Forum Rules

[Happyjose]

Forum rules have now been posted by the new owner/admin team

This is the place to post comments etc.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=252680.msg2578720#msg2578720

[Happyjose]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

Can’t see how this should be an issue for genuine punters, particularly as the restrictions on historic reviews appear to have been lifted

[Waterhouse]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

Can’t see how this should be an issue for genuine punters, particularly as the restrictions on historic reviews appear to have been lifted

Does that include Mr.999?   

[Happyjose]

Does that include Mr.999?   

Why not?

I’ve no doubt he is or was a punter. He’s posted insights in the past that only a punter could know

[Working Wendy]

22 Privacy of service providers

Phone numbers may be posted in full 

Previously the rule was only if the number was advertised. I only have a private number which I'd issue privately to clients for their ease of convenience. E.g. if it's a few minutes before the booking start time and they can't find me it's quicker for them to phone me than send a message on adult work, wait for me to see it and reply. Do I need to stop doing this until I can sort out a work phone?

[Happyjose]

22 Privacy of service providers

Phone numbers may be posted in full 

Previously the rule was only if the number was advertised. I only have a private number which I'd issue privately to clients for their ease of convenience. E.g. if it's a few minutes before the booking start time and they can't find me it's quicker for them to phone me than send a message on adult work, wait for me to see it and reply. Do I need to stop doing this until I can sort out a work phone?

Jeez. You should definitely have a work phone, the same way a punter should have a punting phone. Discretion is the name of the game

[Global_Punter]

Review 4. " Members can post more than one review about an SP " - seems to be a slight change from previous, when it was limited to x 1 review in 12 months.

[Working Wendy]

Jeez. You should definitely have a work phone, the same way a punter should have a punting phone. Discretion is the name of the game

Yes it's on my list of things to do, but I haven't got around to it as previously it was against site rules to publish it. Will it be reinstated or do I need to inconvenience clients until I can sort one out?

[MrMatrix]

Review 4. " Members can post more than one review about an SP " - seems to be a slight change from previous, when it was limited to x 1 review in 12 months.

Think you mean 1 positive review in 12 months. If you had a shit punt the following week you could do a second review and give it a negative

[Happyjose]

Think you mean 1 positive review in 12 months. If you had a shit punt the following week you could do a second review and give it a negative

I don’t think that previous requirement stands. Reading the new Rules more than 1 positive review can now be posted within a 12 month period, with the caveat that touts will not be tolerated

[Happyjose]

Yes it's on my list of things to do, but I haven't got around to it as previously it was against site rules to publish it. Will it be reinstated or do I need to inconvenience clients until I can sort one out?

These are the new rules. As an ordinary member, just like you, I have no special insight here.

But damn, keep your real and working life separate

[Head1]

Re Rule 6
I get loads of requests for name changes every day. Nearly all by non-posters.Its time consuming and a pain in the ass
Anyone wanting a name change has to have a least one bonafide review

[Malvolio]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

Can’t see how this should be an issue for genuine punters, particularly as the restrictions on historic reviews appear to have been lifted

The logical inference from that change is that we will be saying goodbye to the members who are WGs at some point.

[Happyjose]

The logical inference from that change is that we will be saying goodbye to the members who are WGs at some point.

Rule 2 covers that

Don’t see any contradiction

[Jock D]

11 Other punting forums
Discussion about other punting forums is not prohibited but many are often very hostile. Other forums are also anti-punter; therefore it is not in the interests of punters to give them publicity. Posting links to other sites is prohibited as is slagging off. Use your noodle.

As the new owner has no affiliation to UKE....Does this mean we can now give an honest opinion when it's inevitably mentioned on threads...without the fear of a ban, as was the case previously?

[daviemac]

11 Other punting forums
Discussion about other punting forums is not prohibited but many are often very hostile. Other forums are also anti-punter; therefore it is not in the interests of punters to give them publicity. Posting links to other sites is prohibited as is slagging off. Use your noodle.

As the new owner has no affiliation to UKE....Does this mean we can now give an honest opinion when it's inevitably mentioned on threads...without the fear of a ban, as was the case previously?

