Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: Sugar daddy  (Read 5866 times)

Offline topchicken

I have never tried one of those sugar daddy websites, perhaps i should? But i have advistised on the line for a friend with benifit type of arrangement. And it kinda worked out. what been other peoples experiences?

i found ingeneral the sex is much better , i think maybe because the ladies in question are just doing on the side. so there is perhaps excitement on both sides

Offline Blue Moon

That's one helluva contribution after 4 years of membership! Or have I missed something....?    Bm

Offline topchicken

ok the post counting police have me banged to rites  :sarcastic:

Offline tesla

ok the post counting police have me banged to rites  :sarcastic:

4 years 3 posts and sweet fa by way of contribution to the site...leech

Offline topchicken

the ironic thing about all this, although it true what you say, but when i finally have something to contribute, i thought people might have some questions about a subject which is not covered and i been trying out, its at that point you get mad. if i just shut the fuck up i be fine  :diablo:

Online lewisjones23

your post is hardly contributing

it has been covered a thousand times before

Offline tesla

the ironic thing about all this, although it true what you say, but when i finally have something to contribute, i thought people might have some questions about a subject which is not covered and i been trying out, its at that point you get mad. if i just shut the fuck up i be fine  :diablo:
if you shut up you would still be a leech

 you are not contributing, just asking questions, sugar daddy relationships have been discussed for years on here so go leech on SA
« Last Edit: May 05, 2021, 01:33:05 pm by tesla »

Offline boltonagain

That's one helluva contribution after 4 years of membership! Or have I missed something....?    Bm

Hardly surprising people are wary of posting when they see others that do being met with this pedantic self important shite, do you spend all day checking everyone that’s posted’s posting history, how sad is that

Offline tesla

Hardly surprising people are wary of posting when they see others that do being met with this pedantic self important shite, do you spend all day checking everyone that’s posted’s posting history, how sad is that

try reading the rules:

27 Lurking / Dormant Accounts
Members that do not contribute Reviews or where their accounts become dormant may have their membership revoked.

the OP has been a member for 4 years and posted 3 times, thats is leeching

full rules here:
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=252680.0

Offline boltonagain

That doesn’t mean jump on everyone when they do post, there seems to be a clique who waste a big percentage of their posts on commenting on others posting history. I find the fact they spend time clicking and checking every posters history sad at best, and downright weird at worst.

Online lewisjones23

That doesn’t mean jump on everyone when they do post, there seems to be a clique who waste a big percentage of their posts on commenting on others posting history. I find the fact they spend time clicking and checking every posters history sad at best, and downright weird at worst.

how do you know what sort of percentage of posts have been checking up on others etc if you havent been doing the same?  :cool:

Offline boltonagain

I haven’t checked a single one because it’s of no interest to me as I’m not a self important, self appointed forum police watchdog. Hence I do not feel the need to comment on other people’s activity.
I find it very difficult you have only checked the one poster who happens to be the one who’s activity is limited. The amount of posts hijacked by people commenting about how many posts people have made is bizarre.

Offline Access

I haven’t checked a single one because it’s of no interest to me as I’m not a self important, self appointed forum police watchdog. Hence I do not feel the need to comment on other people’s activity.
I find it very difficult you have only checked the one poster who happens to be the one who’s activity is limited. The amount of posts hijacked by people commenting about how many posts people have made is bizarre.
I agree. If leeching is against the rules then these accounts that are dormant should just get deleted.

Offline boltonagain

That makes perfect sense, on a forum not everyone is as forthcoming so decide whether you want them on or not. If you don't then like you say delete them, if you do then cut out the childish researching and outing of peoples history.

Offline Kool Keef

That makes perfect sense, on a forum not everyone is as forthcoming so decide whether you want them on or not. If you don't then like you say delete them, if you do then cut out the childish researching and outing of peoples history.

It's perfectly reasonable for long standing, non contributing members to be pulled up on their lack of effort in contributing to the site.
This is an information sharing site, if we all cba to actively contribute & just log in to read and/or occasionally ask questions then this site would be dead.

