Reasons an SP would know about UKP

[sparkus]

With regards to the title of this thread, does it really mater that a Wg knows about this site. It might do some of them good to know the level of service they provide for our hard earnt bucks.

There are a lot of Wg's out there that take the piss, not all - some give great service - but others don't, they should know about it. If this was any other industry sector they would be reported to the office of fair trading. Maybe the government should set up an office of fair fucking.

You can bet they have their own secret sites and groups going on about us punters

It does if they go on here and decide to jack their prices up as a result (which has happened).

It does if the existence of reviews on here causes them to interrogate regulars as to if they wrote them or not (has happened to me several times).

I wish you well with Ofpunt

[sparkus]

To refer back to the title, what is gained by any punter telling a WG of the site's existence/their reviews? What? I am aching to know.

[finn5555]

With regards to the title of this thread, does it really mater that a Wg knows about this site.

It does as they will put prices up if they get a series of good reviews, greedy fuckers 

Negatives, tends to get them on here defending themselves until they get banned.

I don't think pro$$ies should be on here at all but that's not my call 

[shagmore]

I see where you are coming from, but if they offer good service, then I do not mind paying more for it, i recent paying high prices for something that is shite, market forces...

 And if a regular quizzes you about if you wrote a review, then that must say something about either you or the type of WG you are after, I have never had that happen to me

[finn5555]

I see where you are coming from, but if they offer good service, then I do not mind paying more for it,

So are you saying £150/200 per hour is not high enough already 

[shagmore]

To refer back to the title, what is gained by any punter telling a WG of the site's existence/their reviews? What? I am aching to know.

Yes, fair point. There is a difference between an SP knowing about this site and being told about it. 

[shagmore]

So are you saying £150/200 per hour is not high enough already 

I don't mind spending £150 an hour if its a good punt.
 

[Fuggedaboutit]

So are you saying £150/200 per hour is not high enough already 

Genuinely interested to know - has punting roughly gone up linked to inflation? I mean I remember paying £120 an hour in around 2004 where I am. Started seeing a regular back in 2015 and that was £150 per hour (now £190).

Apologies if that sounds daft, but even at my age I remain clueless as to certain aspects of economics...

[WotABugger]

Looked up on External Link/Members Only , for £120 in 2004 and find that that is £170 or thereabouts at todays value. Your regular is probably extracting the Michael, as £150 back in 2015 would be £165 now and she will be 6 years older, to boot.

[Lou2019]

To refer back to the title, what is gained by any punter telling a WG of the site's existence/their reviews? What? I am aching to know.

I didn’t think it was that difficult to understand? Unscrupulous punters will use UKP as a way of getting discounts, services etc in exchange for a positive review

[sparkus]

I didn’t think it was that difficult to understand? Unscrupulous punters will use UKP as a way of getting discounts, services etc in exchange for a positive review

And that works, does it?

[Fuggedaboutit]

Looked up on External Link/Members Only , for £120 in 2004 and find that that is £170 or thereabouts at todays value. Your regular is probably extracting the Michael, as £150 back in 2015 would be £165 now and she will be 6 years older, to boot.

I meant in terms of advertised rate....

But yeah, overall, from £2 a minute to just under £3 a minute over 17 years isn't bad, I suppose

[Fuggedaboutit]

Just on the aspect of whether or not SPs know about this site, by and large I tend to see SPs with a view to establishing them as a regular, rather than going for a lot of variety, so it's not really cropped up. Only one who's ever mentioned it to me was AliceinWonderland.

[Atlas1957]

I find it very strange that grown men (some of which are real keyborad warriors when it comes to other UKP members) have issues with being identified by a WG that they are not going to see again! And after all, that "identification" is only AW to UKP and niot to any real life information.

CCTV, hidden cameras, doorbell cameras, car dashboard cameras, phone cameras. Facial recognition is getting better each year as well.

For me, I post negatives for SPs working in parlours, so I will sometimes revisit the parlour not the person.

[shagmore]

I didn’t think it was that difficult to understand? Unscrupulous punters will use UKP as a way of getting discounts, services etc in exchange for a positive review

And I don't suppose a WG has ever done anything unscrupulous, like lied about her age, what services she proves, photo touch ups, B&S . If they gave a good service then there would be no requirement for this site, but they all don't, so thank god for UKP

[RedKettle]

I find it very strange that grown men (some of which are real keyborad warriors when it comes to other UKP members) have issues with being identified by a WG that they are not going to see again! And after all, that "identification" is only AW to UKP and niot to any real life information.

