Naughty Natt x - Chancery Lane, London

[beachtest]

External Link/Members Only

Location: Chancery Lane near a pret

This was a while go seeing them 3 weeks apart but I thought i'd write up something here to issue a warning.
After my review of Veronica, I thought i'd try Naughty Natt out of curiosity. I should have read a few more reviews but I was in cloud 9 with Veronica. I thought Nat has to be somewhere up there with quality but how wrong could I be.

Punters  say she can be hot or cold, maybe I caught her on a cold day but spending your money on a chance you’ll end up limp because of attitude is a warning to others...
There are some pics of her floating around but they are heavily airbrushed. She’s heavier than the pics suggest. Not fat but not slim. Taller than you’d think if that’s you’re thing.


After confirming the time, I was left waiting at the allocated time.
On a lunch break, time is of the essence so I messaged 15 mins past the time we booked to say I’m outside, let me know when your ready. The reply was ‘I TOLD YOU I WILL TXT WHEN READY’.
Ok then..
Finally I got a message 5 mins later and told to come up.
Same flat as the amazing Veronica.
In and paid up for the hour.
Onto business.
Cold mechanical business!
I tried to chat but as other punters pointed out, she wasn't into it. No questions, short answers, I had a better experience in pret a few doors down 5 mins earlier. I thought at least she'd make up for her poor timing.

Strike 2: Covered OW because with a shake of her head when I requested OWO. She must of lost her enthusiasm a long time about. It was hard to feel enthused when you get a shake of the head
and getting OW but I thought i'd champion on.
All the right sounds, sloppy and it had good technique but no gusto.
Onto the main act.
She got on top and controlled the rhythm which she seemed to like..maybe..she was distant and didn't want to be here..
I was busting so in the bag I came and then she lept off the convert belt that she made me feel
I was delayed by her poor timing, no gusto, bad attitude and couldn’t manage another so showered and left early.


All in all, a waste.
When you have Veronica in the same place, Nat doesn’t compare. Not even as a plan B.



Pros
-Location (if you're in Chancery Lane?)
-Good sounds (fake) whilst giving a BJ

Cons
-bad communication
-bad timing
-no owo
-no passion
-silent, not talkative
-bad attitude
-airbrushed photos

[The Ultracheese]

Must’ve of been a really bad day you caught her on CIM is included in her service so it’s odd she even refused OW with you. 

[bst]

You are the second person to report that she refused OWO.
Sorry to break it to you but check your hygeine whether it be cleanliness or something looking untoward.
If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason. She saw something.

[a_test_person]

Interesting review. Sorry you had a bad time. I saw her the other day and had a top notch punt with her. Review pending. My first punt in well over a year.

Oral without, with great enthusiasm, incredible dfk, rough facesitting on me amongst other things. All very friendly, enthusiastic and even passionate. Strange.

[bst]

My experiences are always basically as Test Person describe. Never any issues and top notch. But I appreciate she is YMMV especially in terms of attitude.
However taking OWO off the menu..that is different imho.

[beachtest]

You are the second person to report that she refused OWO.
Sorry to break it to you but check your hygeine whether it be cleanliness or something looking untoward.
If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason. She saw something.

Appreciate this and you defending her but i'm sure the WS was having an off, temperamental day judging by everything else I reviewed.
I'm confident I'm clean, checked and never been refused owo before.
It's a little white knight say 'it's for a reason' to say she 'saw something' when equally she could be quite jaded at what she does.

To be fair, I did say maybe I saw her on a bad day. Other reviewers say the same thing. She's just a hit or miss type of person which is why it's a big negative to spend the money if you want a confident punt.

[bst]

Yes I expected to be called a white knight. Not defending her. If anything her getting a bad rep and having less client would be better for me 
I stand by my comment:

If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason. She saw something.

Your own reasons are doublethink. Jaded but gave you a B grade blowie. Makes no sense to me.

Likewise being hit and miss doesn''t account for taking OWO off table:

she is YMMV especially in terms of attitude.
However taking OWO off the menu..that is different imho.

She has literally been bitchy with many and still given them OWO.

[MLawro93]

She refused OWO? Odd...did you have a shower when you got there? I know sometimes that puts wgs off

[pepsicolaboy]

You are the second person to report that she refused OWO.
Sorry to break it to you but check your hygeine whether it be cleanliness or something looking untoward.
If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason. She saw something.

 

A lot of white knighting today, this SP as per my own experience and aborted punt, has a developing bad attitude and is jaded it seems.