Offline tesla

That makes perfect sense, on a forum not everyone is as forthcoming so decide whether you want them on or not. If you don't then like you say delete them, if you do then cut out the childish researching and outing of peoples history.

the only people that can expel people of the site are the owners and the mods
the rest of only have the option of calling out the non contributors. don't contribute then face the backlash

its not outing when the posting history is available for all to see

Offline boltonagain

Like access said delete the accounts then, the whole self important checking and outing is weird. On any forum you’ll get widely varying levels of engagement but all make up the user base, if you want to limit that to only those that contribute frequently then delete the ones you don’t want.

Offline tesla

Like access said delete the accounts then, the whole self important checking and outing is weird. On any forum you’ll get widely varying levels of engagement but all make up the user base, if you want to limit that to only those that contribute frequently then delete the ones you don’t want.

I don't have that power to expel people, but as I said before members are expected to contribute and if they don't then the other contributing members have the right to call them out, if you don't like it then you have the right to express your opinion as I have mine

Offline nearlypastit1234

Can any recommend any good Sugar Daddy sites. As I'm mature in years I'm not looking for young girls. I'd like 30 yrs plus please. Your help would be appreciatted

Offline tesla

Can any recommend any good Sugar Daddy sites. As I'm mature in years I'm not looking for young girls. I'd like 30 yrs plus please. Your help would be appreciatted
try contributing more to the site before asking for help, you will get a much better response

Offline boltonagain

Haha surely you saw that coming  :D :D


Offline nearlypastit1234

I won't ask anymore if that's the reply a new member gets.

Offline NigelF

So much anger :bomb:

Who? The “angriest” person in this thread is boltonagain but to call him angry would still be a stretch.

I won't ask anymore if that's the reply a new member gets.

Yes, that’s what he wants you to do until you contribute more but I notice you’ve not addressed that contribution part of his post because if you do that then clearly he has no issue with you asking.

Since you have actually contributed some helpful info, I will answer your question and give you some good advice (and by extension the OP and the lurkers reading this, who admittedly don’t “deserve” such help):
Can any recommend any good Sugar Daddy sites. As I'm mature in years I'm not looking for young girls. I'd like 30 yrs plus please. Your help would be appreciatted

Firstly, you should put some effort into finding out such info for yourself because as others have said, there is plenty of info on this topic throughout this site. The quickest and easiest way is to browse the topics that are under the category “sugar daddy”. You can find the link to that and the other categories on the UKP home page below the News section and above the Announcements section. It says: “ Filter by category: Massage Sugar Daddy Transsexual”
Click on sugar daddy, here is the direct link:
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?action=categories;name=sugardaddy

Alternatively you can just use the search function and I recommend you get good at using it because it’s very helpful.

However to save you even more time, the general consensus answer to your question (I know because there are so many posts on here addressing your question) is that seeking.com (formerly known as Seeking Arrangement aka SA) is the best sugar daddy site because it has by far the most members (including women aged 30 and over) and many of the girls on other sites are also on seeking. It’s likely that only if you’ve exhausted all your options on seeking.com that other sites would be worthwhile (but still less worthwhile in comparison).
« Last Edit: May 05, 2021, 07:08:54 pm by NigelF »

Offline tesla

So much anger :bomb:

wow is that the best you can do for a second post, you joined the site in 2017 and no contribution since, you could not even be bothered to thank those that replied to your first post

just another leech

Offline Morefun

As a relative newcomer to this site, it is interesting to read comments made by regulars who have issues with longstanding members who never contribute.  I must admit if the rules state you can be booted out so be it.

However, it might be worthwhile for the powers that be to make that clear so that the rule can be applied. It might also be useful to break down the membership into percentage groups showing what the percentage is for the most contributions down to the ones who never make one.  I do wonder how many people make regular posts as the same names keep appearing.

Before anyone asks, as soon as I return to punting in eleven days I will be posting reports. 

Offline Richthescouser

As a relative newcomer to this site, it is interesting to read comments made by regulars who have issues with longstanding members who never contribute.  I must admit if the rules state you can be booted out so be it.

However, it might be worthwhile for the powers that be to make that clear so that the rule can be applied. It might also be useful to break down the membership into percentage groups showing what the percentage is for the most contributions down to the ones who never make one.  I do wonder how many people make regular posts as the same names keep appearing.

