Rating a bait and switch as a positive.

[mrfishyfoo]

Sorry if this has been discussed before.

There's been some "heated" debate recently on the YandH regional review board about rating bait and switch punts as positives with the authors getting "somewhat defensive" IMHO when they are questioned.

IMHO a bait and switch should ALWAYS automatically warrant a negative review, even if the punter knows beforehand that it's going to be a bait and switch. The negative can then IMHO be upped to a neutral if the punt/service was good.

IMHO it should NEVER warrant a positive as that condones shady/sharp practice.

[Sureshot]

Depends on the circumstance. 

Many roms and thais work out of brothel houses where its more like a parlour set up.  You turn up and take whatevers available.  It should be abundantly clear to any one whos read this site how these types operate and whats expected.

If you had a good time and can identify the girl you saw, i see no problem rating it positive.  Help the next punter by suggesting they ask for "anya/ting tong" or whatever.

You know sergei is answering the text so he doesnt care who opens the door.

[catweazle]

While l normally find myself nodding in agreement with Mr FF's sage words, in this instance l disagree.

There is one establishment in Middlesbrough (Michelle' Massage Parlour) where the photo on their advert is never the girl you will see ( l jokingly refer to such images as "off the internet stock photo 'sexychinesegirlinunderwear.jpg').

This doesn't mean that the girl isn't attractive or fails to provide a good service, and as such deserves a positive rating.

However - see a cute slim blonde on AW, ask "are the photos you?" And be told "yes" and turn up to find a 20 stone granny with lank greasy dark hair - then YES that b & s deserves a negative.

[Jimmyredcab]

BAIT AND SWITCH SHOULD ALWAYS GET A NEGATIVE.


ALWAYS.     

[daviemac]

I would agree with catweazle on this, it has to depend on circumstances. In any case it's entirely up to the reviewer how he rates his experience, there's no 'automatic' anything.

We all see and rate things differently and reviews should reflect that. If you think a bait and switch deserves a negative then review your experience as such, if another punter is happy with who he saw, even if it wasn't the one in the photo, he should be free to rate it as he sees fit, as long as he includes those details in his review we can all make our own minds up. No member has the right to dictate what ratings should be, though they are quite entitled to comment on the review.   

[Flunt]

If it's part of a group then they tend to become known for it, I think it would be fair to allow the reviewer their opinion.

If it's a profile where you're expecting one pro$$ie and you find some old hound then most reviewers are going to vote red anyway?

[JV547845]

Positive reviews of B&Ss are just fuck all use to the rest of us, and are completely misleading.  There's no guarantee that a fellow punter will get the same service or the same girl as you did, despite booking from the same AW profile.  It's mis selling.  Great that you had a great experience, but the reviewer themself probably couldn't even rebook the same girl if they wanted to return.  A great WG should have her own profile, and parlours should fuck off to vivastreet, and putting cards in phone boxes.

[LCD1535]

The majority of the ads show a girl, tell us her name and give us some spiel about how she's new to the area or mega horny and how the pictures are 100% real etc. They do not say it's a parlour nor do they say you may see a different girl. For all intents and purposes they are advertising that what you see is what you get but in reality this is not the case so it's a bait and switch and a clear red no matter how good or energetic the shag was once you turn up to the place and fuck a different bird to the one in the picture.

[JamesKW]

If its bait and switch it should be a negative as the person the reviewer gets may not be the person the next man gets,no one knows what they are going to get.

[bhudda]

I would agree with catweazle on this, it has to depend on circumstances. In any case it's entirely up to the reviewer how he rates his experience, there's no 'automatic' anything.

We all see and rate things differently and reviews should reflect that. If you think a bait and switch deserves a negative then review your experience as such, if another punter is happy with who he saw, even if it wasn't the one in the photo, he should be free to rate it as he sees fit, as long as he includes those details in his review we can all make our own minds up. No member has the right to dictate what ratings should be, though they are quite entitled to comment on the review.   

Agree ... if the reviewer makes it clear that its not the lass in the photos its his choice what rating to give it.

[mrfishyfoo]

Positive reviews of B&Ss are just fuck all use to the rest of us, and are completely misleading. There's no guarantee that a fellow punter will get the same service or the same girl as you did, despite booking from the same AW profile.  It's mis selling.  Great that you had a great experience, but the reviewer themself probably couldn't even rebook the same girl if they wanted to return.  A great WG should have her own profile, and parlours should fuck off to vivastreet, and putting cards in phone boxes.

That's my take on it as, like you so IMHO correctly state, there's no guarentee that the next punter will get the same girl.

