Reviews that are given negative

[Stevensmiles]

It’s probably been talked about before but I’ll try and explain as best I can.
Difficult when your a Geordie I know and English is your second language 

Anyway.

I notice quite a few SP’s get a negative in the review section. When a meeting hasn’t actually taken place. For instance when she accepts double or triple bookings and the punter gets to the location and is then left standing there because he gets no reply to calls or texts etc.
Or even the scammers who give out a postcode but there isn’t actually anyone there.

So of course any review posted has to be a negative.

My point being ( if it’s not been done before)

A thread entitled “Timewasters” where we punters could post a sort of review for a meet that never happened.

Christ I hope you all know what I’m on abooooot. !
Just a thought. Mind you my thoughts are quite strange but hey ho.

[scutty brown]

It’s probably been talked about before but I’ll try and explain as best I can.
Difficult when your a Geordie I know and English is your second language 

Anyway.

I notice quite a few SP’s get a negative in the review section. When a meeting hasn’t actually taken place. For instance when she accepts double or triple bookings and the punter gets to the location and is then left standing there because he gets no reply to calls or texts etc.
Or even the scammers who give out a postcode but there isn’t actually anyone there.

So of course any review posted has to be a negative.

My point being ( if it’s not been done before)

A thread entitled “Timewasters” where we punters could post a sort of review for a meet that never happened.

Christ I hope you all know what I’m on abooooot. !
Just a thought. Mind you my thoughts are quite strange but hey ho.

but if you did that, the reviews wouldn't count as reviews, and they wouldn't appear in the review lists. Scores would be wrong, and they'd be hard to find

[Waterhouse]

but if you did that, the reviews wouldn't count as reviews, and they wouldn't appear in the review lists. Scores would be wrong, and they'd be hard to find

Could do it like the regional BB threads.

Still make sure reviewed, but then added to a regional 'Timewaster' thread with AW ID so it can be searched.

Just a thought.

[Ali Katt]

It’s probably been talked about before but I’ll try and explain as best I can.
Difficult when your a Geordie I know and English is your second language 

Anyway.

I notice quite a few SP’s get a negative in the review section. When a meeting hasn’t actually taken place. For instance when she accepts double or triple bookings and the punter gets to the location and is then left standing there because he gets no reply to calls or texts etc.
Or even the scammers who give out a postcode but there isn’t actually anyone there.

So of course any review posted has to be a negative.

My point being ( if it’s not been done before)

A thread entitled “Timewasters” where we punters could post a sort of review for a meet that never happened.

Christ I hope you all know what I’m on abooooot. !
Just a thought. Mind you my thoughts are quite strange but hey ho.

I tagged my review with radio silence in the header, so punters know it didn't take place before reading. It isn't an organised way of doing it, but it is useful. I wouldn't want someone being branded a TW because they have letdown say two men, but have 10 positive reviews.

[magnetico]

but if you did that, the reviews wouldn't count as reviews, and they wouldn't appear in the review lists. Scores would be wrong, and they'd be hard to find

Scutty is right, it has to be logged as a Neg review for the SP's score, and the meet could (optionally) be added in your "Timewaster" thread ?

[magnetico]

I tagged my review with radio silence in the header, so punters know it didn't take place before reading

This is a very good idea 

[Steely Dan]

The rating is a rough guide.  I am sure that most punters read the text as well - otherwise we may miss out on some gems and fuck some fussy dogs.  I have booked a few with negatives for being no show - was very cautious to be fair.  And many more with positives I would not book - e.g. I am not interested in big fake tits, size 18+, pure massage, or having a torture tool shoved up my jap's eye.

[Ali Katt]

The rating is a rough guide.  I am sure that most punters read the text as well - otherwise we may miss out on some gems and fuck some fussy dogs.  I have booked a few with negatives for being no show - was very cautious to be fair.  And many more with positives I would not book - e.g. I am not interested in big fake tits, size 18+, pure massage, or having a torture tool shoved up my jap's eye.

More for me. 

[Scotpunter]

I think the current system works fine. A WG who has left me standing after making a booking deserves a big old red neg.

[User176]

I think the current system works fine. A WG who has left me standing after making a booking deserves a big old red neg.

+1

[Avg_Joe]

I agree, time wasting and standing up/ghosting a punter is a red card offence, however i do believe that if not in the review title, then pretty much the first line the reviewer should state the meeting didn't happen.

If i booked a girl for an outcall and then sent her to a hotel i wasn't in, or didn't give her the room number when she was there because i spied she was ugly on arriving at the hotel.... you can be sure my username would get listed on saafe

[smiths]

It’s probably been talked about before but I’ll try and explain as best I can.
Difficult when your a Geordie I know and English is your second language 

Anyway.

I notice quite a few SP’s get a negative in the review section. When a meeting hasn’t actually taken place. For instance when she accepts double or triple bookings and the punter gets to the location and is then left standing there because he gets no reply to calls or texts etc.
Or even the scammers who give out a postcode but there isn’t actually anyone there.

So of course any review posted has to be a negative.

My point being ( if it’s not been done before)

A thread entitled “Timewasters” where we punters could post a sort of review for a meet that never happened.

