UKP Clients BANNED 🥴😂

[RandomGuy99]

How would someone on UKP know who you are ?

I assume they'd figured it out from my reviews on here OR there's a list somewhere on the internet that lists our names on here and our AW names or maybe they'd asked on another forum. Like I say it's not that hard to do. I think it was most likely a simp on here reporting back to their SP.

I am surprised by the amount of detail that some people on here do put in their reviews e.g. conversations they've had with the SP, very specific things that happened in the booking.

[theaccountant]

I assume they'd figured it out from my reviews on here OR there's a list somewhere on the internet that lists our names on here and our AW names or maybe they'd asked on another forum. Like I say it's not that hard to do. I think it was most likely a simp on here reporting back to their SP.

I am surprised by the amount of detail that some people on here do put in their reviews e.g. conversations they've had with the SP, very specific things that happened in the booking.

It depends on what kind of punter you are. Sure, the amount of detail in a review at times is there to give context to what happened during the booking and I've been guilty of that a few times.

But, since writing up a few reviews and being found out by two girls after I had posted reviews about them. It's best to not detail everything that happens in a booking and limit it to the quality of the services provided vs expectations from the ad. I do put some detail in the reviews, in those cases, I'm not likely to see the girl again so it doesn't hurt me much.

[Jonestown]

Ive always been bemused by how much punters get involved with AW, I just use it as a listing with phone numbers, if an SP needs you to book from inside AW or needs to check your feedback, that's just far too intrusive to me, plenty of girls with direct contact phone numbers.

[PilotMan]

How would someone on UKP know who you are ?

There are users of this forum that inform girls when they have reviews and feed them intel, they must feel as though they're gaining kudos from the SP. It happened to me after I reviewed Karinna Latina. The next time I visited her after the very positive review she said. I know you put a review up of me. I feigned ignorance, she said UKP, you're Pilotman. She clearly knew who I was. I asked her if she read UKP and she said she doesn't but two of her clients (Simps) always send her the full transcript of what's written about her.

I haven't done a review on AW for many years and I see no point in doing so.

AW is bullshit, UKP is where the real info is.

I don't see how anyone can link your AW id to your UKP id - unless of course your AW ID is the same or similar to your Username on here, that's a big mistake.

Secondly as Daviemac said, "the only way for anyone to know who you are on here is if you leave a trail or tell them yourself."

@RandomGuy99

I have over 100 reviews on here and plenty on AW - so tell me Poirot - what's my AW user name?

[Atrueyorkie]

There are users of this forum that inform girls when they have reviews and feed them intel, they must feel as though they're gaining kudos from the SP. It happened to me after I reviewed Karinna Latina. The next time I visited her after the very positive review she said. I know you put a review up of me. I feigned ignorance, she said UKP, you're Pilotman. She clearly knew who I was. I asked her if she read UKP and she said she doesn't but two of her clients (Simps) always send her the full transcript of what's written about her.

I haven't done a review on AW for many years and I see no point in doing so.

AW is bullshit, UKP is where the real info is.

I don't see how anyone can link your AW id to your UKP id - unless of course your AW ID is the same or similar to your Username on here, that's a big mistake.

Secondly as Daviemac said, "the only way for anyone to know who you are on here is if you leave a trail or tell them yourself."

@RandomGuy99

I have over 100 reviews on here and plenty on AW - so tell me Poirot - what's my AW user name?

Oh wow, what losers 

[LLPunting]

...

Point is she actually had no idea who had reviewed her.

Until now, unless she did the UKP101 with every other regular who claimed ignorance about UKP.
Proving Katie's point and comments made time and again when debating that anonymity has nothing to do with time elapsed since encounter.

[Bonker]

Good advice about being careful with details of the punt. I would venture that's it's only the careless punters who are at risk of being identified.

I defy anyone to work out my UKP identity from my reviews. No WG has ever challenged me or questioned me about my membership of this site.

[petermisc]

No, but if you do the same thing again, it's easy to cross-reference them, because the group of users who have given AW feedback to both users will be small in the last 6 months will be small. Repeating this just a few more times will reduce that group to 1 user

Why would you be reviewing the same girl multiple times?  Let alone multiple times on both sites.