Before anyone asks, as soon as I return to punting in eleven days I will be posting reports.

The way I see it is that people leeching and not contributing add nothing to the site, but cause issues (booking in to see good new girls, making it harder for others to get a booking). Given the lack of advertising, the leeches are a cost to the site with no payback. Those who post reviews and useful information add value to the site. I know I don’t give recommendations to people who haven’t helped the wider site, and have messaged people with recommendations and info when we both like the same kind of girl but don’t want the leeches to find out about them.

Offline tesla

As a relative newcomer to this site, it is interesting to read comments made by regulars who have issues with longstanding members who never contribute.  I must admit if the rules state you can be booted out so be it.

However, it might be worthwhile for the powers that be to make that clear so that the rule can be applied.

not sure which bit is not clear, read rule 1 and rule 27

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=252680.0

Offline Numberone

Just stop being leeches and contribute. Make the site a better place. Either you don’t punt in which case why are you on here, or you do punt in which case why aren’t you contributing.
Either way, please stop leeching and help make the site better, more informed decisions and better punts for all.

Offline CoolTiger

  • Forum Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,030
  • Likes: 6
  • Reviews: 10
As a relative newcomer to this site, it is interesting to read comments made by regulars who have issues with longstanding members who never contribute.  I must admit if the rules state you can be booted out so be it.

However, it might be worthwhile for the powers that be to make that clear so that the rule can be applied. It might also be useful to break down the membership into percentage groups showing what the percentage is for the most contributions down to the ones who never make one.  I do wonder how many people make regular posts as the same names keep appearing.

Before anyone asks, as soon as I return to punting in eleven days I will be posting reports. 

not sure which bit is not clear, read rule 1 and rule 27

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=252680.0

1 Site ethos/mission
This Forum puts the interests of Punters first through the sharing of Reviews. The Forum does not endorse or promote any service provider or any other site. This site is totally independent. No favouritism, no special treatment, no vested interests and no pandering to service providers. Members are expected to post Reviews, although there is no formal quota (see rule 27). General chat relating to Punting is allowed on the appropriate Board.

27 Lurking / Dormant Accounts
Members that do not contribute Reviews or where their accounts become dormant may have their membership revoked.

Offline Sadd87

Hardly surprising people are wary of posting when they see others that do being met with this pedantic self important shite, do you spend all day checking everyone that’s posted’s posting history, how sad is that
Hear fucking hear, well said!

Offline Sadd87

That doesn’t mean jump on everyone when they do post, there seems to be a clique who waste a big percentage of their posts on commenting on others posting history. I find the fact they spend time clicking and checking every posters history sad at best, and downright weird at worst.
1805 posts and I'd bet 99% would be moaning at other users.

Offline scutty brown

I have never tried one of those sugar daddy websites, perhaps i should? ..................i found ingeneral the sex is much better................

Never tried it but you find the sex is better?
Bit confused aren't you?

Offline scutty brown

the ironic thing about all this, although it true what you say, but when i finally have something to contribute, i thought people might have some questions about a subject which is not covered and i been trying out, its at that point you get mad. if i just shut the fuck up i be fine  :diablo:

Problem is, you haven't contributed anything worthwhile.
The whole SA/SB thing is actively discussed in existing threads, no need to create another. While in your initial post in this thread you contradict yourself over whether you've been involved in such activity or not.
Come up with a post that doesn't smell of BS and you might get a response

Offline NigelF

Hardly surprising people are wary of posting when they see others that do being met with this pedantic self important shite

The people “wary of posting” are a vanishingly small number of lurkers. The vast majority don’t post because they can’t be bothered. The same is true for pretty much all other internet forums (most of which have a higher percentage of lurkers, which also flies in the face of what you suggest) - see the internet 1% rule. Those few who are wary/put off aren’t the type of people who are likely to become helpful contributors. When people read the comments you describe, the correct reaction should be along the lines of “Oh I should post something helpful before trying to gain even more info from this site” and doubly so if you’ve been leeching for a long time. Indeed this is the reaction that many contributors on this site had when they first encountered such posts while lurking, myself included. It’s why my 2nd ever post was a review. I can also point to numerous others who’s first posts have been helpful contributions or even reviews, indeed there are some very recent examples in the North West review section. There’s no good reason why leeches can’t be like those members.

with this pedantic self important shite,

I don’t know why you’re under this delusion. It’s simply about calling out leeches and encouraging them (plus the lurkers reading) to actually contribute something helpful. There is however room for debate about how best to go about that.