[Blackpool Rock]

Logically the girls advert that the booking was made on should get a Negative for doing the B&S however if the punter can identify a profile for the actual girl he saw then I see no reason why he can't do a separate review of her based on the actual punt and rate it as appropriate

[James999]

Depends on the circumstance. 

No it doesn't, if you are advertised one girl and you get another then it's meaningless to rate the girl advertised (who you didn't see) it's stupid, it's a con... and thus a negative.

If any other rating is used / permitted then it is effectively using UKP to assist the con and totally against the ethos of the forum.

[wristjob]

Why would you even review a B&S that went well? if you decided to stay and it was the best punt ever what possible use could that be to another punter because who knows who they might get if they book the same girl. I would say such a review might be a neutral but no point putting any detail cos it's irrelevant. The point of reviews is to help punters find good punts.

I would say Catweazle's situation is a bit of an outlier because you are really reviewing the establishment as a whole.

If you walked clear neg.

[Sureshot]

No it doesn't, if you are advertised one girl and you get another then it's meaningless to rate the girl advertised (who you didn't see) it's stupid, it's a con... and thus a negative.

If any other rating is used / permitted then it is effectively using UKP to assist the con and totally against the ethos of the forum.

What ethos is that?  I always thought it was to to share punting knowledge and experiences with each other.  When are you going to embrace the ethos?

[James999]

Stick around a bit longer and you may learn 

[BLINDBOB25]

I would personally rate it as negative simply because I am not getting what I booked. For me it's false advertising even if it is a brothel.
However if the service was good that would be said in the review. I would also make punters aware not to except the same girl .

So Red for me all the way

[vw]

Sorry if this has been discussed before.

There's been some "heated" debate recently on the YandH regional review board about rating bait and switch punts as positives with the authors getting "somewhat defensive" IMHO when they are questioned.

IMHO a bait and switch should ALWAYS automatically warrant a negative review, even if the punter knows beforehand that it's going to be a bait and switch. The negative can then IMHO be upped to a neutral if the punt/service was good.

IMHO it should NEVER warrant a positive as that condones shady/sharp practice.

Sad IMO, similar happened with a radio silent neutral in Wales.

Imo it's all about punters wanting to appear successful at punting with low negative review counts.   

[vw]

I would say Catweazle's situation is a bit of an outlier because you are really reviewing the establishment as a whole.

Establishments are not supposed to be reviewed.

IMO it does seem to be an Asian immunity with many for b&s

[smiths]

Sorry if this has been discussed before.

There's been some "heated" debate recently on the YandH regional review board about rating bait and switch punts as positives with the authors getting "somewhat defensive" IMHO when they are questioned.

IMHO a bait and switch should ALWAYS automatically warrant a negative review, even if the punter knows beforehand that it's going to be a bait and switch. The negative can then IMHO be upped to a neutral if the punt/service was good.

IMHO it should NEVER warrant a positive as that condones shady/sharp practice.

I agree, if i know its a bait and switch and who knows how many times I haven't known as the WG didn't show her face in her pics, then I would rate it a negative automatically and walk however good looking the switch may be. I don't knowingly do business with low lifes.

In the early days of UKP I brought this subject up and found some punters weren't bothered, sadly as I see it, they happily punted with the switch which was of course up to them.

[RogerBoner]

Logically the girls advert that the booking was made on should get a Negative for doing the B&S however if the punter can identify a profile for the actual girl he saw then I see no reason why he can't do a separate review of her based on the actual punt and rate it as appropriate

I agree with you.

No it doesn't, if you are advertised one girl and you get another then it's meaningless to rate the girl advertised (who you didn't see) it's stupid, it's a con... and thus a negative.

If any other rating is used / permitted then it is effectively using UKP to assist the con and totally against the ethos of the forum.

James how do you rate the girls in your reviews?

[Jonestown]

If B&S is defined by an intent to deceive then 99% of SPs are going to fall into that category: any girl who uses photoshop, any girl who uses an old photo taken before she wrecked her body having four kids in five years, any girl who hides her verification picture, all of the agencies - there’d be bugger all left.

[fairfield]

While l normally find myself nodding in agreement with Mr FF's sage words, in this instance l disagree.

There is one establishment in Middlesbrough (Michelle' Massage Parlour) where the photo on their advert is never the girl you will see ( l jokingly refer to such images as "off the internet stock photo 'sexychinesegirlinunderwear.jpg').

This doesn't mean that the girl isn't attractive or fails to provide a good service, and as such deserves a positive rating.

However - see a cute slim blonde on AW, ask "are the photos you?" And be told "yes" and turn up to find a 20 stone granny with lank greasy dark hair - then YES that b & s deserves a negative.

