Please Post Up Negative Reviews.

[smiths]

From reading some review threads its apparent on ocassion some punters had punted with a bad WG BUT either not done a review or at least warned other punters. It only becomes apparent when the punter posts he also had a bad punt with the same WG after another punter posts up his negative review. Now kudos for a punter for posting he had had a bad punt but please do a negative review at the time so other punters are made aware.

Even if a punter doesnt want to do positive reviews at least do negatives to inform other punters so they have all the facts to go on before deciding to punt with a WG subject to a negative review or reviews.

Doing this could save many of us money and wasted time booking liars and low lifes.

[nigel4498]

Completely agree, have just posted on the regional board London on a review by password.
Rowntree had seen her two months earlier but did not post a review and now comments on the poor service he received. 

[CBPaul]

Agreed.

For those who are undecided there is also the neutral option, provide details and other punters can make up their minds.

The prossies giving poor service, not offering all they claim on their profiles, being difficult to make arrangements with etc etc will only learn if business starts to suffer and as far as I can see the only place doing that is here on UKP. PN, AW feedbacks and so on are too full of fluffy nonsense to give an accurate picture. 

It appears some think that the out and out scam profiles are transient and not worth reporting as negative, or are too worried about being lambasted for selecting a scam profile. These profiles are recycled with new names, especially if someone has gone to the trouble of verifying them and link fake profiles through a series of fake feedbacks. They will also want to cash in on PG scams too. These should be reported together with the main profile picture and a telephone number if that appears on the profile.

[Natwest]

I have made a lot of punts recently that I haven't written up but have to say have become less enthusiastic in posting.

Hard to articulate but my Father who I could not stand could never differentiate between a "joke" and being "downright bloody rude". So of course if someone posts something "downright rude" directly at you or the prossie, it is a "joke" and therefore you are told to go off and post on "Prossienet" or Saafe". Funny how though this is a punters forum, its still acceptable to kick and insult other punters in the name of humour.

There are also disruptive posters who have been on here a very long time and one in particular has posted not one single review or has ever added to a review thread with any information on seeing any girl. Yet you can guarantee that he will pop up at some time on a review and make some useless comment. It amazes me that nobody has outed the fact that he obviously despises prossies as the lowest of the low and consequently actually never punts.

I will no doubt get flamed for saying this but that is why I have cooled off on posting. There are people on this forum with thousands of posts who hardly ever put up reviews. I have been on five punts since my last review but unfortunately the only way to avoid being the butt of some peoples bad taste in humour is not to post and end up a leech on the site, taking not giving and that certainly wasn't the reason for joining.

I can only liken it to a heated debate in a pub. If someone is a complete arsehole I would just walk away to avoid the unpleasantness. In a public forum you expect there to be some people who do not know how to draw the line. So the best thing is to avoid the unpleasantness by not posting.

What perhaps should be looked at is that there should be an obligation to review as remaining a member of the forum because without reviews, for people who just want to punt rather than debate, there are nowhere near enough reviews. I would be interested to hear from "newbies" and "oldies" alike as to why compared to the number of postings there are such a tiny number of reviews?



 

[wristjob]

There are also disruptive posters who have been on here a very long time and one in particular has posted not one single review or has ever added to a review thread with any information on seeing any girl. Yet you can guarantee that he will pop up at some time on a review and make some useless comment. It amazes me that nobody has outed the fact that he obviously despises prossies as the lowest of the low and consequently actually never punts.

I will no doubt get flamed for saying this but that is why I have cooled off on posting. There are people on this forum with thousands of posts who hardly ever put up reviews. I have been on five punts since my last review but unfortunately the only way to avoid being the butt of some peoples bad taste in humour is not to post and end up a leech on the site, taking not giving and that certainly wasn't the reason for joining.

I can only liken it to a heated debate in a pub. If someone is a complete arsehole I would just walk away to avoid the unpleasantness. In a public forum you expect there to be some people who do not know how to draw the line. So the best thing is to avoid the unpleasantness by not posting.
 

