Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

UKPunting is a free, independent and not-for-profit paid sex buyer site.


Author Topic: Rogues Gallery A Good Idea- How About A Hall Of Fame  (Read 4244 times)

Offline vorian

On a number of recent threads the possibility of a "Rogues Gallery" has been mentioned. Adam said it was on his ever expanding list of things to do. I assume that this will be reserved for the really bad prossies, ParisB types, thieves and violent/dangerous prossies. Not just "Bad" service givers. Sounds like a fantastic idea if controlled properly and consistently and something which which really help all punters.

 I have seen mentioned before that the tone of UKP can be seen by some as often negative, so the provide a counter balance to a rogues gallery, how about a "Hall of Fame" for the very best, consistently good prossies. Of course this could be open to abuse, so perhaps they must have been reviewed by a selection of different established members over a course of time, then nominated to Adam/Nik who would then decide who gets added.

I feel it is very important and for the benefit of punters to pursue and challenge the worst prossies out there, but also equally important to highlight and celebrate the very few who are the best at what they do. This to will show the newbie WG's what they should be aspiring to be and benefit all punters in the long term.

I'm not at this point asking for a list of these good/bad WG's but everyone's thought on if they think it is something worth discussing.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 02:18:54 PM by vorian »
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Yes I think showing both the Best and the Worst like this would be a brilliant idea - provided the workload it throws on to admin or whoever to manage it properly isn't excessive.

Offline vorian

Yes I think showing both the Best and the Worst like this would be a brilliant idea - provided the workload it throws on to admin or whoever to manage it properly isn't excessive.

Yes that was my thought but it would have to be a very, very exclusive list to have value. As the number of reviews increases, sometimes the top drawer girls reviews get drowned in a sea of shit, which is a shame for them and punters.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline Ali Katt

I disagree with a best list as it encourages girls to put their prices up and lower their standards. It's also an excuse if an escort gets a negative review she can claim yes, but I am in the top 10 best, so the punter is wrong.

I disagree with a best list as it encourages girls to put their prices up and lower their standards. It's also an excuse if an escort gets a negative review she can claim yes, but I am in the top 10 best, so the punter is wrong.

I agree. And who would decide who goes onto the list as one man's meat and all that.  :hi:

Offline vorian

I disagree with a best list as it encourages girls to put their prices up and lower their standards. It's also an excuse if an escort gets a negative review she can claim yes, but I am in the top 10 best, so the punter is wrong.

As a counter it might encourage new prossies to improve their services if they have a template to aspire towards. Of course if the level of service declined then they could be removed  from the HOF but imho to get on it in the first place they would have to be very, very consistent anyway.

The punter is never wrong but ten or twenty punters will be more right than just one.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Curious6705

I disagree with a best list as it encourages girls to put their prices up and lower their standards. It's also an excuse if an escort gets a negative review she can claim yes, but I am in the top 10 best, so the punter is wrong.

FWIW I agree. A best of list sounds like a minefield to me.

It kinds of sounds like it might be good for service providers rather than punters.

Offline vorian

FWIW I agree. A best of list sounds like a minefield to me.

It kinds of sounds like it might be good for service providers rather than punters.

If you had a short list of prossies in one place who have been reviewed and recommended by lots of established punters and have a consistent high quality service over a long period of time. Confirmed by Adam/Nik so their is no tricks. Then to me that is a good resource for punters, also it gives a standard that other and newbie prossies can aim for, which again would be good for punters. I just think it is very easy to focus on the negatives of punting and sometimes forgot it can be a fun and enjoyable thing to do.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline Persie

I think thats a great idea..,punter power in full effect

Banning reason: Stalking prossies on Facebook and threatening to out them

Curious6705

If you had a short list of prossies in one place who have been reviewed and recommended by lots of established punters and have a consistent high quality service over a long period of time. Confirmed by Adam/Nik so their is no tricks. Then to me that is a good resource for punters, also it gives a standard that other and newbie prossies can aim for, which again would be good for punters. I just think it is very easy to focus on the negatives of punting and sometimes forgot it can be a fun and enjoyable thing to do.

I think it would make UKP more of a target for unscrupulous SPs than it probably already is.