That doesn’t mean jump on everyone when they do post,
Many of them won’t even have read the rules so it’s good to inform them. It’s also good to encourage people to contribute something useful and one way of doing that is calling people out as leeches.

I do think the indirect snipes and the pure insults aren’t necessarily the best way (even though almost all of those being insulted surely can’t factually disagree with the insult and the nature of the insult/snipe makes it obvious what they should do if they don’t want to be “attacked”) hence I personally prefer calling out someone’s history (much more specific and justified than a generic insult) and then pointing out the rules.

do you spend all day checking everyone that’s posted’s posting history, how sad is that
1805 posts and I'd bet 99% would be moaning at other users.

I know you’re both being hyperbolic but such statements are so detached from reality that thinking anything close to them is just delusional.

I find the fact they spend time clicking and checking every posters history sad at best, and downright weird at worst.

Stating someone’s length of membership, post count and the helpfulness of those posts is very relevant when accusing someone of being a leech because it can make such an accusation much more justified.

there seems to be a clique who waste a big percentage of their posts on commenting on others posting history.

You’re talking bollocks but at least thanks to lewisjones you’ve now admitted that you have no evidence to back up your claim:
I haven’t checked a single one because it’s of no interest to me

I find it very difficult you have only checked the one poster who happens to be the one who’s activity is limited.

First you said they spend all day looking at others’ history, then you said it was a big percentage of their posts, now you’re just saying they’ve probably done it more than once. Way to backtrack!

Like access said delete the accounts then, the whole self important checking and outing is weird. On any forum you’ll get widely varying levels of engagement but all make up the user base, if you want to limit that to only those that contribute frequently then delete the ones you don’t want.

tesla has already explained very well to you. To add my own take, I don’t want leeches to be banned immediately, I want them to be made aware of the rules and warned of the imminent consequences if they don’t comply - in the the hope that they do start contributing soon.

The mods, particularly CoolTiger, are doing a good job of this but it takes a lot of time and effort so if members can have a similar effect then that’s great.

Offline Stevelondon

Hear fucking hear, well said!

It’s not well said. It says absolutely nothing and as such. Adds nothing to this forum.
There are rules that can be read. People should read them before posting.
The ethos of UKP has been laid out a trillion times (alright slight exaggeration). Contribute more and you will almost certainly be assisted when asking questions of help.
But just to read stuff and add sweet FA brings nothing to the table and will, rightly so in my opinion. Get the rebuffs it deserves.

It is all so very simple.

Online hungrypunt

seekingarrangement.com (seeking.com)
secretbenefits.com
sugardaddy.com
sugardaddy.co.uk
whatsyourprice.com

the king of them all is Seeking Arrangement.
can be hard work trawling through and sometimes you are juggling many numbers but I find its very handy, especially if you hit it off with the "right one" or 2. Ive been at it almost 9 years an dit has gone downhill past 2 or 3. If you want a guaranteed service (albeit not always) Then AW/VS etc punting or parlours are the way.

If you have time and money to play the long game, with decent students, bored wives etc, and benefit them with $$ then SD/SB arrangements can work well for both.
2 different levels of punting tbh...1 amatuer and 1 pro.
then when you get going you my need a hand from

External Link/Members Only
or
External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only


come back and add to the varying seeking sugar daddy threads on here
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=244630.0

« Last Edit: July 10, 2022, 05:13:20 pm by hungrypunt »

Online T13

Not defending it, but first time I posted here I got helled. I was lurking for about two months posted a few posts and got abused for it by a mod to.
Hence new account. There needs to be a bit of a balance, yes 4 years is too long not to contribute. However we need to go a bit easy on some genuine maybe first time punters