Totally agree - some very immature bully boys here who are very detrimental to the site in the way you describe. I used to post my reviews on a different site and it ended up being aggro and abuse there, so now I post them here. They've lost a decent chunk and UKPs gained a decent few reviews but I'm sure the same thing happens in reverse.

Back on topic - negative reviews are worth way more than positives IMO.

[password02]

Completely agree, have just posted on the regional board London on a review by password.
Rowntree had seen her two months earlier but did not post a review and now comments on the poor service he received. 

Would have been nice to read a Negative review on the girl before TOFTT and wasting a £100 to give her a Negative!!!

[CBPaul]

Blimey, just about to reply to Waverley and he's been banned, have I missed something ?

[OldAdmin]

I would be interested to hear from "newbies" and "oldies" alike as to why compared to the number of postings there are such a tiny number of reviews?

There are more reviews posted in 2014 than all other national and regional punting sites combined.
Your little subtle tactics at pushing the fluffy and "UKP-is-broken" agenda hasn't worked or went unnoticed by me (like your recent "Don't-Trust-UKP-Reviews" thread), now fuck off back to your gutter Pro$$ieNet where pissant fluffys like you belong.

[CBPaul]

There are more reviews posted in 2014 than all other national and regional punting sites combined.
Your little subtle tactics at pushing the fluffy and "UKP-is-broken" agenda hasn't worked or went unnoticed by me (like your recent "Don't-Trust-UKP-Reviews" thread), now fuck off back to your gutter Pro$$ieNet where pissant fluffys like you belong.

Well that sums it up 

Pity he chose that tactic as he was sharing some good information for the Cambs area until his self-imposed curb on reviews.

[Jimmyredcab]

I would be interested to hear from "newbies" and "oldies" alike as to why compared to the number of postings there are such a tiny number of reviews?



 

I can only speak for myself not others.
I have a very small number of reviews because I rarely punt now, maybe once a month, but with over 35 years experience I think I have a right to comment on the reviews of others, if I click on a profile and see a fat, ugly pig then I will make a negative comment, that is what makes UKP unique, on %%% you can't say anything about a review.

[wristjob]

I can only speak for myself not others.
I have a very small number of reviews because I rarely punt now, maybe once a month, but with over 35 years experience I think I have a right to comment on the reviews of others, if I click on a profile and see a fat, ugly pig then I will make a negative comment, that is what makes UKP unique, on %%% you can't say anything about a review.

"fat, ugly pig" is probably not a comment that really draws on 35 years of punting experience - anybody could write that. It adds nothing constructive at all. If somebody constantly gets that kind of reply and stops posting reviews then you have harmed the site and potentially harmed other punters.

[OldAdmin]

It adds nothing constructive at all. If somebody constantly gets that kind of reply and stops posting reviews then you have harmed the site and potentially harmed other punters.

They can fuck off then.
I'm not here to change my site to appease sensitive little fluffies.

[Daffodil]

"fat, ugly pig" is probably not a comment that really draws on 35 years of punting experience - anybody could write that. It adds nothing constructive at all. If somebody constantly gets that kind of reply and stops posting reviews then you have harmed the site and potentially harmed other punters.

My opinion is that posters should be less sensitive.

If this place became a back-slapping, sugar-coating, wankfest then it would be a greater loss than losing one or two shrinking violets 

[Mr Farkyhars]

Agree with wristjob. Those 'contributions' are just as tedious as Vorian's and less friendly.

[Jimmyredcab]

"fat, ugly pig" is probably not a comment that really draws on 35 years of punting experience - anybody could write that. It adds nothing constructive at all.

Read my post properly.   

" if I click on a profile and see a fat, ugly pig then I will make a negative comment"

I didn't say I would call her a fat, ugly pig, I said I would make a negative comment.   

If you want a totally sanitized forum then you would be far happier on %%% which is run for the benefit of pro$$ies. 

[Jimmyredcab]

Agree with wristjob. Those 'contributions' are just as tedious as Vorian's and less friendly.

Well you will have to live with it or go elsewhere, Admin has made his thoughts clear --------

"I'm not here to change my site to appease sensitive little fluffies."

[infoseeker]

Fluffy reviews are a problem and a risk.
This thread is about Negative Reviews which can generally not be fluffy.
I agree any and all negative experiences should be reviewed that is the greatest value added.

