Duo Reviews

[hendrix]

Gents

How should a duo review be formatted where one girl is nearly always going to be the same regular, and the other (s) are a TOFTT?

No reference at all to the known girl assuming standards are the same? Or just post a review as normal and ignore any complaints about too many reviews of the same girl? (these typically, but not always, come from rival prossies/pimps posing as punters here) - obviously don't care what the pimps think, but want to make sure that actual punters get the information.

[johnny34]

Gents

How should a duo review be formatted where one girl is nearly always going to be the same regular, and the other (s) are a TOFTT?

No reference at all to the known girl assuming standards are the same? Or just post a review as normal and ignore any complaints about too many reviews of the same girl? (these typically, but not always, come from rival prossies/pimps posing as punters here) - obviously don't care what the pimps think, but want to make sure that actual punters get the information.

Just post it as normal 

[smiths]

Gents

How should a duo review be formatted where one girl is nearly always going to be the same regular, and the other (s) are a TOFTT?

No reference at all to the known girl assuming standards are the same? Or just post a review as normal and ignore any complaints about too many reviews of the same girl? (these typically, but not always, come from rival prossies/pimps posing as punters here) - obviously don't care what the pimps think, but want to make sure that actual punters get the information.

Just post as usual but make it clear 1 of the WGs is a regular you have reviewed before, but that was either a 121 or with another WG.

[vw]

Gents

How should a duo review be formatted where one girl is nearly always going to be the same regular, and the other (s) are a TOFTT?

No reference at all to the known girl assuming standards are the same? Or just post a review as normal and ignore any complaints about too many reviews of the same girl? (these typically, but not always, come from rival prossies/pimps posing as punters here) - obviously don't care what the pimps think, but want to make sure that actual punters get the information.

I prefer reviews written for punters not aware of the girl could be the first review he has read about the other girl.  Reviews are supposed to be useful and telling a punter to look at other reviews while on yours is unhelpful IMO.

Reviews that refer to looking at profile, photos or other reviews are lazy IMO.
.

[hendrix]

All points noted - thanks gents

[threechilliman]

I've done a number of FFM/MMF/MMFF's with the same SP in Manchester and reviewed all of them as I feel each is a different punt. The two things that immediately spring to mind which benefit other punters are:-

1. It allows you to judge whether her service is consistent in different situations. An incidental benefit here is that if so, it gives a punter the option to bring in another girl and have some confidence it won't faze her.

2. A punter might fancy the idea of seeing her with one of the girls but not necessarily one of the others. Or he might have a punting pal he wants to take along and be confident of having a good time.

I very nearly brought her together with another girl I'd seen but found out (from her) that someone else had already done it and she reckoned the other girl wasn't too keen on the girl on girl stuff. 240 quid saved..... thanks whoever you are.

[hendrix]

I've done a number of FFM/MMF/MMFF's with the same SP in Manchester and reviewed all of them as I feel each is a different punt. The two things that immediately spring to mind which benefit other punters are:-

1. It allows you to judge whether her service is consistent in different situations. An incidental benefit here is that if so, it gives a punter the option to bring in another girl and have some confidence it won't faze her.

2. A punter might fancy the idea of seeing her with one of the girls but not necessarily one of the others. Or he might have a punting pal he wants to take along and be confident of having a good time.

I very nearly brought her together with another girl I'd seen but found out (from her) that someone else had already done it and she reckoned the other girl wasn't too keen on the girl on girl stuff. 240 quid saved..... thanks whoever you are.

That's my take on it but some people take that as touting. Which is ironic.. In some cases

[vw]

That's my take on it but some people take that as touting. Which is ironic.. In some cases

Have not seen clarke post much lately.  Must of appreciated my stats breakdown.   

[hendrix]

Have not seen clarke post much lately.  Must of appreciated my stats breakdown.   

  - I'm sure his "darling" has him on a short leash!

[hayneplane]

I would say each and every review should be as comprehensive as possible, you should not need to cross reference to another report in order to get the full picture.

[mrhappypants]

Hendrix,

You and I have "discussed" this subject before.  If you care for my opinion I would suggest two things.