Pimp Job Number One would be by hook or by crook get in UKP's Hall of Fame or wreck the site trying.

Also danger of creating an illusion that finding SPs that suit an individual punter is easy / formulaic. Sounds to me like a recipe for some unhappy punters complaining that an SP is in the Hall of Fame but their experience, subjectively, did not match up.

Offline vorian

I think it would make UKP more of a target for unscrupulous SPs than it probably already is.

Pimp Job Number One would be by hook or by crook get in UKP's Hall of Fame or wreck the site trying.

Also danger of creating an illusion that finding SPs that suit an individual punter is easy / formulaic. Sounds to me like a recipe for some unhappy punters complaining that an SP is in the Hall of Fame but their experience, subjectively, did not match up.

Of course no idea is perfect, I am confident that Adam/Nik and other members can spot pimps and tricks a mile off. Fake members and reviews happen everyday. If anything this would be much, much harder to get into and hence more policed. I'm not saying that finding a prossy to fit everyone is possible, but there are some universal constants, ie, comms, professionalism, effort, customer service. I am not saying a HOF of the "Best looking" prossies that would be impossible and too subjective. No one is forcing a punter to see any WG. However every day many threads are started where a newbie asks for recommendations.

If a punter is unhappy with any punt they can still post their own separate review and punters can take all the information on board before making a personal choice.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Curious6705

Of course no idea is perfect, I am confident that Adam/Nik and other members can spot pimps and tricks a mile off. Fake members and reviews happen everyday. If anything this would be much, much harder to get into and hence more policed. I'm not saying that finding a prossy to fit everyone is possible, but there are some universal constants, ie, comms, professionalism, effort, customer service. I am not saying a HOF of the "Best looking" prossies that would be impossible and too subjective. No one is forcing a punter to see any WG. However every day many threads are started where a newbie asks for recommendations.

If a punter is unhappy with any punt they can still post their own separate review and punters can take all the information on board before making a personal choice.

Those things are at best necessary but not sufficient. That's true of punting in general IMO - you may rule out an SP because of objective factors but that's not enough to identify the best SPs, which is a subjective judgement, and the performance of an SP may change rapidly. Even when you look at objective factors, like comms and time keeping, many will overlook them if their subjective experience is such that they believe it justified.

It's much easier to objectively identify a Paris B than it is a Cameron Diaz look a like who lives to make punters happy.

I think the idea is flawed, cos if this was already established I'm pretty sure "Paris B" would have been on the list  :wackogirl:

Offline Dani

  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 2,593
A hall of fame should not be necessary as the good reviews section is enough.  After all we are supposed to consistently give a good service or above average.  A hall of fame would not work as everyone has different tastes.  One girl might be the best out there but only two people from UKPunting live in her area so she wont get in even if she is the best in the country.  Another girl might not be as good as her but works in London so gets more reviews but is not anywhere near as good.
It cant work for that reason alone.  You could have a most successfully punted section where you put up the girls with the most reviews but it wouldn't be a hall of fame as such more of a section with the most reviewed girls.

However the hall of shame would work as it would only include those that out clients, cheat clients or are scammers who run off with the cash and there would have to be more than one report or a one report by a well known and trusted member and only Mods and Admin put people in there or we could have Agency after Agency putting up posts about others saying this girl did this and that.  as well as prossies pretending to be punters writing bad reviews for rivals

Offline vorian

I think the idea is flawed, cos if this was already established I'm pretty sure "Paris B" would have been on the list  :wackogirl:

Then Adam/Nik would have taken her off at the first sign of trouble, to be fair I don't believe that her service was in question, just her integrity as a human being.

Also to be clear I am not talking about every tom,dick or harry with a few good reviews, so ParisB would not necessarily have been on in the first place. Maybe one person every couple of thousand reviews. It would be almost impossible to get on and much easier to be taken off.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline vorian

A hall of fame should not be necessary as the good reviews section is enough.  After all we are supposed to consistently give a good service or above average.  A hall of fame would not work as everyone has different tastes.  One girl might be the best out there but only two people from UKPunting live in her area so she wont get in even if she is the best in the country.  Another girl might not be as good as her but works in London so gets more reviews but is not anywhere near as good.
It cant work for that reason alone.  You could have a most successfully punted section where you put up the girls with the most reviews but it wouldn't be a hall of fame as such such a section with the most reviewed girls.