If she thinks shes gods gift, it makes sense she could start clipping gents on services.

She also gets marks down for inaccurate photos, accounts suggest she has more timber on her.

[a_test_person]

A lot of white knighting today, this SP as per my own experience and aborted punt, has a developing bad attitude and is jaded it seems.

If she thinks shes gods gift, it makes sense she could start clipping gents on services.

She also gets marks down for inaccurate photos, accounts suggest she has more timber on her.

I dunno who you are saying is white knighting but I was just sharing my experience which was less than 72 hours ago.

If she is jaded she didn't seem it then.

[bst]

Jaded or not does not equate to randomly not offering OWO anyhow (and then ironically giving a decent blowie as to OP's admission). Lots of doublethink by guys with axes to grind.
I couldn''t care less and as I said, her having a  bad rep and getting less clients would be to my benefit 

[Fuzzyduck]

Cheers for the review. Sounds like a deserved neg for a bunch of reasons.

I was thinking about seeing Natt again as my first ride back in the saddle for several months but I'm having second thoughts now. I've not seen her in 6 months so have no first hand experience if her service has deteriorated but it sounds like she's getting jaded. She got like that before she retired last time around. With regards to no OWO, it serves as a reminder that even experienced punters, in spite of what a profile says and what multiple reviews report, should always check services in advance. It's punting 101.

[Whoisarrypotter]

Sorry but owo is not always guaranteed even if you shower.
I have have a few punts where it was agreed then after shower ends up as "oh its extra by the way" or just no baby.

I saw a young girl originally at Burnt Oak and owo was available and i didnt even need to shower first,  good session so i went back for another go same again.
3rd time however i needed the shower took it and found owo was suddenly off the cards and service was not as good as before.

Im speculating here but i wonder its possible the pimps sometimes have something to do with this.

[unus669]

Sorry to hear about your experience OP.

However, I’ve never understood why punters that have had a good experience with a WG, think she can’t deliver a bad experience for a subsequent punter for no valid reason in addition justifying why the other punter got a bad experience 

Then when labelled WKs, are surprised?

This WG by all accounts, has a checkered history, yet punters are vouching for her

[smiths]

Sorry to hear about your experience OP.

However, I’ve never understood why punters that have had a good experience with a WG, think she can’t deliver a bad experience for a subsequent punter for no valid reason in addition justifying why the other punter got a bad experience 

Then when labelled WKs, are surprised?

This WG by all accounts, has a checkered history, yet punters are vouching for her

As long as a review good or bad is genuine why are those punters who have punted with the same WG who gets a neg bothered enough to try to undermine another punters neg review is what I always think. It has sometimes revealed a dodgy poster who then gets banned, this isn't always the case though of course and not saying it is in this case.

In punting as some of us know there aren't any guarantees with WGs, so knowing that if like Natt who has always offered me an excellent service she doesn't another punter or punters I don't feel the need to come a chargin on my horse to white knight her. And it doesn't surprise me either, Natt is a conveyor belt WG who will be cramming in as many punters as she can per working day, eventually that could and has in her case led to her service and attitude declining for some of her punters, sadly for them. I had the same thing with Amy Amazon in Colindale, though her reviews have all or mainly been positives since.

[Gatehouse]

A lot of white knighting today, this SP as per my own experience and aborted punt, has a developing bad attitude and is jaded it seems.

If she thinks shes gods gift, it makes sense she could start clipping gents on services.

She also gets marks down for inaccurate photos, accounts suggest she has more timber on her.

Yeah, I saw (and reviewed her) a while back and it was ‘ok’ but nothing more than that.

Bit of a toothy owo and yeah, young and fairly fit but I didnt think the service was any great shakes tbh.

[centry]

Yes I expected to be called a white knight. Not defending her. If anything her getting a bad rep and having less client would be better for me 
I stand by my comment: Your own reasons are doublethink. Jaded but gave you a B grade blowie. Makes no sense to me.

Likewise being hit and miss doesn''t account for taking OWO off table: She has literally been bitchy with many and still given them OWO.

Quite the hefty accusations there Sir bst.

➊ You are defending her. Just because you say you aren't it doesn't then mean that you are not. That isn't an argument.
➋ You have also implied (whether directly or indirectly) the OP of being unclean or similarly of appearing to have bacteria (STI's and etc)

Ex. 1 : "If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason."
Ex. 2 : "She has literally been bitchy with many and still given them OWO"

➌ Just because you have had positive experiences with an SP it does not mean she can not give negative experiences to others. Think about that next time you upload a negative review and some other UKP member calls you out and says "It's not her, it's you !!"