Security is a personal matter depending on your own circumstances. I will give you one real life example. A WG I saw at a location about 40 miles away from me has recently moved into a house very close to where I live, we see each other around and about. It is where she lives not works, in fact I think she has retired.

I am OK, I am sure she will continue to be discrete. However if I had written a negative review of her and she had linked that to me I would now be shitting myself.

Whatever a few macho members on here say as far as I am concerned I will continue to put my security first and do what I can to avoid a WG linking me with an online identity. Personally I think to do otherwise is crazy, but as I said security is a personal matter.

[cotton]

Yeah lol. Pretty sure he said he was in his 20s or 30s and the reason he got such good service was because he had "a way with WGs" and because of his good looks or something.

Yeh he said that in "The Coldness Of Hookers" topic
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=285748.msg2976225#msg2976225

[cotton]

It's hard to believe when your post can come off as trying to appease potential clients. I have not seen anyone on WG websites blowing up the trumpets of unattractive clean respectful punters when I last checked.

Kinda makes you wonder generally how different punter and hooker perception of the same events might be. Like Jerk Chicken thinking he had a gift with the ladies wheras the hookers saying how loathesome he was.
Maybe its a common thing that punters think the punt went really well , "she said i had a big cock and was happy i ran over for 5 mins" while the hooker is moaning on safe about some old boundary pushing fat guy with a small cock. 
You never know , all you can do is try to stay grounded and not fool yourself that its anything other than a paid for experience , you cant transfer having a good experience with a paid for hooker into "geee imve got a gift with the ladies"

[JonasG]

Yeh he said that in "The Coldness Of Hookers" topic
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=285748.msg2976225#msg2976225

Nice one, I tried searching for the posts but I couldn't recall the thread!

[JonasG]

Kinda makes you wonder generally how different punter and hooker perception of the same events might be. Like Jerk Chicken thinking he had a gift with the ladies wheras the hookers saying how loathesome he was.
Maybe its a common thing that punters think the punt went really well , "she said i had a big cock and was happy i ran over for 5 mins" while the hooker is moaning on safe about some old boundary pushing fat guy with a small cock. 
You never know , all you can do is try to stay grounded and not fool yourself that its anything other than a paid for experience , you cant transfer having a good experience with a paid for hooker into "geee imve got a gift with the ladies"

Yeah spot on, the best thing to do is just not care how you come across because it actually doesn't matter. That's why reviews that state "she was loving it" or "she had an orgasm" etc. always make me laugh.

Don't be a dick and be clean and hopefully she gives you a good service, that's it really.

Whether she really likes you or not is pretty irrelevant.

[gbyld87]

Yeah spot on, the best thing to do is just not care how you come across because it actually doesn't matter. That's why reviews that state "she was loving it" or "she had an orgasm" etc. always make me laugh.

Don't be a dick and be clean and hopefully she gives you a good service, that's it really.

Whether she really likes you or not is pretty irrelevant.

I think it's entirely possible that how a WG views you may impact on how they treat you or how they behave, over and above personal hygeine and sticking to the rules.  On a second visit to a WG I was asked if I had a wife/girlfriend/etc (always a fun question, ffs) and for some reason I was feeling honest and just said yes, i had a girlfriend.  She visibly bristled a little at this and although we saw out the hour she was obviously pissed at something.  From that point on she ignores any calls / texts and that's that.

She had kids and I gather had been cheated on by her past fiancee so my guess is she disagreed with my actions and hated me for it, which is understandable.  Don't bother telling me it was my fault for telling her i had a girlfriend, as that's not the point of this post.  I wouldn't be so honest again, but as a case in point i think it obviously affected the service i now cannot get with her.  Didn't think it would / should affect her willingness to accept a booking, as surely she doesn't think everyone's young free and single that comes knocking, but there you go.