I am not sure parlours can ever fall foul of bait and switch. The only 2 that i ever visited regularly had very random/generic photos (sometimes they put up none at all.) You just chose at the time from the line-up of wgs present. Even when i booked a particular wg in advance - the parlour was always clear on if she would be working that shift or not.

To me b&s can only apply to AW or Viva one-to-one type bookings. Like my most recent punt where it was clearly the same wg in the photos - but she had put in another 20 years hard shagging at the coal face since they were taken.
I really dont see why sp's/pimps/madams do this. What punter in his right mind is gonna stay and part with his cash, after such an obvious con?

[Chorley]

My feeling is that for 99.9 % of Asian WG's, particularly Chinese on VS,  they'll definitely be a B&S.
 It's usually bleedin' obvious that the stunning girl in the photos won't be the one you'll meet.

Therefore these should be negative by default, surely?   

[Bogof60]

Mmmm dunno about this one.
I suppose on principle a B+S should not be a positive.
But if the experience is good then a neutral could be awarded.
With Chinese or Thai women then a B+ S is almost expected.
My feeling is that the reviewer has the right to rate his own review as he seems fit.
As long as he includes enough details for the rest of us to make up our own minds then fair does.
It was his punt after all and not up to the punting police to comment on the colour of the review.
Punting police are of course welcome to take him to task in the comments afterwards
IMHO of course.

[lewishamguy]

Giving positive rating to a B&S punt will encourage pimps, prossies, parlours to do more B&S operations. Which is why a B&S always needs to be rated as negative regardless how good the punt was.

[RogerBoner]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=179614.0
Stickitin tried to solve this problem in the EM section by starting this thread. If every B&S was a negative then almost all Chinese places would rate negative. I usually upload a photo of the actual Thai within my review as the same AW profile will often be given to another.

But even this EM solution has it's detractors and is doomed, doomed I say!

[Chorley]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=179614.0
Stickitin tried to solve this problem in the EM section by starting this thread. If every B&S was a negative then almost all Chinese places would rate negative. I usually upload a photo of the actual Thai within my review as the same AW profile will often be given to another.

But even this EM solution has it's detractors and is doomed, doomed I say!

the
My point exactly. Pretty much every  Asian massage or Escort ad on a VS is by default a B&S

[mrfishyfoo]

the
My point exactly. Pretty much every  Asian massage or Escort ad on a VS is by default a B&S

Indeed. 

.....but what does that have to do with rating a B&S as a positive ??   

[LLPunting]

IF you make a booking for an indie and then the girl is not available/never existed when you arrive then that's a Neg against the profile you booked.

Exception is a known operation that always uses false images, but the same images for the same actual girl on dedicated profile, you should rate her per her performance because others can genuinely book her too.

If a sub is offered and she has a separate profile against which she can be reliably booked then you can review her and rate her per her looks and performance.

IF a sub is offered who doesn't have a profile then describe the encounter with her on the negative for girl 1.  Make it clear you saw someone else.  Get her name and state it on the review and give an accurate and detailed physical description.
Title should be; <girl 1> "B&S saw" <girl 2> "instead"

For yourself get her number if she was a success.

[mrhappypants]

The introduction of the aggregate of ratings here has altered this debate.

Your rating is your recommendation to other punters about whether to visit. Ratings are summarised in aggregate beneath posts that include the AW link included in your review. Ultimately the impact of your rating on the aggregate will be the only part of your review readers may see - rate accordingly.

External Link/Members Only

Bait and Switch bookings should not be marked positive.  Marking negative or neutral signals through the aggregate a necessary caution to other punters.

[Flunt]

I remain in two minds because there are two different scenarios. B&S among the Thai pro$$ies in the midlands is common, I think most punters know this and have come to accept it.

The problem is: how do you rate a good punt? The profile I visit might belong to the actual pro$$ie, I have a good time and rate it positive. The next punter goes to see the same profile and meets someone else (ignoring neutrals), if he has a good time should that be a negative for a good pro$$ie even though he hasn't seen her?

I understand the aggregating effect and I'm fairly certain the Thais aren't going to change their shady practices but what is the point of a pro$$ie having 10 positives when there is no certainty that you are going to meet that one or giving them an 80% (guess) negative ratings when the vast majority are good punts?

EEs don't get the benefit of the doubt as usually the bullshit profile means a shit punt is highly likely.

[mrfishyfoo]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=179614.0
Stickitin tried to solve this problem in the EM section by starting this thread. If every B&S was a negative then almost all Chinese places would rate negative. I usually upload a photo of the actual Thai within my review as the same AW profile will often be given to another.