[bst]

I can more or less hold up every line you just said and reverse it onto you (just because you say I am, doesn't mean I am!). But it's not that deep.


Again, you go into the contradictions and misrepresent what I said. Point 3 is moot. At no point did I say she is not YMMV or bitchy to some. Her record here is well noted. But as you correctly quoted me in point 2, she has been bitchy and still given OWO. I stand by the statement, a prossie like this rejecting OWO is unusual.
You are also correct in your lead within point #2, not that I was speaking in code or it wasn't clear. Another comment picked up on this and asked if OP showered. He hasn't replied.

I couldn't care less. I was a regularl of hers. Funnily enough because of my new punting pattern she has been on backburner. I either won't see her any time soon... or if I do make her my regular again, once again I point out it would be better for me for her to have a bad wrap and thus less clients (if UKP is indeed that powerful).
I'm just calling what I see. A prossie like this rejecting OWO is unusual. To give an explicit example, it's different from a Romanian or Brazilian with hidden extras or a record of false likes list isn't it.. or a British type who says on her profile that x y z is all at her discretion 

[centry]

I can more or less hold up every line you just said and reverse it onto you (just because you say I am, doesn't mean I am!). But it's not that deep.


Again, you go into the contradictions and misrepresent what I said. Point 3 is moot. At no point did I say she is not YMMV or bitchy to some. Her record here is well noted. But as you correctly quoted me in point 2, she has been bitchy and still given OWO. I stand by the statement, a prossie like this rejecting OWO is unusual.
You are also correct in your lead within point #2, not that I was speaking in code or it wasn't clear. Another comment picked up on this and asked if OP showered. He hasn't replied.

I couldn't care less. I was a regularl of hers. Funnily enough because of my new punting pattern she has been on backburner. I either won't see her any time soon... or if I do make her my regular again, once again I point out it would be better for me for her to have a bad wrap and thus less clients (if UKP is indeed that powerful).
I'm just calling what I see. A prossie like this rejecting OWO is unusual. To give an explicit example, it's different from a Romanian or Brazilian with hidden extras or a record of false likes list isn't it.. or a British type who says on her profile that x y z is all at her discretion 

Those were some weak arguments, I'm almost at a loss as to the non-sensical comments you've uttered in these paragraphs.

➊ Records of positive reviews are inconsequential to the point being made here. You've somehow created a question and then answered it, to which I applaud and I am at awe of you.

➋ After typing all of that, you're still willing to say that you aren't defending her? Are you certain the OP is in fact unclean? You are certain that the SP was not taking out her frustrations on her client at the time? You are certain that she would never do anything like that? You are certain that she is always polite, always professional, and always giving 110%? You are certain she is always unprejudiced towards all clientele?

➌ You have a clear bias towards the SP in question, you have repeated over & over again that;

"A prossie like this"
"different from a Romanian or Brazilian"

You have failed to act quite fairly, you have not asked the Original Author of this review what may have happened but have gone straight into saying:

"Sorry to break it to you but check your hygeine whether it be cleanliness or something looking untoward.
If a prossie like this rejects you for OWO it's for a reason. She saw something."

From what others and I can see, you are a prime example of a white knight.

Definition: In internet slang, a white knight is a man who comes to the unsolicited defense of a woman online, in the hopes of romantic or sexual favor. A white knight can also more generally refer to someone who rushes to the defense of another online, usually a person whose actions aren't seen as worthy of defense.

[bst]

You should join a Uni debating society. The effort you are putting in here is admirable and has childish undertones throughout. You obviously like a back and forth.

My only point regarding your moot point #3 in reply #16 was that you very clearly state that I was doubting his negative experience because I had a positive one. I at no point renounced his negative experience, namely bitchy texting and f2f (lack of) chat, leaping off and not letting OP bask in the orgasm. It was simply the OWO factor (as pointed out, she has given OWO within previous negative performances).
So your original point was completely moot. You have now followed it up and addressed it again, with your new point #1 in reply #18.
So it's funny you call my comments non-sensical and claiming I am making straw man arguments, when it is in fact you who did so.

"You are certain that she is always polite, always professional, and always giving 110%?" more straw man arguments.