Waverley missed the point accidentally or on purpose.
This site is now big enough and on a strong enough growth trajectory that Quality is more important the Quantity.

My opinions on Reviewing and the level of Fluffiness has developed in the time I have been posting on here.
Now if I see a Fluffy review or a potentially Fluffy review I feel like picking it apart and adding avatars like 
Threaded reviews are vital for the ongoing (and never ending) battle against Fluffiness.

Waverley told us about his Father, as for mine he told me lots including
"Son keep good company and it will rub off on you."
Thank You James999 (and others) for providing me with Good Company it has rubbed off 
Not that I was particularly fluffy to begin with - My First Review - On a stuck up money loving, cock hating bitch on whom I walked out on and got my money back - Negative

[OldAdmin]

First they censored and banned us from Pro$$ieNet.
So we created UKP where we could be FREE. Oh how they mocked us and celebrated our departure.
But today they come on here and try to do the same things on Pro$$ieNet.

You couldn't make it up.

[CBPaul]

It has been made clear many times that this site is not going to be allowed to become a fluffy haven.

Personally I agree with that, if we did go all fluffy then the reviews and general comments would become as useful and reliable as those on PNet, AW etc. Pretty much sod all use. I also think that anyone who disagrees is in the wrong place, we are all entitled to disagree with a review and say so within the rules. Adam's site, his rules, take it or leave it.

All this nonsense about 'I've done more reviews than you' is meaningless and I thought it was agreed that those playground games wouldn't be tolerated when the figures showing the number of reviews a member has made first appeared.

But, I still think it's a loss that Waverley stopped reviewing and also got himself banned. That's partly because he punted the same area as me and his contribution, however worded, will be missed. Thicker skin needed.

[wristjob]

Fluffy reviews are a problem and a risk.
This thread is about Negative Reviews which can generally not be fluffy.
I agree any and all negative experiences should be reviewed that is the greatest value added.

Waverley missed the point accidentally or on purpose.
This site is now big enough and on a strong enough growth trajectory that Quality is more important the Quantity.

My opinions on Reviewing and the level of Fluffiness has developed in the time I have been posting on here.
Now if I see a Fluffy review or a potentially Fluffy review I feel like picking it apart and adding avatars like 
Threaded reviews are vital for the ongoing (and never ending) battle against Fluffiness.

Good post.

Personally I don't mind fluffy reviews - to an extent. If there's enough detail you can see through them. If the guy wants to mark it positive and it's clearly a negative then as long as there's detail you can see - and treat his future reviews as such.

Example this one:

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=33120.0

As long as there's detail and not the usual prossienet "what a great girl - treat her well" BS then it's not a problem if the poster is overly enamoured.

[Mr Farkyhars]

At least we have an 'ignore list' facility on here, for which much thanks to Adam. I think using it to edit out those whose chief 'contribution' is pointless needling will greatly improve the UKP experience

[smiths]

Completely agree, have just posted on the regional board London on a review by password.
Rowntree had seen her two months earlier but did not post a review and now comments on the poor service he received. 

There are in fact 2 punters who have posted on that thread that they had punted with Nadia with a negative result before Password. That thread and some other posts prompted this thread.

As i see it there shouldnt be a reason not to post a negative review, the WG has offered bad service or whatever the reason so why wouldnt a punter want to give her a negative. This is of course assuming the punter is genuine, low lifes will get outed sooner or later but vigilance is always needed and on that this site is really excellent at.

[Mancspunter]

I think the problem is sometimes people let their egos get in the way, people need to realise that bad punts happen to everybody you are not daft because you have been thinking with your dick instead of your brain, we have all done it, the least people can do is make sure they don't let it happen to anyone else and that the prossie that is conning people or just providing a shit service ups her game or fucks off.

[smiths]

I think the problem is sometimes people let their egos get in the way, people need to realise that bad punts happen to everybody you are not daft because you have been thinking with your dick instead of your brain, we have all done it, the least people can do is make sure they don't let it happen to anyone else and that the prossie that is conning people or just providing a shit service ups her game or fucks off.