Christ I hope you all know what I’m on abooooot. !
Just a thought. Mind you my thoughts are quite strange but hey ho.

When a WG fucks me over with dead comms she WILL get a negative review off me as being a low life timewasting cunt. I wouldn't then be bothering posting the same on another thread entitled Timewasters.

[Moby Dick]

As per numerous replies, there is no need for a timewaster/no show thread. It needs to be recorded as a review as a negative so anyone else considering booking can easily take it on board

Adding no show/radio silence/timewaster in the title helps to summarize.

[Stevensmiles]

As per numerous replies, there is no need for a timewaster/no show thread. It needs to be recorded as a review as a negative so anyone else considering booking can easily take it on board

Adding no show/radio silence/timewaster in the title helps to summarize.

I agree. Too much cluttering of the boards with yet another system to be set up.


Errrrrr!!!!   Thanks Smiths for that concise and knowledgeable piece of advise. It’s certainly been noted in the meetings minutes. Have to say the company secretary was made to blush a tad when taking down the notes 

[LLPunting]

Could do it like the regional BB threads.

Still make sure reviewed, but then added to a regional 'Timewaster' thread with AW ID so it can be searched.

Just a thought.

Sadly a thought that you should've saved yourself the effort from...

When we review an AW SP we use their?  Go on, think a little harder... that's it, nearly there, very good, yes, we use their AW ID!  A list of timewasters is superfluous because anyone searching for info about an AW SP...

The only thing we need to do collectively is review our experiences in concise or long form in a timely manner.

[Waterhouse]

Sadly a thought that you should've saved yourself the effort from...

When we review an AW SP we use their?  Go on, think a little harder... that's it, nearly there, very good, yes, we use their AW ID!  A list of timewasters is superfluous because anyone searching for info about an AW SP...

The only thing we need to do collectively is review our experiences in concise or long form in a timely manner.

Why the condescending tone?

Whether I am for the idea or not, it was just an idea someone put forward.  If no one had ideas or thought outside the box not a lot would move forward.

And for the record I wholeheartedly I agree it should be in a proper review.

[LLPunting]

Why the condescending tone?

Whether I am for the idea or not, it was just an idea someone put forward.  If no one had ideas or thought outside the box not a lot would move forward.

And for the record I wholeheartedly I agree it should be in a proper review.

Your particular suggestion is unnecessary extra effort given the way UKP'ers would search for existing reviews about an SP.
A list of "timewasters" without any "evidence" is too prone to abuse, not that writing a review might take much longer depending on how time was wasted.  Also why would anyone just browse such a list if they're looking to punt?

Having new ideas is perfectly fine but if you're going to spitball them out without a little scrutiny by self then you can expect them to be dismissed pretty quick in the first grooming.  I just thought you had a little more insight.

[Waterhouse]

Your particular suggestion is unnecessary extra effort given the way UKP'ers would search for existing reviews about an SP.
A list of "timewasters" without any "evidence" is too prone to abuse, not that writing a review might take much longer depending on how time was wasted.  Also why would anyone just browse such a list if they're looking to punt?

Having new ideas is perfectly fine but if you're going to spitball them out without a little scrutiny by self then you can expect them to be dismissed pretty quick in the first grooming.  I just thought you had a little more insight.

Actually it wasn't my idea, just lending a bit of support to the member who suggested it. 

[Stevensmiles]

At my age I need all the support I can get 


Now let’s not bicker.
I’ll stop suggesting stuff LLP just as long as you try and stop yourself from being that annoying “I know it all so there” type of prig.

Oh dear.
Will this end in a playground bust up. I hate detentions. 

[Hobbit]

At my age I need all the support I can get 


Now let’s not bicker.
I’ll stop suggesting stuff LLP just as long as you try and stop yourself from being that annoying “I know it all so there” type of prig.

Oh dear.
Will this end in a playground bust up. I hate detentions. 

Not sure about detention but a spanking might be on order. 

I agree with Smiths. If a girl wastes my time then she deserves a negative review end of!

[cueball]

When a WG fucks me over with dead comms she WILL get a negative review off me as being a low life timewasting cunt. I wouldn't then be bothering posting the same on another thread entitled Timewasters.

This ^^^is how it works for me too

[LLPunting]

Actually it wasn't my idea, just lending a bit of support to the member who suggested it.

Apologies for the attribution.  Too much Forged in Fire and Dynamo: Magician Impossible over Xmas.   

[TailSeeker]

It’s probably been talked about before but I’ll try and explain as best I can.
Difficult when your a Geordie I know and English is your second language 

Anyway.

I notice quite a few SP’s get a negative in the review section. When a meeting hasn’t actually taken place. For instance when she accepts double or triple bookings and the punter gets to the location and is then left standing there because he gets no reply to calls or texts etc.
Or even the scammers who give out a postcode but there isn’t actually anyone there.

So of course any review posted has to be a negative.

My point being ( if it’s not been done before)

A thread entitled “Timewasters” where we punters could post a sort of review for a meet that never happened.

Christ I hope you all know what I’m on abooooot. !
Just a thought. Mind you my thoughts are quite strange but hey ho.

