I'm a bit surprised by your reaction, but I'll respond to your points below:
Punters are meant to do their research, first and foremost by reading the SP's profile, so if she clearly states any conditions concerning the delivery of any of her services then there's no real need to have a "list".
This thread is intended as a collective research tool. Like most threads in this forum and UKP as a whole.
SP's change their profiles. They may have genuinely changed their policy. Or they may remove elements that they believe are affecting the amount of business they are receiving.
If this thread helps identify an SP with a specific policy or requirement that a punter is interested in it can help them to identify that in their pre meet research and comms.
This kind of thread might be useful for noting those SP's/pimps/angencies who actually refuse to be upfront about any conditions that make any of the services a punter might be requesting "at discretion" aka "refused on site/sight", but then we'd have a ton of threads about all the services that were "lied about", as well as reviews.
This thread can include those SP's that clearly state the policy, and those that are not being upfront.
Is UKP running out of space for new threads? There are already lots of similar types of threads that different members find useful to varying degree's. If the contents of this thread are not of interest to a member they do not need to read it, or comment on it.
A punter is responsible for confirming the services he wants to pay for, whether inclusive or as extras, if he fails to negotiate that before booking and subsequently leaves when refused on site then that's down to him, as much as the SP.
As you are well aware pre-booking confirmation discussions do not always go as smoothly as we'd all like. For many reasons including maids, language/translation, etc.
I always discuss services before making a booking, I used to mention phimosis but stopped because none of them ever said it was a problem. Going forward I will add enquiries about phimosis to my regular questions, since there seems to be an increase in SP's specifying this issue. But many SPs get pissed off with multiple questions or sometimes avoid direct answers. A thread like this prevents both me and her wasting our time with lengthy conversations or text tennis. Or worst of all, only finding out when I arrive.
Searching through threads doesn't seem to be many punters' forte so it would be best that reviews are written and details such as these are clearly captured, as would any (grateful) note of the SP making a point of checking a punter "qualifies" for the services he's seeking.
It's possible to miss small details read in reviews. Particularly if a WG has multiple reviews to wade through (e.g. one of the examples I have listed has over 70 reviews, I've only seen phimosis mentioned once in her reviews.)
The TOFTT thread and other "new girl" ones note desirable unknowns and updates there after someone has made an enquiry would be sufficient and narrow the avenues of search. As would updates on reviews where an SP has changed her screening and criteria if a review can't be written; update any review that convinced you to try the SP, especially if it details services that are now gated or withdrawn.
Some threads, like the TOFTT thread, are very long. If an SP's AWID is mentioned multiple times in the thread the UKP search function will only present a single post from that thread. That posting may not be the one which details any specific screening criteria the SP uses. I believe several threads such as the NBA/ Ethnic Bar threads were created for the same reason.
Given the counter-points made above, lists can be seen as persecutory, it would make much more sense if a punter suggests to the SP that they update their profile to avoid more wasted enquiries, if they are confronted with an unadvertised limitation. If said polite suggestion is (rudely) rejected then that would be one prime reason to report back here against whatever existing entry the SP has or to add her to a genuinely worthwhile list.
It is unfortunate some SP's may regard this list as persecutory. If they prefer not to provide services to punters with phimosis this thread should help them to avoid those punters.
We cannot control what information an SP provides on their profile or in their comms. As punters we can only share the information we have on this forum.
If anything I'm feeling like the tone of many comments on this thread have been more persecutory of men with phimosis. Suggesting they guaranteed to be unclean, even suggesting they are more likely to harbour STI's. Those are ignorant attitudes that I would like to avoid. Hopefully they won't make members feel reluctant to contribute to this thread.