White knighting is a bannable offence. You can report me if you wish and state your case.
Your definition is cool, and ironically exonorates me as I am not hoping for any romantic or sexual favours. I do not discuss this profile with any prossies, as it should be. I go out of my way to leave specifics out of my reviews and bits of anon.
Lastly, as I pointed out, I may not ever see her again. I have dropped her as my value regular (not because of negative experience, but simply because I get bored of one pussy for too long, as I did my now ex wife  ).
If you want to put me on the general definition, the only point I made and which you are deciding that I am defending adn white knighting her, is the OWO issue. Again, I stress and you can read my comments again to see that i did not defend against, deny, or take away from any of the other issues, numerous of which related to her bitchy attitude.

[centry]

You should join a Uni debating society. The effort you are putting in here is admirable and has childish undertones throughout. You obviously like a back and forth.

My only point regarding your moot point #3 in reply #16 was that you very clearly state that I was doubting his negative experience because I had a positive one. I at no point renounced his negative experience, namely bitchy texting and f2f (lack of) chat, leaping off and not letting OP bask in the orgasm. It was simply the OWO factor (as pointed out, she has given OWO within previous negative performances).
So your original point was completely moot. You have now followed it up and addressed it again, with your new point #1 in reply #18.
So it's funny you call my comments non-sensical and claiming I am making straw man arguments, when it is in fact you who did so.

"You are certain that she is always polite, always professional, and always giving 110%?" more straw man arguments.


White knighting is a bannable offence. You can report me if you wish and state your case.
Your definition is cool, and ironically exonorates me as I am not hoping for any romantic or sexual favours. I do not discuss this profile with any prossies, as it should be. I go out of my way to leave specifics out of my reviews and bits of anon.
Lastly, as I pointed out, I may not ever see her again. I have dropped her as my value regular (not because of negative experience, but simply because I get bored of one pussy for too long, as I did my now ex wife  ).

Contrary to your dubious beliefs, a back & forth is usually what a conversation is.
And yes, I do enjoy a conversation.

"You should join a Uni debating society"
➼ Yeah, I'm the one with the childish undertones. Clearly.

So now you are going to deny that you are not undermining the Original Author's negative experience with your own positive one?
I don't feel like playing the game of;

"PROVE THAT I IMPLIED IT (EVEN IF I CLEARLY DID) BUT PROVE IT ANYWAYS !"
➼ I'm losing the will to respond as I type this since this is clearly not going anywhere, I present evidence and you refute by calling me childish and saying "Nuh-uh!"

Also concerning the certain white-knighting, did you happen to read the second part of the definition?

Definition: In internet slang, a white knight is a man who comes to the unsolicited defense of a woman online, in the hopes of romantic or sexual favor. A white knight can also more generally refer to someone who rushes to the defense of another online, usually a person whose actions aren't seen as worthy of defense.

Or is your selective reading kicking in?

[bst]

An uncalled for, tedious and strenuous* back and forth which you desire to get heated, you can make that, then. Your childish tendence showing again.


The review was multifaceted. It was still a negative irrespective of OWO issue, as it was still a negative despite the blowie he did get being a neutral (with positive elements, as per his own description and assessments).
So no, at no point did I say this was not a negative punt. At no point did I comment on any of the (other) negative occurances he described. I was very clear, and her record shows, that she is YMMV with her attitude. You made a bunch of straw man arguments (which you will no doubt consider amongst your "evidence") regardless, pretending as if I said her prossie record is flawless and she's always on the money.

My experiences are always basically as Test Person describe. Never any issues and top notch. But I appreciate she is YMMV especially in terms of attitude.
However taking OWO off the menu..that is different imho.

I am very clear here. And even push back against Test Person with his 100% positive comment.

After all your straw manning, I stated explicitly why it's imho different

it's different from a Romanian or Brazilian with hidden extras or a record of false likes list isn't it.. or a British type who says on her profile that x y z is all at her discretion 

Now you can disagree with that thought, but don't straw man.


The crux is, that I believe no OWO is unusual for a WG like this. "Like this" simply meaning a prossie without Rom or Braz style secret extras, nor a British type who makes it clear that you could be so lucky for kissing or OWO.
That's my thoughts. Now if you want to get into it, the quantitative and qualitative data shows that across 6+ years she has had the same shit attitude problems etc etc. But only TWICE among 50+ reviews and even more sub reviews etc from comments who haven't bothered to do separate reviews, has she refused OWO. That fact, and that only, is why OWO off table strikes as odd, and may suggest something on OP's part for that ONE factor of the punt, and that factor alone.
Nothing to do with my experience with her. We are talking 50+, possibly 100+ experiences from said reviews and sub reviews. I would make the same observation for a prossie I never saw.
In fairness, I should have phrased my comment in reply #2 as "she saw something, or at the very least thought she did". This may or may not have been compounded by other issues such as a lack of a shower, as per another comment.