Rather than a thread that might lead to reviews not getting posted an accurately counting to the aggregate. It might be better to just have a standard flair.

But I don't know how easy that would be for admin to set up flairs like TW, B&S, and other common ones.

Alternatively in the meantime just standard labelling will probably help.

[LLPunting]

At my age I need all the support I can get 


Now let’s not bicker.
I’ll stop suggesting stuff LLP just as long as you try and stop yourself from being that annoying “I know it all so there” type of prig.

Oh dear.
Will this end in a playground bust up. I hate detentions. 

Keep suggesting.
I'll keep challenging if I have a challenge to raise.

By all means block me to save your sensibilities. 

[LLPunting]

Rather than a thread that might lead to reviews not getting posted an accurately counting to the aggregate. It might be better to just have a standard flair.

But I don't know how easy that would be for admin to set up flairs like TW, B&S, and other common ones.

Alternatively in the meantime just standard labelling will probably help.

+1

[wristjob]

I get the OP's point but I'm happy with the system as it is now. If a girl has a number of reviews I usually dig deeper unless it's some horrendous record.

If a girl is a known timewaster but she's 5 minutes away it's irrelevant, but if it's an hour drive each way I don't want to be stood up. It's no different to any other aspect of a WG and needs to be hilighted. The comparison to BB isn't great really. BB is a binary thing - she does it or she doesn't, whereas being let down on bookings is something you can only really judge by weight of numbers, and it's not uncommon for girls who get a red for this to take notice and up their game - a thread probably wouldn't have the same impact.

[blackburnian]

Current system works fine IMHO , that said a thread similar to the veri pic or BB threads could be handy to list those who can't be arsed to reply to emails etc so the rest of us don't waste our time .

Bb

[workinallweek]

ive seen two girls on here both had neg reviews but they didnt really make sense so i did the sensible thing and delved deaper and i decided to meet them both .

I have to say im very glad i did   but alternativelly some girls with good feed back on here really seemed like they must be some one else ,,,

All feedback is a mere damage limitation exercise   after all we are all different

[Waterhouse]

Apologies for the attribution.  Too much Forged in Fire and Dynamo: Magician Impossible over Xmas.   

No drama.  Best for 2019 

[magnetico]

I'd much prefer the indexation of agencies girls 

[LLPunting]

I get the OP's point but I'm happy with the system as it is now. If a girl has a number of reviews I usually dig deeper unless it's some horrendous record.

If a girl is a known timewaster but she's 5 minutes away it's irrelevant, but if it's an hour drive each way I don't want to be stood up. It's no different to any other aspect of a WG and needs to be hilighted. The comparison to BB isn't great really. BB is a binary thing - she does it or she doesn't, whereas being let down on bookings is something you can only really judge by weight of numbers, and it's not uncommon for girls who get a red for this to take notice and up their game - a thread probably wouldn't have the same impact.

Well put, key reasons a thread would not be useful and if anything detrimental as people may be more inclined not to review.  Not responding to contact can happen for any number of reasonable reasons just as hasty/malicious negative comments can be posted by jilted, unlucky or aggrieved snowflakes. 

[Malvolio]

It's up to punters to read the text in the reviews rather than just go on positive, neutral and negative counts - not that tough to do.

[Stevensmiles]

Keep suggesting.
I'll keep challenging if I have a challenge to raise.

By all means block me to save your sensibilities. 

Never sir.

If not for the more intelligent of those on here. We would only be left with people like me. 

[SamLP]

Just because the reason isn't service related, doesn't make it any less of a negative.
It's up to punters to read reviews if they want to know if a wg is worth seeing, and if there is any chance they'll have their time wasted or be presented with a B&S.

[hungrypunt]

I was going to suggest (but I dont know how this Vbulliten board works) that maybe admin could put a select box at the top of each review, that we could tick if the meet didnt happen due to the SP being a fucker.

Then if this was viewable along the review list some way, then you could instantly see how many or if she was a serial let down.
Or even more simple just add to the choosable options of review names/list.
Positive
neutral
negative
Negative didnt show
Timewaster
etc etc ???

Then i thought well its a 2 minute read/search of the red uns i guess anyway. DUNNO!





Hidden Image/Members Only

[Aengus]

“If a girl is a known timewaster but she's 5 minutes away it's irrelevant, but if it's an hour drive each way I don't want to be stood up. It's no different to any other aspect of a WG and needs to be hilighted. The comparison to BB isn't great really. BB is a binary thing - she does it or she doesn't, whereas being let down on bookings is something you can only really judge by weight of numbers, and it's not uncommon for girls who get a red for this to take notice and up their game - a thread probably wouldn't have the same impact.“


Agree with this. I usually have to travel at least 40 miles to reach an acceptable girl. It’s a real pain if I’m let down at that point.

[Grenadier36]

I think the current system works fine. A WG who has left me standing after making a booking deserves a big old red neg.

Agreed - do like the idea of adding radio silence or "family emergency" ( ) to the title as well

[jaszyj87]

its a review of the booking

the booking wa found wanting by them not doing thier bit so hence a negative