Rogues Gallery A Good Idea- How About A Hall Of Fame

[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.

[latecomer]

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.

[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.

[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.

[Bangers and Gash]

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. 

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Persie]

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Closet freak]

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

[Dani]

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

[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 

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.

[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.

[Bangers and Gash]

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.    

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.

[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. 

[Horizontal pleasures]

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

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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! 

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.

[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.

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.

[vorian]

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! 

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.

I see what your saying Matty but surely a good punt is more than about prices. The quality of the service is as important,  we could say that no one should ever recommended a prossy as the more punters she has the more likely the price will be to go up. It is a balance yes and yes the HOF maybe to far but it does concern me that the percentage of good vs bad pressies seems to be getting worse so what ideas are there to change that,  which will bring benefits to all punters in the long term.

Yes challenge the crap prossie UKP is great at that but where is the positive reinforcement to get the number of good prossies up.

[cunnyhunt]

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.

I do not think it was PN for the competition.

[cunnyhunt]

I see what your saying Matty but surely a good punt is more than about prices. The quality of the service is as important, 

This is true, but there is the possibility that one of HP's prossies could make the HoF.....

[vorian]

This is true, but there is the possibility that one of HP's prossies could make the HoF.....

You know what, perhaps bizarrely,  I kind of think that would be a good thing for punters.

[vorian]

I do not think it was PN for the competition.

Oh I assumed with Danish Piaget winning it must have been PN.

[mattylondon]

I see what your saying Matty but surely a good punt is more than about prices. The quality of the service is as important,  we could say that no one should ever recommended a prossy as the more punters she has the more likely the price will be to go up. It is a balance yes and yes the HOF maybe to far but it does concern me that the percentage of good vs bad pressies seems to be getting worse so what ideas are there to change that,  which will bring benefits to all punters in the long term.

Yes challenge the crap prossie UKP is great at that but where is the positive reinforcement to get the number of good prossies up.

Yes, of course it's not just about the price. I agree. I simply meant that I feel it may lead to them increasing their price. That isn't in the interests of the punter, in my opinion. Why pay more for something that was the same quality but cheaper before the price hike? If you big these prossies up too much, this is what you risk happening. This is business. If I thought I was massively popular, I may well try my luck and stick up my price if I felt I could maintain the numbers. Who wouldn't? It isn't a charity. It's business and their job is to maximize their return, in addition to offering a good service.

Also, who decides what prossies deserve to be in any top list? It would be very subjective, as opposed to a scammer, thief or somebody who outs a punter. That would have to be backed up by evidence, verified by admin, so could be objective. 

[mattylondon]

This is true, but there is the possibility that one of HP's prossies could make the HoF.....

I don't think there's a chance any of those hounds would make a Hall of Fame. To each their own and all that but no way. 

[akauya]

Rogues gallery - Yes

Hall of Fame - definitely not. It will be full of fluffies fawning about their favourite prossie or "specialist establishment". No thanks. The search button and requests for info does a good job as it is.

[mattylondon]

Rogues gallery - Yes

Hall of Fame - definitely not. It will be full of fluffies fawning about their favourite prossie or "specialist establishment". No thanks. The search button and requests for info does a good job as it is.

Precisely. Some of us have already had to endure that BS fluffy nonsense praising certain prossies on here already. 

[vorian]

Rogues gallery - Yes

Hall of Fame - definitely not. It will be full of fluffies fawning about their favourite prossie or "specialist establishment". No thanks. The search button and requests for info does a good job as it is.

That would happen for sure but it was not how I thought it would be set up at all,  I assumed in some way it would be locked and controlled by Adam/Nik in the same way as a rogues gallery would be.

[vorian]

Precisely. Some of us have already had to endure that BS fluffy nonsense praising certain prossies on here already. 

I envisaged that only a tiny few would be considered by Adam/Nik and only if they had been reviewed over a long period of time by many established members but so far the consensus seems to be a big no anyway.

[Dr_V_Werdegast]

Adams posts refer to the never ending emails from pissed prossies moaning about getting -ve reviews

They're probably just pissed off at the lack of discretion. At least here, unlike Pro$$ienet, there isn't an option to go on a "No Reports" list. If this article is representative it's just typical pro$$ie mindset:

External Link/Members Only

There's one blathers about "intangibles" and how the punter is made to "feel." It's so fluffy it's unbelievable, like an explosion in a teddy bear factory.

PUT THE PUNTER FIRST!

[squeezebox]

Already been said by others;

Rogues gallery is a logical thing to do as it puts the punter first and offers guidance to others, although it might turn into a danger/curiousity fuck-list.

Hall of fame would not be so good as this becomes essentially free advertising, which goes against the Ethos of the forum. The positive review section works well as it offers a fair perspective when reasearching a punt.

[vorian]

Already been said by others;

Rogues gallery is a logical thing to do as it puts the punter first and offers guidance to others, although it might turn into a danger/curiousity fuck-list.

Hall of fame would not be so good as this becomes essentially free advertising, which goes against the Ethos of the forum. The positive review section works well as it offers a fair perspective when reasearching a punt.

Fair enough that seems to be people's general feeling,  I do still think personally more could be done to highlight the difference between the top few percent and the rest but I guess that will just come down to how vocal the individuals fan club is on the forum. 