Most people tend to have their own writing style, so combining this with details of the meet, I could understand how your AW identity could be linked with your identity on here if you were foolish enough to post detailed reviews of the same meets on both sites.

I agree with others, that reviews on AW are a crock of shite, so why add to it.  Also, I book girls direct by phone, rather than through the AW booking system, so they have no way of knowing my AW identity in the first place.

The only way any WG is going to match me to my one review of her on here is if her memory of the meet matches mine.  Which is why I usually leave at least a week or two before posting the review, and add in a few false flags (all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order).  I agree that those who post detailed blow-by-blow accounts are asking for trouble.  But there again, if it is a negative, does it matter if she blocks you, as you are surely not going back?

[RedKettle]

Until now, unless she did the UKP101 with every other regular who claimed ignorance about UKP.
Proving Katie's point and comments made time and again when debating that anonymity has nothing to do with time elapsed since encounter.

many years ago and she has long retired, unfortunately as she was a great fuck and  lovely woman.

[shed]

In all my time as a member of UKP I have never once been asked if I am a member of the forum. I write my reviews in a way that it's absolutely impossible for a SP to identify me to my user name. It's not rocket science to ensure you protect your identity 🆔

[RandomGuy99]

There are users of this forum that inform girls when they have reviews and feed them intel, they must feel as though they're gaining kudos from the SP. It happened to me after I reviewed Karinna Latina. The next time I visited her after the very positive review she said. I know you put a review up of me. I feigned ignorance, she said UKP, you're Pilotman. She clearly knew who I was. I asked her if she read UKP and she said she doesn't but two of her clients (Simps) always send her the full transcript of what's written about her.

I haven't done a review on AW for many years and I see no point in doing so.

AW is bullshit, UKP is where the real info is.

I don't see how anyone can link your AW id to your UKP id - unless of course your AW ID is the same or similar to your Username on here, that's a big mistake.

Secondly as Daviemac said, "the only way for anyone to know who you are on here is if you leave a trail or tell them yourself."

@RandomGuy99

I have over 100 reviews on here and plenty on AW - so tell me Poirot - what's my AW user name?

You don't have to believe me and I have better things to do than prove it to you. As has already been said, it does depend on the type of SPs you see.

You can carry on believing that the SPs don't know who you are.  You might be right. You might not be. I don't really care.   

[petermisc]

You don't have to believe me and I have better things to do than prove it to you. As has already been said, it does depend on the type of SPs you see.

You can carry on believing that the SPs don't know who you are.  You might be right. You might not be. I don't really care.   

Methinks you protest too much.

You may be right that it depends on the type of SP you see, if you review an SP who sees relatively few clients you are more likely to be recognised.  I suspect it has more to do with how unusual the services you request (such as RO or anal), and how detailed an account you write.

[KatieEdinburgh]

Why would you be reviewing the same girl multiple times?  Let alone multiple times on both sites.

He probably means repeating the cross referencing multiple times between who has seen different SPs narrows it down further

It’s not a problem if they know who you are if you’re still a decent client btw

[wristjob]

The last few agency girls I saw asked me to do reviews - on the agency site of course. Most brothels/agencies have review sections. I guess they all love reviews when they can choose which ones to publish.

[RandomGuy99]

Methinks you protest too much.

You may be right that it depends on the type of SP you see, if you review an SP who sees relatively few clients you are more likely to be recognised.  I suspect it has more to do with how unusual the services you request (such as RO or anal), and how detailed an account you write.

Some SPs use the booking and feedback features of AW.  Some don't

Some display their phone numbers, so you can make a direct booking without using the bookings features of AW. Some don't

Some people (SPs and SSs) want to rack up feedback counts on AW.  Some don't

If it was non-standard services or a particular outfit/venue/something non-standard on the booking then most reviewers would be smart enough not to mention in their review OR they might mention it because they want the SP to know who they are.

Some SPs just use AW as advertising and only take bookings on the phone, so you don't leave feedback.

Some SPs are tourers from overseas or pimped or don't have English as their first language and may struggle with using AW, so just use AW for advertising (possibly having had someone else write their profile and populate their likes list) and make you call or text for bookings. If you see one of these SPs you'll leave no trail.