You make an excellent point. I recall on Pnet a number of punters posting they would never do a negative review or give negative forum feedback on a WG as it would make them look bad in front of other punters. I hope none on here think like this.

[yorkshire123]

Totally agree with Smiths on this one.

As far as I'm aware it isn't mandatory to post reviews but if we didn't make the effort what kind of forum would we have?

What i struggle with is when members have an absolute shocker but decide not to mention it at the time but wait until someone post a review be it positive or negative. Why would you not want to warn fellow members of a potential shite punt?

Yes you may get lambasted for your choice of prossie, stupidity or for your lack of due diligence, so what its only words! grow a pair of man nuts please.

The only excuse for not doing so that i can think of is if the punt was way before joining the forum, I for one don't make notes so would struggle to remember all of my past punts.

Also UKP to its credit doesn't have a set format for reviews/warnings so writing them shouldn't be too difficult 

[RedKettle]

Just to comment as a newbie who tentatively put some catch up reviews on when I started I have found the comments and PMs supportive and the banter on most threads entertaining.  There are some idiots but there always will be.

Personally I will never be posting loads of reviews as I tend to stick to regulars - but I am building up a HL of potentials from the reviews for when I feel the need for a change.

Finally - great to be back on here after 3 weeks away with only the odd furtive look on UKP when French WiFi allowed and the family were out .

[Jimmyredcab]

At least we have an 'ignore list' facility on here, for which much thanks to Adam.

It is indeed a great facilty but you can't put too many people on ignore because the threads will not make any sense.

I only have two members on ignore, not so much because I disagree with their views but because I have zero respect for them.   

[Banquo]

From reading some review threads its apparent on ocassion some punters had punted with a bad WG BUT either not done a review or at least warned other punters. It only becomes apparent when the punter posts he also had a bad punt with the same WG after another punter posts up his negative review. Now kudos for a punter for posting he had had a bad punt but please do a negative review at the time so other punters are made aware.

Even if a punter doesnt want to do positive reviews at least do negatives to inform other punters so they have all the facts to go on before deciding to punt with a WG subject to a negative review or reviews.

Doing this could save many of us money and wasted time booking liars and low lifes.

Great post. I've often wondered why members here with zero reviews post up knowleadgeable info about girls in various threads. Is it because members here feel embarrassed by posting up about poor choices? Punting in my area involves a high level of "poor choices" unless you want to see the same two or three girls repeatedly. I like variety, so end up posting neutrals and negatives - I hope others aren't embarrassed by posting negatives - christ, it's an anonymous forum after all

[yorkshire123]

Fluffy reviews are a problem and a risk.

I totally disagree, I doubt they are a risk at all in reality. If you look at the (virtual) firewalls in place any fluffy will be quickly outed whether it be by admin, Nik, long standing members or newer members (with bollocks) & soon realigned or dispensed with if appropriate.
The growth of UKP v's the demise of %%% shows which one has got the correct balance & long may it last.

[Horizontal pleasures]

I can only speak for myself not others.
I have a very small number of reviews because I rarely punt now, maybe once a month, but with over 35 years experience I think I have a right to comment on the reviews of others, if I click on a profile and see a fat, ugly pig then I will make a negative comment, that is what makes UKP unique, on %%% you can't say anything about a review.

punt maybe once a month, how is that a reason for not posting many reviews?

You see fat ugly pigs, I see smiling mature aunties with large boobs, bellies and bums, ready to gush with sensuous enthusiasm.
Some folks see slim young fit ladies not long out of school; I see narcissistic anorectics with loads of cosmetics.
So I say more tolerance without being fluffy, and more reviews from all.

[LL]

As we're on the subject have you noticed that negative reviews only get a tiny fraction of the number of reads compared to positive ones?  Take the review I started for Xena, which was positive - and now has 21249 reads.  Then my last negative review for Nicole @Angelica's Massage has 2135 reads.  The difference is ten-fold.