[cunnyhunt]

Fair enough that seems to be people's general feeling,  I do still think personally more could be done to highlight the difference between the top few percent and the rest but I guess that will just come down to how vocal the individuals fan club is on the forum. 

I understand your viewpoint, but we see too many who after a length of time are either jaded or they have too high opinion and their service level declines, too much fawning only increases the speed with which that would happen.

[whiterussian]

What next?  Superprossies ! 

[vorian]

I understand your viewpoint, but we see too many who after a length of time are either jaded or they have too high opinion and their service level declines, too much fawning only increases the speed with which that would happen.

Thank you I appreciate you comment, I myself was feeling a little bit jaded, I guess I was hoping that the tiny amount of one's that would be good enough to stand out would partly be so good because of the fact that they wouldn't become jaded, be up their own arse or have declining levels of service.

Just makes me feel down that no prossie seems to be able to achieve that level,  even if it is one in a thousand. More so for the newbie prossies starting up as the best they can strive to achieve is mediocrity, followed by decline,  so why should they make any effort in the first place. Is there nothing that can be done it just seems so frustrating that hunting out and exposing the shit prossie is the best that can be hoped for.

[mattylondon]

I understand your viewpoint, but we see too many who after a length of time are either jaded or they have too high opinion and their service level declines, too much fawning only increases the speed with which that would happen.

Spot on. Far too much fawning on here by a few. It runs the risk of them being up their own arses or becoming jaded. Complacency effects both prices and service.  It's better to keep them honest and remain vigilant. Standards which I'd apply to any customer service.   

[mattylondon]

What next?  Superprossies ! 

With magic powers of cock sucking. They can suck you by just looking at you.

[cunnyhunt]

Just makes me feel down that no prossie seems to be able to achieve that level, 

For the majority they have found that opening their legs is an easy way to money, they do not consider themselves as giving a service but doing a favour.
 Consistent reports on a prossie should build a picture as she may have good and bad points but overall the picture builds to one of consistancy. A HoF would give too much impression that there was little -ve and if the thread was locked to all but admin then trying to add a counter point would have to go through admin and mean more work for them.
There is not harm in discussing the idea but I have seen how cheerleading can start to change a forum. 

[vorian]

For the majority they have found that opening their legs is an easy way to money, they do not consider themselves as giving a service but doing a favour.
 Consistent reports on a prossie should build a picture as she may have good and bad points but overall the picture builds to one of consistancy. A HoF would give too much impression that there was little -ve and if the thread was locked to all but admin then trying to add a counter point would have to go through admin and mean more work for them.
There is not harm in discussing the idea but I have seen how cheerleading can start to change a forum. 

Yes, you have made a very good point with your last sentence in particular, honest real reviews do to a degree help as well. It's just I hate having to go to the lowest common denominator because of the actions of the minority. However it is better being safe than sorry. Guess I will just have to take up the batton for the Prossie Olympics instead,  Asian cowgirl relay race anyone.

[a10]

How would it work if a HoF pro$$ie got a bad review? Would one bad review be considered a 'blip' and they stay on the HoF? How about 2 or 3 bad reviews?

Come to that how many positive reviews from "established" punters would put a pro$$ie on the list? What defines an "established" punter? If Vorian votes someone onto the HoF, would James999 be able to veto that because he's more "established"?

It sounds like it has the potential to be an admin nightmare!

Much simpler to stick to the system we have. Get a review from a punter you trust, then if needs be search UKP for that pro$$ie's name. This will throw up any and all reviews said pro$$ie has. From the search results screen you can see if they're positive or negative for yourself.

[vorian]

How would it work if a HoF pro$$ie got a bad review? Would one bad review be considered a 'blip' and they stay on the HoF? How about 2 or 3 bad reviews?

Come to that how many positive reviews from "established" punters would put a pro$$ie on the list? What defines an "established" punter? If Vorian votes someone onto the HoF, would James999 be able to veto that because he's more "established"?

It sounds like it has the potential to be an admin nightmare!

Much simpler to stick to the system we have. Get a review from a punter you trust, then if needs be search UKP for that pro$$ie's name. This will throw up any and all reviews said pro$$ie has. From the search results screen you can see if they're positive or negative for yourself.

All you points are well made A10, someone earlier in the thread said much the same but suggested that the search facility with reviews could improve and I think that is something Adam has mentioned before as being on his to do list. It would have much the same effect anyway and help the consistent good prossies stand out from all the crap.

[mattylondon]

How would it work if a HoF pro$$ie got a bad review? Would one bad review be considered a 'blip' and they stay on the HoF? How about 2 or 3 bad reviews?

There's also the potential that such a HoF would encourage an increase in touting. I can see the lines it would take. Touting by PM, with the promise of preferential extra time, services or a 'loyalty discount', in return for a positive review on UKP to bump them up that HoF. Don't think it couldn't or doesn't happen on here right now. I suspect is does, knowing how some of these prossies work. That's certainly been my experience with a couple in the past, including on AW.

[vorian]

There's also the potential that such a HoF would encourage an increase in touting. I can see the lines it would take. Touting by PM, with the promise of preferential extra time, services or a 'loyalty discount', in return for a positive review on UKP to bump them up that HoF. Don't think it couldn't or doesn't happen on here right now. I suspect is does, knowing how some of these prossies work. That's certainly been my experience with a couple in the past, including on AW.

Spot on again Matty,  just a shame that the response would be increased touting instead of the prossy trying to take feedback and improve the service.