However the hall of shame would work as it would only include those that out clients, cheat clients or are scammers who run off with the cash and there would have to be more than one report or a one report by a well known and trusted member and only Mods and Admin put people in there or we could have Agency after Agency putting up posts about others saying this girl did this and that.  as well as prossies pretending to be punters writing bad reviews for rivals

I see you point Dani, it just as UKP grows and more and more reviews are posted every day, the top performers who could be examples to newbies get pushed down threads quicker and quicker. Unless new punters review them which is harder as there are more reviews and not all positive every day.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Where women are concerned, it sounds good in principle, but actually putting it into practice and policing it would be a nightmare and damage the sites impartiality. :bomb:   

Then to me that is a good resource for punters, also it gives a standard that other and newbie prossies can aim for....

A bad idea. Trying to live up to the standards set by Smiley Sindy and Stephen Hendry could lead to a mass exodus of prossies leaving the game. :D

Curious6705

I see you point Dani, it just as UKP grows and more and more reviews are posted every day, the top performers who could be examples to newbies get pushed down threads quicker and quicker. Unless new punters review them which is harder as there are more reviews and not all positive every day.

There is always the ability to search. Maybe in time it may be possible to enhance the search facility to help find popular providers. 

I agree. And who would decide who goes onto the list as one man's meat and all that.  :hi:

a good example is the Worst Escort Picture Challenge thread which enables some gents to jeer at overweight ladies and enables other gents to augment their hotlists!.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=10615.400

Offline vorian

a good example is the Worst Escort Picture Challenge thread which enables some gents to jeer at overweight ladies and enables other gents to augment their hotlists!.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=10615.400

Imho if lots and lots of established members reviewed a prossy over a period of time and she was a consistent high performer then if she was a large WG then she should be considered as well. It's not about who is the best looking or the best tits. All to subjective.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline cunnyhunt

Rogues gallery - Yes

Hall of Fame - No  Too much work for Admin and it is not required as the search function fulfills the requirement.

Offline vorian

Rogues gallery - Yes

Hall of Fame - No  Too much work for Admin and it is not required as the search function fulfills the requirement.

How does the current search function do that and why do you think something is to much work for admin. I have only made extremely loose suggestions for people to discuss.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline cunnyhunt

How does the current search function do that and why do you think something is to much work for admin. I have only made extremely loose suggestions for people to discuss.

Adams posts refer to the never ending emails from pissed prossies moaning about getting -ve reviews removed as well as watching for previous banned members and trolls, why load him with more work ?

I do not think that Hall of Fame would be any use. If a member is looking for a punt what use would a further section be if none are in his area.
 
I am for sure I have read in the past that another forum ran an "Escort of the Year" competition and Danish Pia won it. That should be enough proof that cheerleading does not work. :hi:

Offline mattylondon

I disagree with a best list as it encourages girls to put their prices up and lower their standards. It's also an excuse if an escort gets a negative review she can claim yes, but I am in the top 10 best, so the punter is wrong.
I agree. A best list is a really bad idea. I wouldn't be in favor of anything that's likely to result in it getting to some girls heads and sticking their prices up! No thanks!  :scare: :D

On the other hand, a Rogues gallery is an excellent idea. Praise the good yes, but not at the cost of their prices going up. Not in the punter's/customers interest.  :)

A good review should be enough for any girl. A best list would result in loads of arguments and isn't worth the bother. A rogues gallery could be filtered via Nik and Adam, as a form of control.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 11:51:01 PM by mattylondon »

Offline vorian

Adams posts refer to the never ending emails from pissed prossies moaning about getting -ve reviews removed as well as watching for previous banned members and trolls, why load him with more work ?

I do not think that Hall of Fame would be any use. If a member is looking for a punt what use would a further section be if none are in his area.
 
I am for sure I have read in the past that another forum ran an "Escort of the Year" competition and Danish Pia won it. That should be enough proof that cheerleading does not work. :hi:

Fair enough, but imho  another place, another time and another ethos. I have more faith in UKP than PN then and now, but maybe your right I suppose.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account


Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)