Some SPs never read their messages or booking requests on AW, so no trail is left.

If you see SPs who work for agencies or in parlours then they'll be no trail on AW, but they still may figure out who you are based on the SPs you have left reviews for and possibly jow often you visit/when you visit/things that happen - chatting to the receptionist while you're waiting.

There's a number of ways they can figure your identity out (e.g. incalls/outcalls booking - outcalls are probably less common so that reduces the possible identities), which is why it pays to change some things in reviews.

As Katie said early she can usually figure out who you are and SPs sometimes share info.

[Matium]

There have been boycotts of UKP before, led by the harridans of the Sisterhood.

There was .co.uk and Das Boot.

All failed.

They didn't bring down UKP then and they won't now.

[jeanphillipe]

Surely what ultimately links you is the mobile number you use. All the more to change burner sims regularly or if you use a virtual sim , change number...

[daviemac]

Surely what ultimately links you is the mobile number you use. All the more to change burner sims regularly or if you use a virtual sim , change number...

How is anyone going to link the phone I use to book with my name on here? 

[KatieEdinburgh]

How is anyone going to link the phone I use to book with my name on here? 

Well if you were to book someone then you write a review afterwards. If I can remember who you are I will have a phone number for you I perhaps might save your contact as DavieMac ?

Really what links you is very simple, it’s the actual review. You’re all posting write-ups of your experiences which with even subtle changes person to person it can be quite clear a lot of the time

Without the review I wouldn’t know as much about you. Ironically people who don’t use UKP I’ll know less about than those who do. By know *about* them it’s just which other ladies you have seen, It’s not real life information, don’t worry!


Overall only WGs can work out who you are but obviously not another punter. As the missing link is actually meeting us in real life, then writing a review. WGs who haven’t met with you, of course will be none the wiser

[PilotMan]

@KatieEdinburgh

I do believe that there are subtle nuances with each customer / encounter that our reviews could guide you to potentially match who we are.

But like you say, it's limited to the SP that could make that match to an actual identifiable person. Nobody on here can make that match, because we're all anonymous.

Other than what they look like, all you may know about a punter is their mobile number or maybe AW I'd. So unless the punter is stupid enough (or wants to) to tell you more, we are anonymous to you also.

I'm not fussed if an SP works out who I am on here from a review. I give honest reviews that I believe are helpful to her. If she does something well, keep at it. If it it's something she can change, it's her decision what she does with that information.

I appreciate that there is also a slight imbalance. When we write about something that may be sexually graphic or when we provide a detailed description of an SP, they don't have the same level of anonymity.

[RandomGuy99]

But like you say, it's limited to the SP that could make that match to an actual identifiable person. Nobody on here can make that match, because we're all anonymous.

.

[KatieEdinburgh]

@KatieEdinburgh

I do believe that there are subtle nuances with each customer / encounter that our reviews could guide you to potentially match who we are.

But like you say, it's limited to the SP that could make that match to an actual identifiable person. Nobody on here can make that match, because we're all anonymous.

Other than what they look like, all you may know about a punter is their mobile number or maybe AW I'd. So unless the punter is stupid enough (or wants to) to tell you more, we are anonymous to you also.

I'm not fussed if an SP works out who I am on here from a review. I give honest reviews that I believe are helpful to her. If she does something well, keep at it. If it it's something she can change, it's her decision what she does with that information.

I appreciate that there is also a slight imbalance. When we write about something that may be sexually graphic or when we provide a detailed description of an SP, they don't have the same level of anonymity.

You make a fair point.

I’d like to add that for myself I don’t care about reviews. A lot of WGs do not share this feeling though and despise all of UKP with no exception

I can take criticism as long as it is constructive. I’ve been around long enough to remember that years ago the comments were normally a lot ruder and often called us animals like fat pigs or bitches and I’m honestly glad to see that it’s mostly better now

Also I see posters calling others out now when they said they hit or choke someone without agreeing it -or fuck them so hard she cried is another I remember ???

So I’m glad the attitude is changing. And personally I don’t have a problem with this site

But I think you’d be surprised how easy it is to match reviewers to their bookings that’s all




Lets say, if you are a decent hooker a large percentage of your bookings will be regular clients or repeats. Perhaps for example say 70% are visiting for their second time (or more). So when I get a review from a new client, I’m already selecting from 30% of my client base who it could be

Then is narrowed down by services and length of booking.

