Keira-Glasgow

[Happyjose]

I agree with a Negative review on this count, I agree with Keema giving his perspective and I agree with others that outside a booking context that her reliability for him has no context.

I do not agree with the militant attitude taken towards some postings on the Scots sections here of late.

She has been on my radar and I will reconsider keeping her there, maybe only for a rainy day. As a regular UKE poster I haven't really even seen her there for quite a while now. Nothing worse than a punt arranged in advance and then radio silence on the day. This is especially so when so many girls are now asking to confirm before 9/10/11 on the day...I don't normally plan to roll out of bed until noon!

Some genuinely interesting discussion points raised here.

UKP and UKE are both terrific sites with different posting cultures. It would seem inevitable that those members who post regularly on the other site, interacting and flirting with WG's on an equal basis, may find it difficult to adjust back to the punter first ethos here. They may even have developed a relationship of sorts with the girl in question that further clouds the issue. To this end, if a member has developed such a relationship with a WG under discussion, declared or not, then his perspective has no relevance and would be better kept to himself.

This is UKP. What has been described as a militant attitude is simply the result, the necessary and inevitable response, to too many fluffy posts. Attempts to shut down the conversation when a favoured WG comes under the spotlight, complaints that girls will choose not to tour in our area if we're too critical, posts undermining negative reviews and reviewers, and similar, will always be met with a robust response by members who understand that the punter first ethos is central to the past and future success of this site.

You mention that many girls (aka prostitutes) require customers to confirm on the day at times you find inconvenient. There is nothing inevitable about this practice, despite your apparent resignation to it. Like the often noted profile statement to read all the conditions/rate info etc and not to ask on the phone/in person as it's disrespectful when she has gone to the trouble of writing them down, it's bullshit and should be challenged.

You are the paying customer. It isn't a relationship of equals. You pay your money, she provides a service of a standard and at a time that is convenient to you. UKP can highlight such unpopular, anti-punter practices and potentially change them to better suit the customer

Finally, Happy Birthday UKP

[S.X. MacHine]

I hate unreliable prossies. At the prices charged, they should have professional standards of time keeping.
I applaud the OP for his useful contribution.

[Courtney]

This is UKP. What has been described as a militant attitude is simply the result, the necessary and inevitable response, to too many fluffy posts. Attempts to shut down the conversation when a favoured WG comes under the spotlight, complaints that girls will choose not to tour in our area if we're too critical, posts undermining negative reviews and reviewers, and similar, will always be met with a robust response by members who understand that the punter first ethos is central to the past and future success of this site.

+1
That was brilliantly worded Jose.

Yes and there are some long standing members that have been here for 2/3 years, that apparently still seem to struggle with this.

Happy Birthday to UKP.

[mavgoose]

Yep. Very well written jose. I agree , the crossover between the 2 sites can be a thin line.
If anyone cares to look , my UKE account (same name) , has been dormant for months and months. I log on to look for touring girls only. I've stopped posting on it.

[McSteamy]

A drop the mic moment if I ever saw one, Jose. Very well written.

[Juilius_Sneezer]

You mention that many girls (aka prostitutes) require customers to confirm on the day at times you find inconvenient. There is nothing inevitable about this practice, despite your apparent resignation to it. Like the often noted profile statement to read all the conditions/rate info etc and not to ask on the phone/in person as it's disrespectful when she has gone to the trouble of writing them down, it's bullshit and should be challenged.

You are the paying customer. It isn't a relationship of equals. You pay your money, she provides a service of a standard and at a time that is convenient to you. UKP can highlight such unpopular, anti-punter practices and potentially change them to better suit the customer

I agree with many things you have said but disagree with others.

Firstly, yes it is a consumer industry and yes our opinions are of prime importance. This is not only true for us but also for the girls. What is also important to not is that it is their bodies, thier territory and their access that they sell. At any given moment any one of us could fuck it all up for the rest of us by fucking with one of these girls (as has sometimes been the case).

Secondly, the example I stated is for busy girls who are touring or have had noted problems with time wasters. I don't like it and I might yet review at least one of them but it isn't neutral or negative territory by any means. I agree that if it is stated on the profile then fair enough you know what you are in for but if it isn't then agreed it is an unwelcome ambush.

[Happyjose]

I agree with many things you have said but disagree with others.

Firstly, yes it is a consumer industry and yes our opinions are of prime importance. This is not only true for us but also for the girls. What is also important to not is that it is their bodies, thier territory and their access that they sell. At any given moment any one of us could fuck it all up for the rest of us by fucking with one of these girls (as has sometimes been the case).

Secondly, the example I stated is for busy girls who are touring or have had noted problems with time wasters. I don't like it and I might yet review at least one of them but it isn't neutral or negative territory by any means. I agree that if it is stated on the profile then fair enough you know what you are in for but if it isn't then agreed it is an unwelcome ambush.

Utter fluffy shite. I strongly suspect it was written with a prossie audience in mind.

How can you state that our opinions (as punters ) are of prime importance, but that this is also true for the girls (sic). Clearly a logical fallacy and clearly at odds with the ethos of UKP.

The rest of your post is anti-punter drivel. Your points concerning punter behaviour potentially fucking it up for the rest of us reveals you as a cuntstruck fool, and your meek acceptance of prossies citing time wasters for imposing unwanted conditions makes you a gullible one at that. It provides a prescient example of the type of shit prossie defending behaviour that I alluded to in my previous post.

just from recent posts:

Don't be smarter than you have to be in this hobby. Her fanny is a commodity, it is also her personal space, she is in full control......Anything outside her stipulation is not only breach of verbal contract (illegal in itself) but could be brought to more serious charges of rape....

I disagree with a 1 off gaining shaming as we are all human with other lives to lead

I am a softie in so far as I believe in second chances. Especially if they offer an apology (even if it is bullshit, it's the polite thing to at least try and apologise).

[Happyjose]

You would also be wise to refrain from offering legal advice to punters, particularly on such diverse matters as verbal contracts and rape.

I have employed enough legal counsel over the years to understand the limits of my own competence in such matters. You clearly have no such perspective.

Reading up on immoral contracts would be a first step. Not to assist you in offering advice, but to help you understand why you shouldn't.