Yeah I addressed the second part of the definition. You are simply too engrossed and too fast.

[centry]

An uncalled for, tedious and strenuous* back and forth which you desire to get heated, you can make that, then. Your childish tendence showing again.


The review was multifaceted. It was still a negative irrespective of OWO issue, as it was still a negative despite the blowie he did get being a neutral (with positive elements, as per his own description and assessments).
So no, at no point did I say this was not a negative punt. At no point did I comment on any of the (other) negative occurances he described. I was very clear, and her record shows, that she is YMMV with her attitude. You made a bunch off straw man arguments regardless.
I am very clear here. And even push back against Test Person with his 100% positive comment.

After all your straw manning, I stated explicitly why it's imho different
Now you can disagree with that thought, but don't straw man.


The crux is, that I believe no OWO is unusual for a WG like this. "Like this" simply meaning a prossie without Rom or Braz style secret extras, nor a British type who makes it clear that you could be so lucky for kissing or OWO.
That's my thoughts. Now if you want to get into it, the quantitative and qualitative data shows that across 6+ years she has had the same shit attitude problems etc etc. But only TWICE among 50+ reviews and even more sub reviews etc from comments who haven't bothered to do separate reviews. That fact, and that only, is why OWO off table strikes as odd, and may suggest. Nothing to do with my experience with her.
In fairness, I should have phrased my comment in #2 as "she saw something, or at the very least thought she did". This may or may not have been compounded by other issues such as a lack of a shower, as per another comment.


Yeah I addressed the second part of the definition. You are simply too engrossed and too fast.

It's almost astounding how you are still pushing this 'childish' agenda until even now.
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove? This seems more like an internal issue to me.
You've clearly responded at every turn to my responses so does that mean you also have "childish tendencies"?
You call it tedious and strenuous but still manage prompt responses despite showing your disdain.
I'm sure you're not going to address any of this in your next response.

You've also repeatedly said I was using straw-man arguments, and at this point I'm convinced you don't know what that is.

Concerning the OWO subject.
Yes, the OP did respond to that allegation;

bst : "You are also correct in your lead within point #2, not that I was speaking in code or it wasn't clear. Another comment picked up on this and asked if OP showered. He hasn't replied."

Appreciate this and you defending her but i'm sure the WS was having an off, temperamental day judging by everything else I reviewed.
I'm confident I'm clean, checked and never been refused owo before.
It's a little white knight say 'it's for a reason' to say she 'saw something' when equally she could be quite jaded at what she does.

To be fair, I did say maybe I saw her on a bad day. Other reviewers say the same thing. She's just a hit or miss type of person which is why it's a big negative to spend the money if you want a confident punt.

➼ Maybe you believe this particular WG has super natural abilities that are beyond us mortals? Did you perhaps bestow her these discerning abilities? Is that why you're so sure?

Yet despite that response you still push your white-knighting tendencies
"THIS CAN'T BE TRUE !"
Is your selective-reading kicking in yet again?

I wasn't completely convinced before, but I am now that you are completely biased.

[bst]

Yes I suppose that the fact that I have bit and gone to your level by definition means that I am being childish.

But anyway, you mentioned "evidence". Which was basically a majority (50%+) of straw man arguments.
I just gave you some actual data. So everyone can make their own judgement regarding the OWO, which I stress again, does not mean that this punt was not a negative. Again, given his neutral-positive mixed experience on the blowie he got, this review reads like a negative even if he did get OWO. Again data and actual evidence (not straw men): it was ONE of his SEVEN listed negatives in his conclusion.


I know very well what a straw man argument and specifically pinpointed one tranche of consecutive straw man arguments, in addition to explaining elsewhere straw man arguments that you made.


And now this is comical. But I am starting to have some sympathy as many genuine misunderstanding? My quoted words that you put in bold: "he hasn't replied" was solely in reference to the shower question. That should have been clear. My apologies if it wasn't. The reply you quote from beach was before various pps then expanding the shower Q. Beach hasn't replied since then. His perogative. Maybe he doesn't want to get into back and forth. I should have taken his approach when I read your initial comment mentioning me.