Then further narrowed down by which other ladies you have reviewed.

Also you tend to be more seasoned clients in general so there’s something I can spot. When I see you have 100+ feedbacks I think to myself, maybe a reviewer- or none at all because you refuse to use it. You often change your number, something non UKPs rarely do

I’ve probably given away farrrr too much. So I will stop now !!! Lol

[FiveKnuckles]

Well if you were to book someone then you write a review afterwards. If I can remember who you are I will have a phone number for you I perhaps might save your contact as DavieMac ?

You could also put a report on CE that number belongs to DM.  Then every time he uses that SIM to call an SP, he is identified.      

[KatieEdinburgh]

You could also put a report on CE that number belongs to DM.  Then every time he uses that SIM to call an SP, he is identified.      

I’m not going to do that. Client eye is only for bad behaviour !

[daviemac]

Well if you were to book someone then you write a review afterwards. If I can remember who you are I will have a phone number for you I perhaps might save your contact as DavieMac ?

The whole point is all this happens after the booking and a review has been posted, by which time it's all academic the SP has seen the UKP member and knew nothing about it. Or have I got it wrong and escorts do more extensive research than checking ClientEye to check potential clients are not members of UKP?

The fact is I could book you and you would not know who I was either before or during the booking, you may be able to link me afterwards and refuse future bookings but if I'd had a positive experience, posted a positive review and hadn't done anything to cause you any concerns that would be your loss.

Edit

There's loads of reports on CE just for punters being members of UKP with no other warnings.

[FiveKnuckles]

I’m not going to do that. Client eye is only for bad behaviour !

Of course I meant the tools a SP could use, not DM and you specifically.

[KatieEdinburgh]

What about the reverse? Clients who I know are NOT from UKP will book with their real first and second name. Which you may be surprised, perhaps 10% of clients will volunteer that information to me

Non UKP clients will bring up they’re OK to send a deposit, even without me wanting one lolol

[PilotMan]

I’ve probably given away farrrr too much. So I will stop now !!! Lol

It's really good that you are on here, thankfully you're not one of the SP's who demonise us all.

Your input gives us punters the view from the other side. Whilst we may think we're always doing the right thing, it helps to get the SP's narrative.

You can't improve if you're not learning.

[KatieEdinburgh]

The whole point is all this happens after the booking and a review has been posted, by which time it's all academic the SP has seen the UKP member and knew nothing about it. Or have I got it wrong and escorts do more extensive research than checking ClientEye to check potential clients are not members of UKP?

The fact is I could book you and you would not know who I was either before or during the booking, you may be able to link me afterwards and refuse future bookings but if I'd had a positive experience, posted a positive review and hadn't done anything to cause you any concerns that would be your loss.

Edit

There's loads of reports on CE just for punters being members of UKP with no other warnings.

Yes that’s correct, not until after the booking and subsequent review I could work that out. And only if you review me rather than just from any other lady’s reviews

By that point if it’s negative you probably will not want to book me again so no big deal

[Doc Holliday]

Katie I am not disagreeing with what you are saying overall, although matching a real life face to a review is a 'suspicion' and cannot be corroborated in the majority of cases.

The other issue is that some reviews are simply not an accurate description of what took place. I am not talking about deliberate subtle changes by the author to attempt to disguise their ID, but some reviews are just pure fantasy.

You appear to be quite a 'canny' person so I have no doubt you have the ability to be an accomplished detective, but not the near 100% accuracy you claim 

In addition there are many SP's who do not match your competency in this respect.

[KatieEdinburgh]

The potential downside could be if the girl not like myself who does not mind, And blacklists you even for any positive review you post

You wouldn’t know until it’s too late but then you’re not able to book the lady you enjoyed your time with again. Which I suppose is what the brothel in Bristol is doing.

And that will only lead to punters not posting reviews in the future if every WG does *unionise* against seeing members on here, I’m not sure that’s what unionising is but whatever

[KatieEdinburgh]

Katie I am not disagreeing with what you are saying overall, although matching a real life face to a review is a 'suspicion' and cannot be corroborated in the majority of cases.