[JonasG]

I think it's entirely possible that how a WG views you may impact on how they treat you or how they behave, over and above personal hygeine and sticking to the rules.  On a second visit to a WG I was asked if I had a wife/girlfriend/etc (always a fun question, ffs) and for some reason I was feeling honest and just said yes, i had a girlfriend.  She visibly bristled a little at this and although we saw out the hour she was obviously pissed at something.  From that point on she ignores any calls / texts and that's that.

She had kids and I gather had been cheated on by her past fiancee so my guess is she disagreed with my actions and hated me for it, which is understandable.  Don't bother telling me it was my fault for telling her i had a girlfriend, as that's not the point of this post.  I wouldn't be so honest again, but as a case in point i think it obviously affected the service i now cannot get with her.  Didn't think it would / should affect her willingness to accept a booking, as surely she doesn't think everyone's young free and single that comes knocking, but there you go.

An odd reaction indeed.

She'll be rejecting a ton of bookings if she was basing it on if he's attached or not lol.

This has been touched upon in the wedding ring thread atm.

[PaulRuff]

I think it's entirely possible that how a WG views you may impact on how they treat you or how they behave, over and above personal hygeine and sticking to the rules.  On a second visit to a WG I was asked if I had a wife/girlfriend/etc (always a fun question, ffs) and for some reason I was feeling honest and just said yes, i had a girlfriend.  She visibly bristled a little at this and although we saw out the hour she was obviously pissed at something.  From that point on she ignores any calls / texts and that's that.

She had kids and I gather had been cheated on by her past fiancee so my guess is she disagreed with my actions and hated me for it, which is understandable.  Don't bother telling me it was my fault for telling her i had a girlfriend, as that's not the point of this post.  I wouldn't be so honest again, but as a case in point i think it obviously affected the service i now cannot get with her.  Didn't think it would / should affect her willingness to accept a booking, as surely she doesn't think everyone's young free and single that comes knocking, but there you go.

 

Exactly my point and as told to me by SPs, as mentioned on the wedding ring thread.  They're human and humans are judgemental.

[mace-window]

I think it's entirely possible that how a WG views you may impact on how they treat you or how they behave, over and above personal hygeine and sticking to the rules.  On a second visit to a WG I was asked if I had a wife/girlfriend/etc (always a fun question, ffs) and for some reason I was feeling honest and just said yes, i had a girlfriend.  She visibly bristled a little at this and although we saw out the hour she was obviously pissed at something.  From that point on she ignores any calls / texts and that's that.

She had kids and I gather had been cheated on by her past fiancee so my guess is she disagreed with my actions and hated me for it, which is understandable.  Don't bother telling me it was my fault for telling her i had a girlfriend, as that's not the point of this post. I wouldn't be so honest again, but as a case in point i think it obviously affected the service i now cannot get with her.  Didn't think it would / should affect her willingness to accept a booking, as surely she doesn't think everyone's young free and single that comes knocking, but there you go.

Another WG that is delusional Jesus. If she think she will have many clients who are like me (free and single) then she is in the wrong business as people like me are in the minority still.

[Fuggedaboutit]

Don't be a dick and be clean and hopefully she gives you a good service, that's it really.

Can't disagree with that; in punting, as in life, don't be a twat...

[patdavies]

my favourite sp made a comment the other day when i told her about saafe.  She said ukpunting when i was talking about a site for escorts.  She cant be mad neways i gave her a great review 

[LLPunting]

my favourite sp made a comment the other day when i told her about saafe.  She said ukpunting when i was talking about a site for escorts.  She cant be mad neways i gave her a great review 

Did you already tell her your UKP username?  Did she ask for a review? 
If she reads this thread then 2+2 = patdavies.

[patdavies]

i subscribed to her only fans for a month i had the same user name

[patdavies]

no she didnt ask for a review I just like her and wanted to tell her about online resources that would help her.  Though I suspect from the convos we have she has more wg friends I know that cause she commented about some of the b&s Romanians had used some of her friends photos in their ads.

[sparkus]

Yeh he said that in "The Coldness Of Hookers" topic
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=285748.msg2976225#msg2976225

The SAAFE mention of his demanding to know "Is there a Sergei here?!" shows what a one dimensional world he was in really.

