

[cotton]

Reading back over my comments last night, I could've perhaps been a tad more diplomatic in my choice of words, and I apologise to anyone who may have been put out by them, particularly sparkus and LLPunting, who are both valuable contributors. I also apologise to Dave for any suggestion the forum isn't being moderated properly. Any complaint about how individuals present themselves isn't meant as a criticism of the site itself, and I say this as someone who's modded and helped out on other, unrelated forums in the past.

I do understand the need to get members contributing as a site like this relies on people chipping in and not just relying on the efforts of others. Since I joined at the turn of the year I've tried to contribute where I can, not just in proper reviews but in other posts on threads like the Olde Axe and the Soho ones where I've talked about my adventures and the girls I've met. I do this because I realise this place is an invaluable resource for my punting needs and I'm not a leech!

I also understand why some posters get frustrated when others don't contribute or follow the rules etc. I guess my gripe coming into this thread was that I'd seen a lot of instances of 'newbies' getting what I would call unnecessary stick and also being treated differently for being new members - something I'd come across elsewhere and, as I said above, something I am perhaps more (too) sensitive to than others due to my own status on here - and that this treatment (how I perceive it at least) of newcomers could be counter-productive in putting them off from contributing at all if they feel intimidated. Again, I'm not referring to how I've been treated, which has been fine.

I've laid out my thoughts on this subject and don't really want to discuss it any further. If others disagree then great, debate is what this forum is about after all, after the important business of finding out what SPs take a facial for less than £120 and if they've got suspiciously big hands.

But is it unnecessary stick  ?  When registration was re-opened its well known the forum implemented a policy of making new members feel welcome and the usual banter was proatcively discouraged to help new members feel welcome and integrate , and thats great but now if any member, new or old gets stick they probably deserve it, otherwise why would they get stick.
Also about members feeling nervous and intimidated , its only an internet forum , its not like Greta Thunberg aged 15 giving a speech at the United Nations Climate Change Conference is it, id guess a more likely reason for members not contributing is that they just cant be bothered , blaming the boisterous nature of the forum for detering non contributors from contributing to me seems like fishing for excuses rather than anything founded in reality.

[FLYING BLUE]

I'll tell you what is starting to 'boil my piss' and that is yet another newbie coming on and whinging about what they perceive to be wrong with the site.

You have never stopped talking about what you think will affect other members but does not affect you and in doing so are insinuating the site is not moderated efficiently.

Yep, exactly this

[Marmalade]

I'll tell you what is starting to 'boil my piss' and that is yet another newbie coming on and whinging about what they perceive to be wrong with the site.

You have never stopped talking about what you think will affect other members but does not affect you and in doing so are insinuating the site is not moderated efficiently.

Exactly. Any other forum where a newbie started bellyaching on and on about what was ‘unfair’ would be given short fucking shrift.

To the current miscreants one might politely enquire,
 what part of ‘kindly shut the fuck up till you have something fucking useful to fucking say’ do you not quite fucking understand??

No offence. 



On a more general note, I personally feel the country has enough people looking for reasons to be offended. Poor affected leeches suffering emotional trauma at perceived as such tend to join Mumsnet to whine about “that awful UKP site”. 
Wtf do they want? A free link?   

Love n peace blahblahblah 

[contentguy]

Reading back over my comments last night, I could've perhaps been a tad more diplomatic in my choice of words, and I apologise to anyone who may have been put out by them, particularly sparkus and LLPunting, who are both valuable contributors. I also apologise to Dave for any suggestion the forum isn't being moderated properly. Any complaint about how individuals present themselves isn't meant as a criticism of the site itself, and I say this as someone who's modded and helped out on other, unrelated forums in the past.

I do understand the need to get members contributing as a site like this relies on people chipping in and not just relying on the efforts of others. Since I joined at the turn of the year I've tried to contribute where I can, not just in proper reviews but in other posts on threads like the Olde Axe and the Soho ones where I've talked about my adventures and the girls I've met. I do this because I realise this place is an invaluable resource for my punting needs and I'm not a leech!

I also understand why some posters get frustrated when others don't contribute or follow the rules etc. I guess my gripe coming into this thread was that I'd seen a lot of instances of 'newbies' getting what I would call unnecessary stick and also being treated differently for being new members - something I'd come across elsewhere and, as I said above, something I am perhaps more (too) sensitive to than others due to my own status on here - and that this treatment (how I perceive it at least) of newcomers could be counter-productive in putting them off from contributing at all if they feel intimidated. Again, I'm not referring to how I've been treated, which has been fine.

I've laid out my thoughts on this subject and don't really want to discuss it any further. If others disagree then great, debate is what this forum is about after all, after the important business of finding out what SPs take a facial for less than £120 and if they've got suspiciously big hands.

I can't help thinking that with your experience of 'modding and helping out' on other sites, you'd realise you'd be better off STFU rather than writing apology essays.

You essentially criticised existing members for berating new members for contributing reviews.
You haven't cited an example and are not affected by this yourself.

I can't recall a recent incident of what you cite.
If it did happen, I'd anticipate the new poster being defended by the membership if he'd made a genuine attempt to contribute.

Just sayin' 

[contentguy]

I've laid out my thoughts on this subject and don't really want to discuss it any further. If others disagree then great, debate is what this forum is about after all, after the important business of finding out what SPs take a facial for less than £120 and if they've got suspiciously big hands.

Talking about boiling piss, this type of response does it for me.

The translation is "I've laid out my thoughts on this subject, made a bit (ok quite  alot) of a twat of myself and wish you'd all change the subject (PLEASE)."