The other issue is that some reviews are simply not an accurate description of what took place. I am not talking about deliberate subtle changes by the author to attempt to disguise their ID, but some reviews are just pure fantasy.

You appear to be quite a 'canny' person so I have no doubt you have the ability to be an accomplished detective, but not the near 100% accuracy you claim 

In addition there are many SP's who do not match your competency in this respect.

Yeah, I agree with all that. I wouldn’t say I have 100% accuracy just that for mine I do know who each of my reviews are, in the olden days guys wrote a lot more detail and didn’t keep it vague however

Also some SPs will not care if they think a reviewer could be one of two guys but they’re not certain which, they might just blacklist both.

[RandomGuy99]

Katie I am not disagreeing with what you are saying overall, although matching a real life face to a review is a 'suspicion' and cannot be corroborated in the majority of cases.

The other issue is that some reviews are simply not an accurate description of what took place. I am not talking about deliberate subtle changes by the author to attempt to disguise their ID, but some reviews are just pure fantasy.

You appear to be quite a 'canny' person so I have no doubt you have the ability to be an accomplished detective, but not the near 100% accuracy you claim 

In addition there are many SP's who do not match your competency in this respect.

An SP could contact another SP that had reviewed by you and compare notes to identify you. That might allow them to put a face to a username. Probably only in the case of a negative review though.

[KatieEdinburgh]

An SP could contact another SP that had reviewed by you and compare notes to identify you. That might allow them to put a face to a username. Probably only in the case of a negative review though.

Yes. All of these loopholes have been possible for years so it’s nothing new at all.

Ultimately WGs will choose who they want to see and who they don’t, and that will continue

[Doc Holliday]

An SP could contact another SP that had reviewed by you and compare notes to identify you. That might allow them to put a face to a username. Probably only in the case of a negative review though.

In what way is that relevant to my post you have quoted?

[Fuzzyduck]

IMO it's a mistake to think that reviews can't be linked to other identities, especially related to AW.

1) I've linked UKP members to AW profiles on many occasions. Once you identify one connection (a AW id and a UKP id have seen the same SP, then you look for other points of connection and correlate with timelines. After 4 or 5 connections I'm pretty confident, though not 100% of course. If the SP has got your AW id (say she doesn't advertise her number or insists you made a booking) then she also has your AW feedback so can try correlating the AW id with any given UKP id. It can take time, but not impossible if you're motivated. It's also easier since she was actually there during the punt.

There are things you can do of course - not leave them AW feedback or only contact them if the number is showing - but it's not foolproof.

2) With managed providers (booking one of many SPs through a single contact point) I can believe that whomever manages the number has a good idea of who leaves reviews based on feedback from the SPs and other factors.

3) It's harder, for sure, when a SP only has a review to go on but certainly not impossible, unless the review is littered with red herrings and completely neutralised. I often think guys who put in exact dates for a punt are either trying to throw any SP detectives off the scent or, in fact, the opposite and deliberately identifying themselves. If the SP can establish a connection somewhere (your phone number, other SPs you've seen) then it becomes easier.

The best way to avoid being busted is to not leave a review (which was self defeating). I will admit there are a few I haven't: one had a real rant about UKP out of the blue on a first meet. I wanted to see her again so decided early doors not to review.

[RandomGuy99]

Katie I am not disagreeing with what you are saying overall, although matching a real life face to a review is a 'suspicion' and cannot be corroborated in the majority of cases.

This bit.

Two SPs talking allows a suspicion to be corroborated

[FiveKnuckles]

1) I've linked UKP members to AW profiles on many occasions. Once you identify one connection (a AW id and a UKP id have seen the same SP, then you look for other points of connection and correlate with timelines. After 4 or 5 connections I'm pretty confident, though not 100% of course. If the SP has got your AW id (say she doesn't advertise her number or insists you made a booking) then she also has your AW feedback so can try correlating the AW id with any given UKP id. It can take time, but not impossible if you're motivated. It's also easier since she was actually there during the punt.

There are things you can do of course - not leave them AW feedback or only contact them if the number is showing - but it's not foolproof.

I share the same sentiment as randomguy99;   Using process of elimination you maybe able to match ukp Id to AW, providing the aw profiles still exist.