[Crackpot11]

I had a lot of grief from an SP who saw my review of her here and started wading in complaining about it. I had no idea an SP would so easily get on a punters forum. It certainly gave me second thoughts about reviewing. That said, the review of her was a ‘positive’ and what she was complaining about was my description of her as being over the advertised age, which we all know is standard practice for tarts. As her reply name included  -1964, it wasn’t hard to work out that I was right and she had taken 8 years off. The end result was no more bookings from me and as her replies to other punters became more unhinged I would venture a lighter diary. I hadn’t told her about here but I guess she knew about it from others and matched my review to our meet. A good idea is to leave a few weeks after punt before posting one. These days I hardly ever book through AW so that helps keep both identities separate.
I now suspect another SP I reviewd and left a ‘neutral’ for saw it and didn’t like it, as she refused to see me again despite leaving good feedback for me on AW. I imagine there are plenty of white knights who alert them to less than positive reviews. Again not too fussed as despite being hot her service was mechanical at best.

[bedhedred]

I've posted some negative reviews 10 minutes after the punt, if they were straight forward to write, and I've posted later the same day if I wanted to put more detail in. If I've decided never to see the girl again then I don't give a fuck what she thinks. I've only posted one negative where I wondered if she was worth a second try.

I've been more circumspect about a house or parlour. I had a negative experience with a girl, delayed several weeks before trying to write it up and then she left anyway so I didn't bother in the end.

I've written a positive within an hour of meeting a girl for the first time and she identified me from it. Luckily I was welcomed back. Maybe because I didn't spend half the review discussing the fact that she was a bit older than the advertised age.

If I want to see the girl again, then I may do a positive quite soon after the meeting. What I don't do is a so called "positive" review which is stacked full of vindictive and hurtful personal comments about her appearance: ten years older, droopy boobs, wonky teeth, wrinkles, hairdo needs refreshing, in need of cosmetic surgery.. etc etc etc. In recent months, I've heard a couple of girls complain about how demotivating this was to read about themselves. It's close to online bullying. One of them said: "listening to those wankers on ukp, anyone would think that they have supermodels lining up to fuck them for £130 an hour".

I don't want to be exactly like the arsehole boss at appraisal time who feels that he has to drag up a list of shortcomings and "development" points simply to make the victim feel small and deny the maximum bonus, even when the performance was fun and enjoyable.

Entitled rude and bossy bitches giving shit services are a totally different matter in my view and worthy of forensic analysis.

[JonasG]

I think with positives it's best to be careful (I never used to think that!), but I got spotted last year after a positive.

I gave her a top review but I did mention that she talked a lot and when I saw her the 2nd time, the minute I walked in she said, "You gave me a review, you said I talked a lot." But she and I laughed it off and never mentioned it again, so I suppose I got lucky as she easily could've been miffed.

A lesson learnt not to be so specific in positive reviews.

[LLPunting]

...

If I want to see the girl again, then I may do a positive quite soon after the meeting. What I don't do is a so called "positive" review which is stacked full of vindictive and hurtful personal comments about her appearance: ten years older, droopy boobs, wonky teeth, wrinkles, hairdo needs refreshing, in need of cosmetic surgery.. etc etc etc. In recent months, I've heard a couple of girls complain about how demotivating this was to read about themselves. It's close to online bullying. One of them said: "listening to those wankers on ukp, anyone would think that they have supermodels lining up to fuck them for £130 an hour".

I don't want to be exactly like the arsehole boss at appraisal time who feels that he has to drag up a list of shortcomings and "development" points simply to make the victim feel small and deny the maximum bonus, even when the performance was fun and enjoyable.

Entitled rude and bossy bitches giving shit services are a totally different matter in my view and worthy of forensic analysis.

Employers aren't typically paying their "employees" over the odds to be good looking (or at least not off-putting) and to perform poorly.  Punters are paying for the advertised looks and a satisfying performance to boot; guaranteed value for money, however deluded that be in reality.  SPs who cannot stand punters discussing how they look fail to understand the market they are presuming to make a killing from.
If the SP is so worked up about her feminist identity then she should post real pics in her full glory and be truthful about how she will perform.  If she's going to behave like a lying, money-grabbing bitch then she's going to be treated with the contempt she deserves.  That's not a misogynistic statement that's a statement about a despicable criminal who happens to be female.