Now I'm not too fussed about a high or low number of reads.  As long as I've helped a few people out that's fine.  But why the huge difference in reads?  It could be that a scan of the title itself, along with the negative rating alongside it gives many people all the information they need.  By that I mean they see a negative rating, the name of a girl they've heard of but are not sure about and then the name of a member who's name they recognise as someone perhaps giving them good advice in the past.  So no need to read the review - the girl in question just gets removed from their hotlist (whether that's a physical one on AW or just a mental one!).

Another theory I have as to why positive reviews are much more popular than negative ones (in my extremely small study ) is down to lurkers.  I suspect a lot of lurkers just scan through the reviews section and read only the latest positive ones when planning a short-notice punt.

I'm certainly happy to continue posting negative reviews after shitty punts in most cases.  The only exception to this is when I've had a punt that's so shit that I'd rather just forget about it and having to put fingertip to keyboard to share it here with you guys would only make me have to relive the dire experience.

I had another idea and apologies if it's already been suggested but are you familiar with hotukdeals?  I like this model in that everyone here can rate deals by clicking the positive or negative button and this affects a deal's rating.  The same thing could be applied to WGs here.  The key to it is that more established members' opinions carry more weight.  I.e. if you've been here for a while and have a few reviews under your belt, or are perhaps recognised as a member with trusted opinions, clicking the positive rating button or negative one would affect a girl's rating not just by 1 point but by up to 10.

[wristjob]

As we're on the subject have you noticed that negative reviews only get a tiny fraction of the number of reads compared to positive ones?  Take the review I started for Xena, which was positive - and now has 21249 reads.  Then my last negative review for Nicole @Angelica's Massage has 2135 reads.  The difference is ten-fold.

Another theory I have as to why positive reviews are much more popular than negative ones (in my extremely small study ) is down to lurkers.  I suspect a lot of lurkers just scan through the reviews section and read only the latest positive ones when planning a short-notice punt.

If there's a negative review I may have had no interest in the girl anyway so no need to read - and reading it once is enough.

With a positive it may trigger me to book a girl I hadn't looked at - but probably not this week. I might read it, hotlist her then go reread it a couple of times prior to getting round to seeing her. Also it depends on if the review draws a lot of comments.

I had another idea and apologies if it's already been suggested but are you familiar with hotukdeals?  I like this model in that everyone here can rate deals by clicking the positive or negative button and this affects a deal's rating.  The same thing could be applied to WGs here.  The key to it is that more established members' opinions carry more weight.  I.e. if you've been here for a while and have a few reviews under your belt, or are perhaps recognised as a member with trusted opinions, clicking the positive rating button or negative one would affect a girl's rating not just by 1 point but by up to 10.

I wouldn't be keen on that. If someone has seen the girl as has been stated they should do their own review - where they can potentially be questions on aspects of the punt and where they add extra information. Just adding a weighted number gives no extra information and is anything ever as simple as a +/- number?

[infoseeker]

I totally disagree, I doubt they are a risk at all in reality.

"I totally disagree", in reality what has likely prompted you to come back on this thread and quote me to "totally disagree" after already having posted after me once already, is since I just exposed the fluffiness in a review and follow up point of your buddy/pal in the North West.

I believe in Quality Reviewing on UKP even it upsets you if your buddy/pals review and reviewing approach is critiqued and contextualized or as you put it "derailed" in between your back slapping him.

As an aside- I don't know what it is with you are your two pals and your implicit defence of that old American hag KimberlyC whose poor service and attitude and unrepresentative photos I exposed with my own Neutral/Negative Review the first on her on this forum! As encouraged my smiths in this thread.

Threaded reviews are vital for the ongoing (and never ending) battle against Fluffiness.

That is what I said and I stand by and events in the North West review forum yesterday evening only underline that.
The only relevant point that you could have come back on here to make is that it (Fluffiness) is being effectively kept in check at present.
I agree and part of that was me keeping your two pals in check in the North West with their respective reviews of KimberlyC containing some fluffiness particularly the latest one.
You've not picked up on the shocking fluffiness in that review yet or at least not commented on it.