1) Be careful about including a link to a previously reviewed WG in your review of the duo because of the impact that this has on her aggregate.  By way of example I suspect that a high proportion of KDD's positive ratings come from your write up of duo's.  No aspersion intended, I suggest that  this is not the same as each of those positive ratings being gathered from separate reviews by different fuckers on the board.

2) To the reader who does not know the girl, a detailed, objective description of physique and looks is invaluable, particularly where the profile lacks informative pictures.

I hope it helps.

[threechilliman]

1) Be careful about including a link to a previously reviewed WG in your review of the duo because of the impact that this has on her aggregate.  By way of example I suspect that a high proportion of KDD's positive ratings come from your write up of duo's.  No aspersion intended, I suggest that  this is not the same as each of those positive ratings being gathered from separate reviews by different fuckers on the board.

I don't agree with that. I'd prefer it linked so I can read ALL the reviews, be they 1-2-1's, duo's or whatever else. I could then make my own mind up. Even girls with lots of green reviews fall short sometimes, as I found out.......

[hendrix]

Hendrix,

You and I have "discussed" this subject before.  If you care for my opinion I would suggest two things.

1) Be careful about including a link to a previously reviewed WG in your review of the duo because of the impact that this has on her aggregate.  By way of example I suspect that a high proportion of KDD's positive ratings come from your write up of duo's.  No aspersion intended, I suggest that  this is not the same as each of those positive ratings being gathered from separate reviews by different fuckers on the board.

2) To the reader who does not know the girl, a detailed, objective description of physique and looks is invaluable, particularly where the profile lacks informative pictures.

I hope it helps.

Indeed we have and yes of course I value your opinion as a genuine and experienced punter.

The KDD/other scenario is exactly what I'm thinking about so this is useful.

[mrhappypants]

Hendix 

I don't agree with that. I'd prefer it linked so I can read ALL the reviews, be they 1-2-1's, duo's or whatever else. I could then make my own mind up. Even girls with lots of green reviews fall short sometimes, as I found out.......

It's a good point.

I am increasingly aware that the aggregate is EXTREMELY powerful.  The contribution of the rating to the aggregate  and the effect of including the link in duo reviews on individual WG's aggregate is my concern.  I think we may need to revise the guidance about ratings in the report writing guide on the wiki.   

As a workaround, do you think it acceptable to include links to WG's AW profile in a reply to the review (when you have written a previous solo review)?  This would then bring up the thread with a search in the tool bar but without including it in the aggregate.

I don't underestimate the difficulty of implimenting this - but carving out effective practice is the first step and building the integrity of the aggregate is worth the effort.

[vw]

It's a good point.

I am increasingly aware that the aggregate is EXTREMELY powerful.  The contribution of the rating to the aggregate  and the effect of including the link in duo reviews on individual WG's aggregate is my concern.  I think we may need to revise the guidance about ratings in the report writing guide on the wiki.   

As a workaround, do you think it acceptable to include links to WG's AW profile in a reply to the review (when you have written a previous solo review)?  This would then bring up the thread with a search in the tool bar but without including it in the aggregate.

I don't underestimate the difficulty of implimenting this - but carving out effective practice is the first step and building the integrity of the aggregate is worth the effort.

the aggregate is determined by the indexing that everyone helps with these days, nothing to do with links in the body of the review.   

[mrhappypants]

the aggregate is determined by the indexing that everyone helps with these days, nothing to do with links in the body of the review.   

OK I just learned something.  I am not a "helper" and did not realise the aggregate is compiled manually. iIt isn't quite clear to me what indexing actually involves.  If it's a manual process, it comes down to indexing policy.  Nothing's perfect but I'd suggest this for discussion at least.  I can see the interest in writing about a number of meetings (which include a favourite WG), but perhaps there is a better way of translating this to the aggregate.

[vw]

OK I just learned something.  I am not a "helper" and did not realise the aggregate is compiled manually. iIt isn't quite clear to me what indexing actually involves.

before indexing a review does not get included in the list of reviews for a prossie

Involves putting the aw number into the index form field, press the button then hey presto its on the list of reviews for that prossie and included in the review count.

Not sure if the boss has any good suggestions for this scenario. 

He did mention his list of improvements the other day here, https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=161049.msg1740152#msg1740152