[Payyourwaymate]

Employers aren't typically paying their "employees" over the odds to be good looking (or at least not off-putting) and to perform poorly.  Punters are paying for the advertised looks and a satisfying performance to boot; guaranteed value for money, however deluded that be in reality.  SPs who cannot stand punters discussing how they look fail to understand the market they are presuming to make a killing from.
If the SP is so worked up about her feminist identity then she should post real pics in her full glory and be truthful about how she will perform.  If she's going to behave like a lying, money-grabbing bitch then she's going to be treated with the contempt she deserves.  That's not a misogynistic statement that's a statement about a despicable criminal who happens to be female.

You took the words right out of my mouth other than the despicable criminal line lol. With money on the line looks cannot be suddenly forgotten about when that is large part of what punters are paying for. There is very little wriggle room for allowances to be made when buying a service or product which is costly, and that is what this is...buying a costly service. No customer cares about the employees feelings if they give terrible service or not as advertised for what ever reason in other industries because it might be mean. Just the reality of it. As for vindictive comments, normally it would be challenged anyway from what I have seen and must punters description of women on here are generous and not accurate to the finer details of pure objective physical analysis so there is a balanced view of fluffy descriptions and analytical ones; and not just punters trying to destroy the self esteem of women. Anyway, the women have gone into an industry where their looks and bodies are the main sale so that's on the woman to be secure in her own right of how she looks, otherwise no point selling sex and moaning about shallow Hals.

[MrMatrix]

Employers aren't typically paying their "employees" over the odds to be good looking (or at least not off-putting) and to perform poorly.  Punters are paying for the advertised looks and a satisfying performance to boot; guaranteed value for money, however deluded that be in reality.  SPs who cannot stand punters discussing how they look fail to understand the market they are presuming to make a killing from.
If the SP is so worked up about her feminist identity then she should post real pics in her full glory and be truthful about how she will perform.  If she's going to behave like a lying, money-grabbing bitch then she's going to be treated with the contempt she deserves.  That's not a misogynistic statement that's a statement about a despicable criminal who happens to be female.

Couldnt agree more. 

[mr small]

While chatting after a meeting a new SP told me that the other girls with the agency had told her about UKP and that it was all horrible and derogatory comments and that she was terrified of what people would write about her.

I told her I was aware of the site but never mentioned my membership or name but advised her that site generally gave a true reflection of the SP's, and if there were negative comments about certain SP's then they probably deserved them.

 

[Rochelle]

While chatting after a meeting a new SP told me that the other girls with the agency had told her about UKP and that it was all horrible and derogatory comments and that she was terrified of what people would write about her.

I told her I was aware of the site but never mentioned my membership or name but advised her that site generally gave a true reflection of the SP's, and if there were negative comments about certain SP's then they probably deserved them.

 

I agree, overall, but people do also make shit up. I'm sure you've seen it in all your years here.

[sparkus]

Employers aren't typically paying their "employees" over the odds to be good looking (or at least not off-putting) and to perform poorly.  Punters are paying for the advertised looks and a satisfying performance to boot; guaranteed value for money, however deluded that be in reality.  SPs who cannot stand punters discussing how they look fail to understand the market they are presuming to make a killing from.
If the SP is so worked up about her feminist identity then she should post real pics in her full glory and be truthful about how she will perform.  If she's going to behave like a lying, money-grabbing bitch then she's going to be treated with the contempt she deserves.  That's not a misogynistic statement that's a statement about a despicable criminal who happens to be female.

It's quite amusing to hear some of the protests when you walk from a B&S, including the corker "She's just as good as the girl in the pictures" or "I can't show pictures of me in case someone I know sees them, so I used a similar one instead, what's the problem?"

[mr small]

I agree, overall, but people do also make shit up. I'm sure you've seen it in all your years here.

That's why I said 'probably', in any large group there will always be a percentage of arses.

Not sure of other regions but Scottish board seem quite quick to question and out dodgy reviews / punters.

 

[LLPunting]

I agree, overall, but people do also make shit up. I'm sure you've seen it in all your years here.