But even this EM solution has it's detractors and is doomed, doomed I say!

Indeed they would. 

If the pimps/madame's that ran these places upped their game and stopped giving/switching the profiles to new lasses then the problem would be solved but they don't so IMHO that leaves us punters with little choice but to red card them.

[mrfishyfoo]

I remain in two minds because there are two different scenarios. B&S among the Thai pro$$ies in the midlands is common, I think most punters know this and have come to accept it.

The problem is: how do you rate a good punt? The profile I visit might belong to the actual pro$$ie, I have a good time and rate it positive. The next punter goes to see the same profile and meets someone else (ignoring neutrals), if he has a good time should that be a negative for a good pro$$ie even though he hasn't seen her?

I understand the aggregating effect and I'm fairly certain the Thais aren't going to change their shady practices but what is the point of a pro$$ie having 10 positives when there is no certainty that you are going to meet that one or giving them an 80% (guess) negative ratings when the vast majority are good punts?

EEs don't get the benefit of the doubt as usually the bullshit profile means a shit punt is highly likely.

IMHO yes as that pro$$ie allowed another pro$$ie to use her profile which is IMHO highly deceitful OR , and more likely, that the maid/madam/pimp doesn't give a shit about the "reputation" of any one lass and instead is just thinking about their cut of the proceeds.

[shagmore]

B&S always a negative
Even if you know its going to be.

How can it be anything else, they are lying at the offset

[smiths]

B&S always a negative
Even if you know its going to be.

How can it be anything else, they are lying at the offset

Indeed, to me its clear, IF I am aware its a B&S its a negative 100% of the time and I walk.

[Flunt]

Indeed, to me its clear, IF I am aware its a B&S its a negative 100% of the time and I walk.

The advantage of London punters mean the choices and availability allow you that privilege. If you've just driven 40 minutes to a punt, the best of a bad lot, then you tend to take what's on offer, unless it's truly undesirable.

Although, I'm inclined to agree, it's a bit daft to give a positive to a pro$$ie you've never seen! 

[Chorley]

Indeed. 

.....but what does that have to do with rating a B&S as a positive ??   

I'm saying that as these ads are default B&S the default rating should be  a neg. 

[smiths]

The advantage of London punters mean the choices and availability allow you that privilege. If you've just driven 40 minutes to a punt, the best of a bad lot, then you tend to take what's on offer, unless it's truly undesirable.

Although, I'm inclined to agree, it's a bit daft to give a positive to a pro$$ie you've never seen! 

Fair enough, if it were me in this scenario I would do a negative review and say it is a negative as it was a B&S BUT I punted with her anyway as I had travelled a long way making the best of a bad lot. To me it doesn't matter as per the review rating if the service a switch offered was good as her being a switch trumps everything else. In reality I walk if I know it is a B&S but who knows how many I haven't been aware.

Obviously reviewers on here can make their own minds up as to what rating to give.

[mrfishyfoo]

I'm saying that as these ads are default B&S the default rating should be  a neg. 

Now I'm with you. 

[RogerBoner]

What does Admin think?

Maybe he should make it a rule that every fake profile and B & S must be reviewed as a Negative. It would stop them being reviewed or maybe they would blur faces white is also confusing. For example Poni Thai Beeston don't often use head shots so I uploaded the wrong girl that they used in the ad one day early.  mrfishyfoo is correct and now that he's brought it up again I'll follow what Admin advises as he may have an opinion.

[Chorley]

Now I'm with you. 

Thanks.    However, I've just had a quick look through my reviews as I knew I'd seen a B& S (a VS Chinese massage ad) as a neutral. 
Won't be making that mistake again. Lol 

[mrfishyfoo]

What does Admin think?

Maybe he should make it a rule that every fake profile and B & S must be reviewed as a Negative. It would stop them being reviewed or maybe they would blur faces white is also confusing. For example Poni Thai Beeston don't often use head shots so I uploaded the wrong girl that they used in the ad one day early.  mrfishyfoo is correct and now that he's brought it up again I'll follow what Admin advises as he may have an opinion.

I haven't asked him yet as I'm still waiting to see what the consensus is.

Currently we appear to have 2 overriding group opinions.....

1.   Always a negative end of game over
2.   Can be a neutral with caveats

There is also a much smaller opinion group, which I'm waiting for further input from, that thinks a positive with caveats is also acceptable.

[Flunt]

There is also a much smaller opinion group, which I'm waiting for further input from, that thinks a positive with caveats is also acceptable.

My head banging post earlier was the penny dropping as I tried to argue in favour of a positive B&S...