I think the highlighted part answers your own question.

[Jock D]

I think the highlighted part answers your own question.

Depends on where you draw the line between, an honest critical opinion/assessment and slagging off?

Other forums are also anti-punter; therefore it is not in the interests of punters to give them publicity.

Going by that people...usually fluffy types...shouldn't really be referring to UKE in the first place? Therefore if they do, and someone responds with a reasoned critical view, I don's see any problem with that?

[Head1]

Posting links to any other website means that the owner of that site will see all the traffic coming from this site. And then may try to cause us problems. LInks have repercussions

[daviemac]

Depends on where you draw the line between, an honest critical opinion/assessment and slagging off?

Other forums are also anti-punter; therefore it is not in the interests of punters to give them publicity.

Going by that people...usually fluffy types...shouldn't really be referring to UKE in the first place? Therefore if they do, and someone responds with a reasoned critical view, I don's see any problem with that?

If you want to insist on talking about other forums carry on and the new owner / Admin team will decide if it's reasonable or not. I've given as much advice as I can by pointing out the relevant section of the rules.

[jeanphillipe]

Posting links to any other website means that the owner of that site will see all the traffic coming from this site. And then may try to cause us problems. LInks have repercussions

Ive wondered why links were banned even got my post deleted and messaged by old admin,

This makes a lot of sense

[PatMacGroin]

Seeing as someone has started a thread about this. I posted this comment on another thread:

I notice the new rules states that Hotels used for meet-ups can be mentioned in posts/reviews:

"22 Privacy of service providers
It is generally not allowed to post personal info of service providers, such as real names and personal social networking profiles. Phone numbers may be posted in full. Hotels may be named."

I don't remember exactly what it said on the old rules, but if I recall correctly it wasn't the done thing.

That always made sense to me. Generally hotel staff are going to be on the look out for WG's, but do we want to make it easier for them to spot which ones use their establishments? With many of them adding key card entry on the lifts it's already getting more and more difficult to by pass their security arrangements.

I got a response from the moderators:

"I don't remember exactly what it said on the old rules, but if I recall correctly it wasn't the done thing."

At one time it wasn't allowed but Oldadmin abandoned it because of the way it was reported. It was too much hassle to find the name in the thread. People should have enough sense to be discrete about it.

But, I thought I would repost it here. In case anyone was wondering the same thing, or wanted to add anything.

[Up The Manor]

Review 4. " Members can post more than one review about an SP " - seems to be a slight change from previous, when it was limited to x 1 review in 12 months.

Correct. We changed the rules.

[Up The Manor]

22 Privacy of service providers

Phone numbers may be posted in full 

Previously the rule was only if the number was advertised. I only have a private number which I'd issue privately to clients for their ease of convenience. E.g. if it's a few minutes before the booking start time and they can't find me it's quicker for them to phone me than send a message on adult work, wait for me to see it and reply. Do I need to stop doing this until I can sort out a work phone?

Get a punting phone like the rest of us.

[sunnyj]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

Can’t see how this should be an issue for genuine punters, particularly as the restrictions on historic reviews appear to have been lifted

Positive reviews can be posted for meeting that happened more 12 months ago?

[cotton]

Re rule 26 - "26 Allegations of underaged /trafficked/forced sex workers
                  Contact law enforcement."
Weve recently had alot of comments in reviews suggesting certain girls are trafficking victims (in the sense of human slaves) and that they should be reported to the relevant authorities. To the extent that any EE , cheap (£80/hour), managed by someone else and giving a poor service should be "called in".
Are such comments compliant with the new forum rules or is the purport of the new rule that concerned parties should simply "Contact law enforcement" and not clutter up the forum with repetitive allegations about trafficking.

[Up The Manor]

Re rule 26 - "26 Allegations of underaged /trafficked/forced sex workers
                  Contact law enforcement."
Weve recently had alot of comments in reviews suggesting certain girls are trafficking victims (in the sense of human slaves) and that they should be reported to the relevant authorities. To the extent that any EE , cheap (£80/hour), managed by someone else and giving a poor service should be "called in".
Are such comments compliant with the new forum rules or is the purport of the new rule that concerned parties should simply "Contact law enforcement" and not clutter up the forum with repetitive allegations about trafficking.