And anyhow, I addressed the comment you quoted by beach in direct reply and said that imho jaded issue doesn't affect OWO off table. Not least because of her specific record of shit attitude and being jaded, and still giving OWO.


"Maybe you believe this particular WG has super natural abilities that are beyond us mortals? Did you perhaps bestow her these discerning abilities? Is that why you're so sure?" More straw men. You'll have a straw army soon.
Again showing I know what a straw man is. You repeatedly give farcical comments like this with the implication that I take these stances. Not only did I acknowledge the negative aspects of her record before this "argument" even kicked off, I have never made any such extreme points in her support.
It is funny that you rephrased your approach with "maybe you believe" and changed to a jokey manner for this last set of straw men.

If you wish to continue let's keep on the one issue of OWO off table. I'll wait to hear you address the actual "evidence" in the form of the data I offered.

[centry]

Yes I suppose that the fact that I have bit and gone to your level by definition means that I am being childish.

But anyway, you mentioned "evidence". Which was basically a majority (50%+) of straw man arguments.
I just gave you some actual data. So everyone can make their own judgement regarding the OWO, which I stress again, does not mean that this punt was not a negative. Again, given his neutral-positive mixed experience on the blowie he got, this review reads like a negative even if he did get OWO. Again data and actual evidence (not straw men): it was ONE of his SEVEN listed negatives in his conclusion.


I know very well what a straw man argument and specifically pinpointed one tranche of consecutive straw man arguments, in addition to explaining elsewhere straw man arguments that you made.


And now this is comical. But I am starting to have some sympathy as many genuine misunderstanding? My quoted words that you put in bold: "he hasn't replied" was solely in reference to the shower question. That should have been clear. My apologies if it wasn't.

And yes, I addressed the comment you quoted by beach, and said that imho jaded issue doesn't affect OWO off table. Not least because of her specific record of shit attitude and being jaded, and still giving OWO.


"Maybe you believe this particular WG has super natural abilities that are beyond us mortals? Did you perhaps bestow her these discerning abilities? Is that why you're so sure?" More straw men. You'll have a straw army soon.

Well I guess I was right after all, you didn't address any of my first paragraph.

Also seriously 'actual Data'? Really?
Yes this WG has 50+ reviews here, that is by no means an actual representation of the amount of clients she has seen, contrary to what you believe in the world of Escorting is a lot larger than UKP.

You seem to not be able to handle the possibility that this particular WG did not offer this punter any OWO purely because she didn't feel like it on that day, but rather you find comfort in pushing your own agenda. People/Men/Women do not have to be rational, they are and forever will always act without reason to at times. But of course your beloved Naughty Natt wouldn't possibly act like that right?

You also seem stuck on this 'straw man', sometimes a person may repeat themselves because they want to communicate and cannot find anything else to say. The person might have become 'stuck' on a particular word, phrase or action.
I've also done this as a child when I learnt a new word, I kept repeating it even at times that didn't make any sense.

[bst]

Well I guess I was right after all, you didn't address any of my first paragraph.

What? Really is getting comical now.

Is this not a reply  to your first paragraph?

Yes I suppose that the fact that I have bit and gone to your level by definition means that I am being childish.

I was even kind enough to give you your gotcha moment. But let me know what I supposedly didn't address and I will.

In fact start writing in bullet points and I will start replying to every single one. I explicitly wanted to avoid this:

I can more or less hold up every line you just said and reverse it onto you (just because you say I am, doesn't mean I am!). But it's not that deep.

But let's go. So I can show up your straw manning and imaginary stage play.


Yes it is actual data. And no mr straw man, at no point did I imply that this was near a tally of every punter who has punted her. But yes, it is actual data. The same way a few thousand or even hundred sample is taken to represent dozens of millions of a nation's population (and the wrong winner may have been deemed by polls, or even results outside the calculated margin of error).
Of course this is less scientific, but data nonetheless. There is also a lesser need for science here (less demographical nuance involved). This is after all one of the central premises of the site. You see a prossie with a batting score of 4-4-4 and you say meh, odds are it won't be good! And you avoid.
As I said, we can get into it and get technical if you want. I just wasn't, as I don't see it all as that deep. But I'm happy to take you on if that's what you want. I can give you your Uni society debate.

Nah I keep repeating straw man because you keep straw manning, as I clearly show and directly pinpoint. But nice kiddie lines! If you stop straw manning, I'll stop saying it. Regardless, clearly I have managed to express myself well beyond variations of straw man. But nice kiddie lines nonetheless.