How can you give a positive review for someone you haven't seen? On reflection, I agree, that it should automatically be Negative and say it was a B&S. If the punter stays and has a great punt then that is also useful information. 

[RogerBoner]

Don't most negative reviews attract fewer readers (excepting Amira Khan)?  So that useful information won't be passed on.
Aren't the Chinese known for their intransigence? They won't change their ways quickly.
Sergio could easily truth up because he seems quite keen on photography. The Thais have lazy management.

[daviemac]

I haven't asked him yet as I'm still waiting to see what the consensus is.

Currently we appear to have 2 overriding group opinions.....

1.   Always a negative end of game over
2.   Can be a neutral with caveats

There is also a much smaller opinion group, which I'm waiting for further input from, that thinks a positive with caveats is also acceptable.

Are you suggesting that punters should be told what rating to give their reviews, I always thought that this site was so successful because of the freedom to post as you wish. Dictating what ratings should be removes that.

Regarding bait and switch, it isn't straightforward, there are several variations.

For example if I book an independent prossie from her advert and it blatantly isn't her, then she's advertised falsely so a negative would result, no matter how good she was it's not the one booked.   

On the other hand if I book with one of the NE Chinese massage places, I know it's the owner who posts the ad and it will likely be a stock photo but you aren't booking either the owner or the one in the photo, you're booking the massage with whoever is working at the time. As long as you get the name and it's all good then why not post a positive, the next punter knows who to ask for.

They tend to change the girls every few weeks but by reviewing who you see a picture of the place can be built up so you get to know if it's always legit or if they employ girls who are happy to do extras.

Another point, if I book a massage at a totally legit place and the masseuse is nothing like the photo would that be classed as a bait and switch and given a negative.

[notcalledchris]

Imho the primary criteria in deciding how to review is to ask youself what is most useful to the punter who comes/cums after me.  A review should be less about rewarding or punishing the SP and more about informing the fellow punter.   He is an adult and can make his own decisions.  In that regard can i suggest that "B+S" be added to the review title regardless of how the whore is rated.

[Herts_Outcaller]

I've got two reviews for a B&S in my reviews section.

One chinese girl I gave a neutral, just felt like it on the basis of Value for Money being good, and the fact I knew and was even warned by fellow UKP members it was Bait & Switch before I went.

the other I gave a positive in the name of the girl that I did see as a. she apologised that the other one wasn't available b. the girl I saw in the end was actually much BETTER looking.

Definitely the case when you do the review you have to mention that it was B&S to let others know. There's a brazilian operation I keep going back to, 50% of the time you get a bait and switch, but it's only £60 and whoever you get is normally pretty good

For instance, notice how this girl, in Aylesbury,  External Link/Members Only has the same phone number as this Brazilian girl, in Harrow External Link/Members Only

Guess what happened yesterday? Phoned up the first one, got told to go to Harrow, ended up seeing number 2. Second one was good, would rather have had the first one, who does exist as I've had her before. The maid said Vanessa had gone back to Brazil, which I don't know if it's true or not. Next time I'll ask who's working as I've seen all the girls there now

[mrfishyfoo]

Are you suggesting that punters should be told what rating to give their reviews, I always thought that this site was so successful because of the freedom to post as you wish. Dictating what ratings should be removes that.

Regarding bait and switch, it isn't straightforward, there are several variations.

For example if I book an independent prossie from her advert and it blatantly isn't her, then she's advertised falsely so a negative would result, no matter how good she was it's not the one booked.   

On the other hand if I book with one of the NE Chinese massage places, I know it's the owner who posts the ad and it will likely be a stock photo but you aren't booking either the owner or the one in the photo, you're booking the massage with whoever is working at the time. As long as you get the name and it's all good then why not post a positive, the next punter knows who to ask for.

They tend to change the girls every few weeks but by reviewing who you see a picture of the place can be built up so you get to know if it's always legit or if they employ girls who are happy to do extras.

Another point, if I book a massage at a totally legit place and the masseuse is nothing like the photo would that be classed as a bait and switch and given a negative.

No !!!

As you correctly state it isn't "straightforward" especially with the Chinese and Thai brothels as they may well provide a very good service BUT who exactly will be providing that service can be a lottery.

[mrfishyfoo]

Imho the primary criteria in deciding how to review is to ask youself what is most useful to the punter who comes/cums after me.  A review should be less about rewarding or punishing the SP and more about informing the fellow punter.   He is an adult and can make his own decisions.  In that regard can i suggest that "B+S" be added to the review title regardless of how the whore is rated.

+me

I've always been of the opinion that reveiws are for us punters not the whores.