The latter. If you have evidence of trafficking, report it to the police.

[Happyjose]

Positive reviews can be posted for meeting that happened more 12 months ago?

Do you see anything to the contrary?

[Happyjose]

From what I can see, the new rules, though an evolution of the old rules, have been carefully considered by the new owner/Admin team, and any changes deliberate.

To try and interpret them through the prism of the old rules is probably unwise. If something is no longer there (e.g. the rule on only posting 1 positive review for a WG within a 12 month period), then clearly it no longer stands.

[Doc Holliday]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

The wording of the rule is important

"Members that do not contribute Reviews or where their accounts become dormant may have their membership revoked."

That wisely allows discretion on an individual basis ie judging a member's overall contribution to the forum.

I think (but could be wrong) that it is aimed at members who, from their posts, are clearly active punters and who for example ask for specific info but then give little back in the form of reviews and that they are the main target.

This allows discretion with say retired or inactive punters, who wish to continue to be involved but of course if their accounts become dormant may then also be deleted.

In terms of dormant accounts huge numbers of people join forums and only ever logon once or sometimes never at all. Then there is the issue of those who logon regularly but never post!!

[professorlove]

Whilst I agree with all the rule changes, the rule about SP phone number being allowed when not advertised on AW should be a big no in my honest opinion.

I mean can you imagine getting through to your regular with the extra amount of calls/texts she'll get.

On a serious note it did give the SP breathing space from stalkers and harassment.
And whilst yes the SP should have a work phone, unsolicited calls/texts from punters whom have no intention of a booking etc is a pain.
And as an OP and you receive unsolicited text from a SP we normally freak out. So this needs to be seen from both perspectives even this forum is in the interests of punters only.

It's a big task keep up the good work

[Urban_G]

Thanks for the update admins, upon first read they seem to be well considered and fair.

The 'Site Rules' link at the bottom of every page doesn't work though, at least not for me.

[90125]

Whilst I agree with all the rule changes, the rule about SP phone number being allowed when not advertised on AW should be a big no in my honest opinion.

I mean can you imagine getting through to your regular with the extra amount of calls/texts she'll get.

On a serious note it did give the SP breathing space from stalkers and harassment.
And whilst yes the SP should have a work phone, unsolicited calls/texts from punters whom have no intention of a booking etc is a pain.
And as an OP and you receive unsolicited text from a SP we normally freak out. So this needs to be seen from both perspectives even this forum is in the interests of punters only.

It's a big task keep up the good work

Old Rules

- Privacy of service providers
It is generally not allowed to post personal info of service providers, such as real names and personal social networking profiles. Phone numbers may be posted in full. Hotels may be named. General description of incall locations is acceptable, but not specific house numbers and street names. Modelling, porn and media-related work are acceptable to be posted, even if it includes their real names as they actively sought publicity / higher-profile. Any news items may be posted. All aforementioned restrictions do not apply to thieves and those with criminal convictions. Past name changes are never censored, regardless of reasons.

New Rules

22 Privacy of service providers
It is generally not allowed to post personal info of service providers, such as real names and personal social networking profiles. Phone numbers may be posted in full. Hotels may be named. General description of in-call locations is acceptable, but not specific house numbers and street names. Modelling, porn and media-related work are acceptable to be posted, even if it includes their real names as they actively sought publicity / higher-profile. Any news items may be posted. All aforementioned restrictions do not apply to thieves and those with criminal convictions. Past name changes are never censored, regardless of reasons.

Am I missing something   

..... and what about AW SP's that put up "I am working when my number is displayed" how would that be moderated?

[Waterhouse]

Whilst I agree with all the rule changes, the rule about SP phone number being allowed when not advertised on AW should be a big no in my honest opinion.

I echo this sentiment... there may be a number of reasons why she'd choose not to share her number on a public site - timewasters, stalkers, she's only part-time, pests, security or personal reasons.