If you've been on ukp for 5+ years with 100 reviews; your first 5 reviews could had identified you, however the SPs profile may be long gone to leave any breadcrumbs.

*I'm sure there's many newcomers to the game that have left positive reviews on AW to build their own reputation. 
When I read reviews that someone (like ravashing Rox) will only see guys with reviews on AW, some will let their guard down.


The positive aspect of ukp moving to a subscription model is to eliminate random SPs joining to check our post history.  If they pay the join fee, they may eventually see we're not all that bad 

[Doc Holliday]

This bit.

Two SPs talking allows a suspicion to be corroborated

No it doesn't, it just increases the probability. Corroboration can only apply if the punter confirms it.  Even that isn't 100%. At the height of my punting nearly two decades ago and when I was posting shed loads of internet reviews, I had at least two confirmed impostors telling SP's they were me.

[Fuzzyduck]

I share the same sentiment as randomguy99;   Using process of elimination you maybe able to match ukp Id to AW, providing the aw profiles still exist.

If you've been on ukp for 5+ years with 100 reviews; your first 5 reviews could had identified you, however the SPs profile may be long gone to leave any breadcrumbs.


The positive aspect of ukp moving to a subscription model is to eliminate random SPs joining to check our post history.  If they pay the join fee, they may eventually see we're not all that bad 

I have done, on more than one occasion. Members here confirmed it to me. And I only have limited data and am only motivated by curiosity. Imagine the SP side when they are pissed off about something and have more breadcrumbs.

Certainly the joining fee cuts down on newcomers interrogating the site but, if you're motivated, it's no barrier. Sadly people often only see what they want to see: we could be all be labelled as evil bastards because of one shitty review.

[KatieEdinburgh]

Food for thought, the US similar site to this is TER and you can ask to be delisted at any time and from that point all reviews of you are scrubbed from the site, and you can never be discussed ever again on there

Hidden Image/Members Only

In fact that’s quite the opposite of here, actually

I wonder if that was the case, what percentage of WGs would request to be delisted. Aside from myself most ladies do not appreciate being reviewed. And I don’t particularly like it I’m just neutral about it

You get some ladies refusing to see UKP members again even when they’ve given a glowing positive, and that’s their choice

If you could opt out of being reviewed then they’d not need to do that anymore

Hidden Image/Members Only

[FiveKnuckles]

I wonder if that was the case, what percentage of WGs would request to be delisted. Aside from myself most ladies do not appreciate being reviewed. And I don’t particularly like it I’m just neutral about it

It's comes down to the the fundamentals of UKP.  It's for the Punters.

Say an SP (and mates) assaults and rob the punters, the elimination of profiles wouldn't allow other punters to trace/avoid her.

NAL. The fact we use pseudonyms wouldn't impact gdrp. 

[Jonestown]

If you could opt out of being reviewed .................

Light blue touch paper, and retire to a safe distance.

There used to be a review site that allowed this, as I recall it did not end well.

[daviemac]

Food for thought, the US similar site to this is TER and you can ask to be delisted at any time and from that point all reviews of you are scrubbed from the site, and you can never be discussed ever again on there

Hidden Image/Members Only

In fact that’s quite the opposite of here, actually

I wonder if that was the case, what percentage of WGs would request to be delisted. Aside from myself most ladies do not appreciate being reviewed. And I don’t particularly like it I’m just neutral about it

You get some ladies refusing to see UKP members again even when they’ve given a glowing positive, and that’s their choice

If you could opt out of being reviewed then they’d not need to do that anymore

In the majority of the USA prostitution is illegal, with the exception of Northern Ireland where purchasing sex is illegal, prostitution, as long as the provider is doing it willingly, is perfectly legal in the UK. No comparison.

When you consider this thread started because some brothels are refusing UKP clients, all this talk of linking AW profiles to UKP names seems like an awful lot of effort for very little return. Do brothels advertise on AW?   

[KatieEdinburgh]

Yeah it was just a hypothetical. If one could opt out, how many would ?

Also if you read their terms on the pic I attached it says Bait and switch or Rip offs are never delisted, so I guess that mitigates that part for our American friends ? Who knows

[RandomGuy99]

Yeah it was just a hypothetical. If one could opt out, how many would ?