Unless you're talking a conspiracy to condemn a particular SP for some perceived offence or personal vendetta the collective UKP interest and good is served by outing all substantive liars, whether punter or SP.
In a market that has so many false advertisers the hunt for the minority of genuine SPs, regardless of taste or fetish served, who deliver (G)VFM services keeps UKP honest about the pertinent facts.
Were we in a market saturated by great SPs offering value then the dynamic would likely shift to promotion and exploitation where SPs would induce punters to post positively to increase awareness and mindshare.

[xyfek]

Unless you're talking a conspiracy to condemn a particular SP for some perceived offence or personal vendetta the collective UKP interest and good is served by outing all substantive liars, whether punter or SP.
In a market that has so many false advertisers the hunt for the minority of genuine SPs, regardless of taste or fetish served, who deliver (G)VFM services keeps UKP honest about the pertinent facts.
Were we in a market saturated by great SPs offering value then the dynamic would likely shift to promotion and exploitation where SPs would induce punters to post positively to increase awareness and mindshare.

I agree with what you say, but there will always be members who have a hidden agenda that compels them to either promote or slander an SP.

The ethos of the site is to benefit the punter, no doubt through sharing honest information. Often, reviewers are fairly obvious in their touting, but I recall a recent ban that was quite surprising, so it's possible to spread lies and remain unnoticed. On the other hand, if you want to call out someone for slandering, you run the risk of being banned for white knighting, and at least for me, UKP is too valuable a resource to risk that.

My impression is that the vast majority of members have good intentions, so given enough reviews it's likely you'll get an accurate picture of a WG's quality of service, YMMV notwithstanding. But it's impossible to guarantee the veracity of every single review/comment.

[hullad]

I have had some grief from a regular in the last year because she was not working much and was only seeing one or two during the  summer. I made a stupid remark on here about being easier to see her at that time. Talk about cause world war 3 as some arsewipe had moaned to her in an email about 'why was he not on her special list able to visit '. They'd was none to happy with me and to be fair she was right I should have kept my own council. Its ok she knows me very well and knew it was me just being me, but it could have spoiled a very good working relationship.

 I have never discussed being on here or anyone else with a working girl, its not on. My reports I hope helpothers as other reports have certainly helped me. I made a mistake, but no more as I no longer mention any skuttlebutt I hear now.

[MrMatrix]

I too would never mention being on here either. But on two occasions I've been challenged as to whether I was MM. One I was able to easily deny even though it was a positive review and the other just knew it was me....
Another SP said I'm surprised someone like me had never heard of UKP.... Sorry luv..

[PatMacGroin]

Jerkchicken what a creep by the sounds of it. Wonder if he’ll infiltrate under another alias.

External Link/Members Only

Only just read this. I always thought JerkChicken was full of shit. A total twat that didn't know the difference between a fact and an opinion, but liked to repeatedly bang on about it, revealing more and more how he had those concepts mixed up.

Only surprising detail is the age reported on SAAFE. I had him for 20' or 30's rather than 60's, but that's probably just one of the lies that he managed to slip through without me noticing. Although I do remember feeling a bit surprised that he seemed to go for some of the older WG's so regularly.

He will not be missed.

[PatMacGroin]

Regarding the main topic. I am well aware that I include too much revealing detail in my own reviews. I hope that leaving positive reviews for a month or two before posting might help dim the memories a little. I always post negatives ASAP.

I've never been asked outright about UKP or if I was responsible for a review. Although I believe that on at least a couple of occasions a WG has linked me to my review. I'm pretty certain one review resulted in my number getting blocked by one of my favourite WG's. I have considered asking a WG if she minds getting a UKP review, even if it's positive, but quickly dismissed the thought as a bad idea.

[Atrueyorkie]

My 2 pence. It’s usually some guy who thinks if I tell her I’ll get some secret privileges or she’ll love me 

I can never fathom why people tell, only situation I’d agree with is if public information like a road name or something that is potentially life endangering is mentioned. I’m too very surprised how easy access seems to be.

Had once instance before a punt where a SP mentioned the site ukp and gave me a lowdown summary of the site!

For a few reasons I’ve left back on reviewing a few as it’s either extremely obvious who it was due to them seeing very few people or due to the fact I can’t be asked for the unnecessary grief that could potentially follow.

[Driftking]

Random question to the forum.

Has anyone had a WG ask them about UKP? If you have how have you responded?

[Waterhouse]

Best to feign ignorance if asked.

[lamboman]

No for me.