Since this thread is about encouraging members to post a Negative review I wouldn't want to take it off topic by going further into detail here but when I get time, I'll start a new thread in the UK Punting forum to explain what you seem to be blind too due perhaps to your buddyship/palship or just due to your propensity to cut of your nose to spite your face, which I have warned you about before, since it is "quite a bad personal trait to have which is mainly found within the weak & insecure members of any society"

[yorkshire123]

"I totally disagree", in reality what has likely prompted you to come back on this thread and quote me to "totally disagree" after already having posted after me once already, is since I just exposed the fluffiness in a review and follow up point of your buddy/pal in the North West.

I believe in Quality Reviewing on UKP even it upsets you if your buddy/pals review and reviewing approach is critiqued and contextualized or as you put it "derailed" in between your back slapping him.

As an aside- I don't know what it is with you are your two pals and your implicit defence of that old American hag KimberlyC whose poor service and attitude and unrepresentative photos I exposed with my own Neutral/Negative Review the first on her on this forum! As encouraged my smiths in this thread.


That is what I said and I stand by and events in the North West review forum yesterday evening only underline that.
The only relevant point that you could have come back on here to make is that it (Fluffiness) is being effectively kept in check at present.
I agree and part of that was me keeping your two pals in check in the North West with their respective reviews of KimberlyC containing some fluffiness particularly the latest one.
You've not picked up on the shocking fluffiness in that review yet or at least not commented on it.

Since this thread is about encouraging members to post a Negative review I wouldn't want to take it off topic by going further into detail here but when I get time, I'll start a new thread in the UK Punting forum to explain what you seem to be blind too due perhaps to your buddyship/palship or just due to your propensity to cut of your nose to spite your face, which I have warned you about before, since it is "quite a bad personal trait to have which is mainly found within the weak & insecure members of any society"

I've no intention of getting into a cock measuring competition with you, The facility to report me is available may i suggest you use that option rather than selective quoting & behaving like a spoilt kid just because someone dares to disagree with you

[Daffodil]

As we're on the subject have you noticed that negative reviews only get a tiny fraction of the number of reads compared to positive ones?  Take the review I started for Xena, which was positive - and now has 21249 reads.  Then my last negative review for Nicole @Angelica's Massage has 2135 reads.  The difference is ten-fold.

I have not noticed this to be honest, but it is interesting if correct. To know for sure you'd have to pick a fairly large sample size and not just a few of your own reviews.

I do believe that people in general read what they want to read, so will look for evidence to support their own viewpoint. They see a girl they fancy on AW, search for her, and then selectively choose the positive stuff to reinforce their decision and gloss over the bad. Possibly one explanation.

[OldAdmin]

Average views for ALL regions:
Positive - 2,390 per review
Negative - 1,882 per review

Average views for just London region:
Positive - 3,322 per review
Negative - 1,895 per review

[Daffodil]

Average views for ALL regions:
Positive - 2,390 per review
Negative - 1,882 per review

Average views for just London region:
Positive - 3,322 per review
Negative - 1,895 per review

Interesting.

WJ's point also makes sense to me. There's no real point to click a negative if you hadn't planned to see her anyway, but it may be worth just reading through all the positives in the hope of finding a girl you may have missed from an AW search alone.

[infoseeker]

Fluffy reviews are a problem and a risk.

I totally disagree, I doubt they are a risk at all in reality.

You've not picked up on the shocking fluffiness in that review yet or at least not commented on it.

yorkshire123 be a grown up punter and take it in your stride and learn from this experience.
You got caught red handed back slapping on an intolerably fluffy review by your pal where you accused me of "derailing" it when I critiqued and contextualised it as required to uphold the reviewing integrity of this forum.
We all make mistakes it is how we learn from them that counts.

5 StepGuide to get the most out of a Pro$$ie by the lads in UKPunting North West

[wristjob]

"I totally disagree", in reality what has likely prompted you to come back on this thread and quote me to "totally disagree" after already having posted after me once already, is since I just exposed the fluffiness in a review and follow up point of your buddy/pal in the North West.

I believe in Quality Reviewing on UKP even it upsets you if your buddy/pals review and reviewing approach is critiqued and contextualized or as you put it "derailed" in between your back slapping him.