So let's go. Let's cut the ad hominems and stick on the issue. Use bullet points, and I will reply comprehensively to every. single. one.
You made a good start there in paragraph three. True. But possibly no more true than the fact that I could go out and murder my neighbour right now for no rational reason. Possible yes, but what are the odds?
Let's stay on point: ~3% been rejected OWO as per UKP. Even as a proportion of people she has given negative service and shit attitude we are still within single digit territory. Yet it is outlandish white knighting for me to think that there may be something to do with the punter side for OWO off table, and not the prossie who has given OWO to 90%+ of punters she has given similar negative experiences and had some of the same other attitude issues with?
Let me know yr retort. Thanks.

[centry]

What? Really is getting comical now.

Is this not a reply  to your first paragraph?I was even kind enough to give you your gotcha moment. But let me know what I supposedly didn't address and I will.

In fact start writing in bullet points and I will start replying to every single one. I explicitly wanted to avoid this: But let's go. So I can show up your straw manning and imaginary stage play.


Yes it is actual data. And no mr straw man, at no point did I imply that this was near a tally of every punter who has punted her. But yes, it is actual data. The same way a few thousand or even hundred sample is taken to represent dozens of millions of a nation's population (and the wrong winner may have been deemed by polls, or even results outside the calculated margin of error).
Of course this is less scientific, but data nonetheless. There is also a lesser need for science here (less demographical nuance involved). This is after all one of the central premises of the site. You see a prossie with a batting score of 4-4-4 and you say meh, odds are it won't be good! And you avoid.
As I said, we can get into it and get technical if you want. I just wasn't, as I don't see it all as that deep. But I'm happy to take you on if that's what you want. I can give you your Uni society debate.

Nah I keep repeating straw man because you keep straw manning, as I clearly show and directly pinpoint. But nice kiddie lines! If you stop straw manning, I'll stop saying it. Regardless, clearly I have managed to express myself well beyond variations of straw man. But nice kiddie lines nonetheless.

So let's go. Let's cut the ad hominems and stick on the issue. Use bullet points, and I will reply comprehensively to every. single. one.
You made a good start there in paragraph three. True. But possibly no more true than the fact that I could go out and murder my neighbour right now for no rational reason. Possible yes, but what are the odds?
Let's stay on point: ~3% been rejected OWO as per UKP. Even as a proportion of people she has given negative service and shit attitude we are still within single digit territory. Yet it is outlandish white knighting for me to think that there may be something to do with the punter side for OWO off table, and not the prossie who has given OWO to 90%+ of punters she has given similar negative experiences and had some of the same other attitude issues with?
Let me know yr retort. Thanks.

Somehow you've managed to make booking escorts into your own twisted analytics.
I'm cringing extremely hard, you must be proud of yourself.

"Nah I keep repeating straw man because you keep straw manning, as I clearly show and directly pinpoint. But nice kiddie lines! If you stop straw manning, I'll stop saying it. Regardless, clearly I have managed to express myself well beyond variations of straw man. But nice kiddie lines nonetheless."

What utter non-sense, you're regressing your age by the minute. You've managed to expose yourself.

Honestly it's just the same arguments over & over again that I feel like I'm in ground-hog day, and I haven't bothered reading it all. As soon as you claimed science as your back-up for UKP reviews I knew it was pointless to further this conversation.

I for one have lost interest in this silly farce that you've made it out to be. 

[bst]

Hahahahaha I love it. Most of what you say can be held straight back right at you as I noted very early on. YOU'VE managed to expose yourself, backing down once I step up and really get into it like you wanted. Saying I didn't address para when I did, and now downplaying my deconstructing your straw man against the data as "twisted analytics" 

Have a good night fella. Put your straw men to bed.
You literally had only just got my interest. So disappointing you've decided to run now after all of your effort. If anything was repetitive, it was because of you. I simply retorted your comments 

As soon as you claimed science as your back-up for UKP reviews I knew it was pointless to further this conversation.

Hilarious final straw man. I literally said less scientific (however less need for it).

Of course this is less scientific, but data nonetheless. There is also a lesser need for science here (less demographical nuance involved). This is after all one of the central premises of the site. You see a prossie with a batting score of 4-4-4 and you say meh, odds are it won't be good! And you avoid.

Done  You can shout into a void now if you wish. There's a good boy.