If girl is not advertising her number and states that coms should be via AW for new (or even returning) clients, then that ought to be respected.

Discretion is key in this pastime/line of work and should be respected and maintained on both sides punting/work phone/numbers or otherwise.

Am I missing something   

..... and what about AW SP's that put up "I am working when my number is displayed" how would that be moderated?

To that point then yes, since the SP in question does and is happy to advertise her number, just not all of the time.  IMO that presents a different case from where a girl never publishes her number openly.

 

[tynetunnel]

The rules surrounding privacy of service providers has not changed. So I don’t get all the discussion and angst. 

[Up The Manor]

Thanks for the update admins, upon first read they seem to be well considered and fair.

The 'Site Rules' link at the bottom of every page doesn't work though, at least not for me.

I’m looking into this. Did it ever work?

[Happyjose]

I’m looking into this. Did it ever work?

Yes. Think it stopped working fairly early under the new management

[Doc Holliday]

Yes. Think it stopped working fairly early under the new management

Yes it stopped working with the server move.

[Head1]

Amendment to rule 22

[datwabbit]

Depends on where you draw the line between, an honest critical opinion/assessment and slagging off?

Other forums are also anti-punter; therefore it is not in the interests of punters to give them publicity.

Going by that people...usually fluffy types...shouldn't really be referring to UKE in the first place? Therefore if they do, and someone responds with a reasoned critical view, I don's see any problem with that?

I refer to comments made by a sp on UKE where I think it's useful. If a sp mentions they're on holiday or slags off punters, I think it's worth sharing here. It builds a picture of whether you want to give her your money.

If an sp says what their favourite music is, there's no point in sharing.

The site in general I wouldn't slag off. It doesn't help anyone.

[NIK]

The most notable change seems to be the expectation that members post reviews

Can’t see how this should be an issue for genuine punters, particularly as the restrictions on historic reviews appear to have been lifted

So basically retired punters, even if they have knowledge and experience to contribute, are fucked?

[Waterhouse]

Amendment to rule 22

Makes sense.  Thanks for clarifying. 

[Happyjose]

So basically retired punters, even if they have knowledge and experience to contribute, are fucked?

Not within my gift

I would refer to Reply 28 though

[Derrick101]

Posting links to any other website means that the owner of that site will see all the traffic coming from this site. And then may try to cause us problems. LInks have repercussions

Does that include posting links in reviews, such as vivastreet, parlours, agencies etc ? Or indeed the AW links ?

[Head1]

So basically retired punters, even if they have knowledge and experience to contribute, are fucked?

Basically read rule 27

[Happyjose]

Does that include posting links in reviews, such as vivastreet, parlours, agencies etc ? Or indeed the AW links ?

Obviously not

The reference was to other punting related forums

[MrMatrix]

So basically retired punters, even if they have knowledge and experience to contribute, are fucked?

I cannot believe that Head1 would ban you for any reason bearing in mind the contribution you have made over the years and having the vision to get this forum up and running in the first place.
Those that have contributed significantly over the years and perhaps retired from punting I would hope would be reviewed more favourably. I mean this year I've done fewer punts than previous years.
The Admin team have a lot to consider at the moment and I think we should wait and see what happens, rather than jump to conclusions.
It is more unfortuneate that Oldadmin didn't do a proper hand over which really surprises me, bearing in mind the huge effort he put in over the last 9 years.

[12 MONTHS IN A YEAR]

Sorry about being a wally. You can post previous meets in the past, however, is there a maximum time, ie 5 years, you can put up reviews. Apologies If I have misread.
 

[Happyjose]

Sorry about being a wally. You can post previous meets in the past, however, is there a maximum time, ie 5 years, you can put up reviews. Apologies If I have misread.
 

No idea, but have you not seen anyone more recently?

[90125]

No idea, but have you not seen anyone more recently?

Sounds a bit strange how a review can be made after such a period.

[Happyjose]

Sounds a bit strange how a review can be made after such a period.

Can’t see how it would be of use to anybody