Way way way back when PN first started I used the reviews there for pretty much 1 purpose - to ascertain what services a girl offers. Even a fluffy review does that. I think once you have tagged someone as a fluffy then you look at the reviews differently, give them a different weighting - it's something you can do because you have the history of that guys reviews/posts so I'd say as long as the guy included enough detail on the basics you can get something out of them.

What I really don't like is the assumption that I'm too think to realise when a guy has lost objectivity and to filter out the bits of useful information from the chaff.

[LL]

Average views for ALL regions:
Positive - 2,390 per review
Negative - 1,882 per review

Average views for just London region:
Positive - 3,322 per review
Negative - 1,895 per review

Thanks for that. Good to know the difference is not as large as I thought.

[LL]

Just adding a weighted number gives no extra information and is anything ever as simple as a +/- number?

It wouldn't replace the reviews and subsequent comments, it would accompany them. Also gives members who don't write reviews (most of them?) for whatever reason, a chance to contribute anonymously and with very little effort (one click)

[Steve2]

Completely agree, have just posted on the regional board London on a review by password.
Rowntree had seen her two months earlier but did not post a review and now comments on the poor service he received. 

Everyone has the choice whether to do reviews or not. And comment or not

 

[Jimmyredcab]

punt maybe once a month, how is that a reason for not posting many reviews?

1)  Half of those punts will be with women I have seen before.

2)  Even on %%% I never posted "Neutral" reviews, no point in my opinion.

3) Quite a number of my punts are in the Domination sector, not too many members seem to show an interest in that.

4)  A high review count means very little to me, it is the quality of the punts that is important.

[yorkshire123]

yorkshire123 be a grown up punter and take it in your stride and learn from this experience.
You got caught red handed back slapping on an intolerably fluffy review by your pal where you accused me of "derailing" it when I critiqued and contextualised it as required to uphold the reviewing integrity of this forum.
We all make mistakes it is how we learn from them that counts.

5 StepGuide to get the most out of a Pro$$ie by the lads in UKPunting North West

Caught red hand by who may i ask? A self appointed punting Messiah & a trouble causing forum traffic policeman, i don't think so!
However you will be pleased to know that i have learnt from this experience as prior to this i just thought that you were a jumped up self opinionated troll, now i know it to be true so i thank you for confirming that 

Enough of the personal attacks & lets get back to the matter in hand before we both get a ticking off or banned shall we, punting, reviewing, information sharing, having the odd laugh & the acceptance that some people may have differing opinions from ourselves from time to time?

[Jimmyredcab]

Enough of the personal attacks & lets get back to the matter in hand before we both get a ticking off or banned shall we.

Might be a good idea to put him on ignore, he does come across as being a bit of a ****.     

[Steve2]

For once we agree Jimmy

 

[yorkshire123]

Might be a good idea to put him on ignore, he does come across as being a bit of a ****.     

Great advice Jimmy i hadn't thought of doing that, Best all round i suppose 

[infoseeker]

Jump to next post below if you would like to avoid the spill over of UK Punting North West onto this thread caused by yorkshire123 here.


jimmyredcab you want to get yourself over to the North West forums the lads over there are making exciting things happen, it is the fastest growing region on UK Punting.... if you get the chance drop in and post on some more of my reviews, like you did here.

Might be a good idea to put him on ignore, he does come across as being a bit of a ****.

If yorkshire123 puts me on ignore the North West Forums will no longer make sense to him. 
A large part of the Info and Recommendations and Reviews in those two forums will no longer be visible to him.
According to the stats I am 9% of that forum AND I've only been posting there for a month and a half, and unlike him and his old pal Vorian / Remus I don't make 100s of superfluous posts (Admin can confirm that for you).
Maybe he should put all my pals that recently started posting in North West on ignore too, so it could go back to the way it was before..... "The Good Old Days".

I wouldn't be suprised though if he'd be willing to Cut off His Nose to Spite His Face enough to do that though.
I'd not put him on ignore in the North West for the most part he posts to add Info and Recommendations and Quality Detective Work, it is mostly when he ventures out here....