I think many SPs would opt out of being reviewed. Why?

Negative reviews on here have in the past resulted in shit slinging - nobody wants that stress. That situation does seem to have improved though and that's good to see.

Positive reviews can apply pressure to the SP as they then have to live up to them and it is sometimes hard to deliver that consistent experience as it is often dependent on the SS too. It takes two to be doing the right things to make a good booking. Sometimes a SS won't and that results in a different experience to past reviews.

There is a trade off as no doubt positive reviews do drive punters to SPs and probably SPs will see spikes in booking enquiries after a positive review is posted on here.

I suspect the benefits to SPs of positive reviews may be outweighed by the impact (potential decrease in bookings, impact on mental health of the SP, arguments and stress if the SP chooses to defend themselves, some SPs like to maintain a 100% positive review record - which is unrealistic as everyone has bad days (SSs and SPs) and the outcome of a booking isn't solely dependent on the SP) on the SPs of negative reviews.

It is a useful tool for SSs though as we get to spend our money more wisely, but you need to look at the overall review record of an SP and not go counting SPs out if they get a few negatives or neutrals along the way.  You also need to look at the review record of the reviewer as they may have unrealistic expectations of bookings or generally be a twat.

Imagine if there were reviews of SSs performances on bookings?

How would the SSs feel?

And we"re not dependent on the reviews to make money.  Thankfully or I'd be broke.

[PilotMan]

In my head UKP is similar to most other review sites.

Most good businesses subscribe and pay for a review service (Feefo etc) to give the customer the opportunity to leave feedback. It adds authenticity to your service / product and gives the business to improve where they are lacking. In addition, there are Google Reviews, which are free, but not verified by a purchase. Customers are very influenced by reviews and buying habits are shaped as a result.

From the information left in reviews a potential customer can make a decision as to whether they want to do business with that entity.

If a business states that they will refuse anyone that posts a review, or is fearful of reviews, that suggests to me that they aren't offering customers a good product / service and are seeking to hide their business practices.

[RandomGuy99]

In my head UKP is similar to most other review sites.

Most good businesses subscribe and pay for a review service (Feefo etc) to give the customer the opportunity to leave feedback. It adds authenticity to your service / product and gives the business to improve where they are lacking. In addition, there are Google Reviews, which are free, but not verified by a purchase. Customers are very influenced by reviews and buying habits are shaped as a result.

From the information left in reviews a potential customer can make a decision as to whether they want to do business with that entity.

If a business states that they will refuse anyone that posts a review, or is fearful of reviews, that suggests to me that they aren't offering customers a good product / service and are seeking to hide their business practices.

Agreed but on business reviews someone doesn't say they had a smelly pussy and droppy tits. Remember the mental health impact of that being read by the SP.

You can write a negative review without using such emotive language and that might be more acceptable.

The whole reviewing process adds stress to the SP regardless of whether they're positive or negative reviews.  It's a constant fear.

[KatieEdinburgh]

In my head UKP is similar to most other review sites.

Most good businesses subscribe and pay for a review service (Feefo etc) to give the customer the opportunity to leave feedback. It adds authenticity to your service / product and gives the business to improve where they are lacking. In addition, there are Google Reviews, which are free, but not verified by a purchase. Customers are very influenced by reviews and buying habits are shaped as a result.

From the information left in reviews a potential customer can make a decision as to whether they want to do business with that entity.

If a business states that they will refuse anyone that posts a review, or is fearful of reviews, that suggests to me that they aren't offering customers a good product / service and are seeking to hide their business practices.

Sure. However the main differences are between those it’s not a review on someone’s looks which naturally people do get upset about IRL, not as dangerous as regular businesses aren’t attracting the same amount of stalkers or weirdos, plus  finally once you’ve posted photos with face pictures on here they never get deleted. So 10 years later once you’ve settled down and left the industry or have kids, you’re forever wondering will someone possibly out you to your family

Other than that …yeah it’s completely the same as regular business reviews 

[KatieEdinburgh]

But again I’d like to add I get why it is the way it is. They are probably a necessary evil
Protecting other punters is fully understandable and I don’t mind the site