[centry]

Hahahahaha I love it. Most of what you say can be held straight back right at you as I noted very early on. YOU'VE managed to expose yourself, backing down once I step up and really get into it like you wanted. Saying I didn't address para when I did, and now downplaying my deconstructing your straw man against the data as "twisted analytics" 

Have a good night fella. Put your straw men to bed.
You literally had only just got my interest. So disappointing you've decided to run now after all of your effort. If anything was repetitive, it was because of you. I simply retorted your comments 

Hilarious final straw man. I literally said less scientific (however less need for it).
Done  You can shout into a void now if you wish. There's a good boy.

Right, but I'm the childish one though right?
I've clearly been wasting away talking to a 12 year old.
I'm not pressing any further since I know silliness when I see it.

Feel free to consider it 'running', if that helps you feel better about your beloved SP.
Have a good night Sir White Knight, may you ride your steed well. 

[MLawro93]

wtf...

[bundaskwilz]

ALOT of comments on this thread ive not read them all but i think this can be answered  pretty easily... did you accept the offer of the shower ?

Veronica and Nat provide to complete different services veronica is more PSE and nat more GFE...veronica takes the job alot more seriously then natt as well... nat will openly tell you she arrives after and leaves before veronica she gets to a time in the day when she just wants to leave lol.

with that being said there is defo more sass in nat then there is in veronica lol

[LLPunting]

ALOT of comments on this thread ive not read them all but i think this can be answered  pretty easily... did you accept the offer of the shower ?

Veronica and Nat provide to complete different services veronica is more PSE and nat more GFE...veronica takes the job alot more seriously then natt as well... nat will openly tell you she arrives after and leaves before veronica she gets to a time in the day when she just wants to leave lol.

with that being said there is defo more sass in nat then there is in veronica lol

I always thought sass was a good thing, she seems to be more of a strop, i.e. the sort many of us took to punting to escape. 

[Whoisarrypotter]

ALOT of comments on this thread ive not read them all but i think this can be answered  pretty easily... did you accept the offer of the shower ?

Veronica and Nat provide to complete different services veronica is more PSE and nat more GFE...veronica takes the job alot more seriously then natt as well... nat will openly tell you she arrives after and leaves before veronica she gets to a time in the day when she just wants to leave lol.

with that being said there is defo more sass in nat then there is in veronica lol

Mate no offence but op's hygene isnt what this review is about,  the review calls into question the sp's service and attitude which this negative highlights.

You seem to know a lot about them yet no reviews on either of them

[bundaskwilz]

Mate no offence but op's hygene isnt what this review is about,  the review calls into question the sp's service and attitude which this negative highlights.

You seem to know a lot about them yet no reviews on either of them

Are you trying to suggest I'm lying ? How the hell would I know that if I was lying ? The OP made 2 points and I agreed about Nats attitude so there was nothing to discuss there... I'm highlighting the lack of OWO which the OP mentioned was strike 2.

Are you alright ?

[bundaskwilz]

Mate no offence but op's hygene isnt what this review is about,  the review calls into question the sp's service and attitude which this negative highlights.

You seem to know a lot about them yet no reviews on either of them

Also just for the record I saw her the exact same day I wrote that reply lol.. but to rebuttal your point both girls a highly reviewed there has never been anything to add untill this last punt with Nat (she gave me pussy slides which I didn't even ask for) and a duo I had with em a few weeks ago but I like to sit on my reviews so the girl can't narrow down who I am so keep an eye open for em

Hidden Image/Members Only

[Whoisarrypotter]

Are you trying to suggest I'm lying ? How the hell would I know that if I was lying ? The OP made 2 points and I agreed about Nats attitude so there was nothing to discuss there... I'm highlighting the lack of OWO which the OP mentioned was strike 2.

Are you alright ?

Apologies fella wasnt trying to suggest you were lying.
Your highlighted point actually made me stop and look back at my comment.
You are quite right at this time im probably not, I didnt actually mean to come across in that context and definatley not cause offence (thats not how i usually roll).
Apologies if that is how it came over

Happy punting
Hp

[bundaskwilz]

Apologies fella wasnt trying to suggest you were lying.
Your highlighted point actually made me stop and look back at my comment.
You are quite right at this time im probably not, I didnt actually mean to come across in that context and definatley not cause offence (thats not how i usually roll).
Apologies if that is how it came over

Happy punting
Hp

Respect for the apology bro.

but yh her attitude is always kinda sassy, her time keeping is in the mud the last week or so but i think thats coz veronica hasnt been around (shes back now i think)