Great advice Jimmy i hadn't thought of doing that, Best all round i suppose

....he displays his other trait which I find detesable "the tactic of sucking up to the "old guard" in the vain hope of getting some recognition or favoured support is very amateurish. These guys are seasoned punters and forum contributors who will see right through any deception or deflection techniques you may wish to use.", that is precisely what he came back onto this thread to do!, causing me to have to come back on it.


To make it clear I think yorkshire123 is a contributing punter whose posts I enjoy reading in the North West forums.
Where we differ is I use this forum to Infoseek and Infoshare almost exclusively and have been very successful in promoting the North West forums. (Admin can confirm that for you)
To yorkshire123 it is like a youth club / pub / old peoples home (depending on his age) where he perhaps gains a lot / most of his social interaction, what appears to annoy him most about me is due to my goal focused nature I am unable to pay heed to his sensitivities in that regard whilst I am focused on my current (and time limited) goal of building up the North West forums.

yorkshire123 you are a good guy perhaps if you take on board my observations and insights about you, you'll be a better punter.... and less prone to backslap on a blatantly fluffy review just cause it was from your pal 

[infoseeker]

As we're on the subject have you noticed that negative reviews only get a tiny fraction of the number of reads compared to positive ones?  Take the review I started for Xena, which was positive - and now has 21249 reads.  Then my last negative review for Nicole @Angelica's Massage has 2135 reads.

Hi LL,
You have a valid point and the stats posted by Admin bear that out.
But in your example the Positive Review was posted Feb and the Negative Review was posted May so that would account for some of the difference in views
AND
More impactfully when a review generates comments for whatever reason (relevant or irrelevant) it leads to return viewers and the Postive one has 177 replies whilst the Negative one has 9.
So there is a difference but in general with a like for like comparison is not x 10 it more like x 1.5 to x 2.


To get more views consider adding a more descriptive/informative Attention Drawing title as in the case of my last Negative Review posted a few weeks ago.
young teen 18 Adultwork 2396662 Liverpool Rip off including threat of a Minder
AND
Later add more relevant Info to Inform... like I did in the case of this whiney Scouse whore. 

[smiths]

Jump to next post below if you would like to avoid the spill over of UK Punting North West onto this thread caused by yorkshire123 here.


jimmyredcab you want to get yourself over to the North West forums the lads over there are making exciting things happen, it is the fastest growing region on UK Punting.... if you get the chance drop in and post on some more of my reviews, like you did here.

If yorkshire123 puts me on ignore the North West Forums will no longer make sense to him. 
A large part of the Info and Recommendations and Reviews in those two forums will no longer be visible to him.
According to the stats I am 9% of that forum AND I've only been posting there for a month and a half, and unlike him and his old pal Vorian / Remus I don't make 100s of superfluous posts (Admin can confirm that for you).
Maybe he should put all my pals that recently started posting in North West on ignore too, so it could go back to the way it was before..... "The Good Old Days".

I wouldn't be suprised though if he'd be willing to Cut off His Nose to Spite His Face enough to do that though.
I'd not put him on ignore in the North West for the most part he posts to add Info and Recommendations and Quality Detective Work, it is mostly when he ventures out here....

....he displays his other trait which I find detesable "the tactic of sucking up to the "old guard" in the vain hope of getting some recognition or favoured support is very amateurish. These guys are seasoned punters and forum contributors who will see right through any deception or deflection techniques you may wish to use.", that is precisely what he came back onto this thread to do!, causing me to have to come back on it.


To make it clear I think yorkshire123 is a contributing punter whose posts I enjoy reading in the North West forums.
Where we differ is I use this forum to Infoseek and Infoshare almost exclusively and have been very successful in promoting the North West forums. (Admin can confirm that for you)
To yorkshire123 it is like a youth club / pub / old peoples home (depending on his age) where he perhaps gains a lot / most of his social interaction, what appears to annoy him most about me is due to my goal focused nature I am unable to pay heed to his sensitivities in that regard whilst I am focused on my current (and time limited) goal of building up the North West forums.

yorkshire123 you are a good guy perhaps if you take on board my observations and insights about you, you'll be a better punter.... and less prone to backslap on a blatantly fluffy review just cause it was from your pal 

Thanks for doing your best to derail this thread with this bollocks.