Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

UKPunting is a free, independent and not-for-profit paid sex buyer site.


Author Topic: UKP Regional WG Hot Lists or Top Tens: anyone think they would be useful?  (Read 2981 times)

Offline Ben4454

I mentioned something like this a while ago as a feature for people who are members of the site. My idea was to not prohibit them from viewing reviews but instead give people extra features and more incentives to become a member of the site. I do agree that touters and working girls could easily fix the numbers and use it as a platform to bump their favourite working girls so in a way the system would need to be moderated.

My idea is that once a working girl recieves a positive it adds a number to her score. So for example...

Dirty Dorris recieves a positive from PuntingBob - one point is added to her profile. If someone then leaves a negative then Dirty Dorris loses that point she had and returns back to zero. League tables will then form with the best 15 prossies in each region.

The problem we have with this system is that fluffies or trolls could counteract the positive/negative reviews in the prossies favour so the system would need to be moderated and regulated. Perhaps members with over a certain amount of posts will be able to add a point to each profile otherwise the point becomes obselete.

If it works then if puntingBob fancies a decent punt then all he has to do is look at the league tables for each county and can decide which girl he wants to see without the fuss and time it takes to sort through all of the profiles on Adultwork.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 02:25:53 PM by Ben4454 »
Banning reason: Ignored admin warning after temporary banning and signed up to malicious troll anti-UKP site

''Hey babykins, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi. Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. xx''

 :kissgirl:

''Hey babykins, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi. Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. xx''

 :kissgirl:

Exactly.

Offline west8

I don't think it would be useful. Punting is such a personal thing. We each have different needs and interests.

A well-argued case Puntico, I can’t deny that. I also agree with much of what you wrote.

However, I think it’s largely applicable to existing / established members who have taken the time to register and participate. Yes, they are the lifeblood of the site, but to ensure continuity and expansion of the community, one key thing is most important: fresh blood.

Virtually every single day there are multiple new folks making their first (and often last) post to elicit suggestions or recommendations from the established membership.

Wouldn’t an auto-generated ‘best seller list’ to use your analogy, be a good starting point for those new arrivals?

We all want to make the ‘right’ choices and discover the best girls who provide a good range of services at the fairest prices in any given area. For example, I’ve always been tempted to spend a week in Essex to explore the local MILF talent, but I wouldn’t know where to start.

At least that ‘best seller’ list would give me some pointers so that – worst way – I might not have a brilliant punt, but at the very least any girl who makes it to double-digit positive reviews and earns a place on the ‘top’ list is highly likely to be a safe choice for a punt and a punters hard-earned cash.

Moreover, as some have already mentioned, given the scrutiny that both new members and new reviews (rightly) attract, I think the lists might even help to draw out the touts, fluffies and desperate/bad service providers.

. . . I’ve always been tempted to spend a week in Essex to explore the local MILF talent, but I wouldn’t know where to start.

Fair point, although the region search tool on AW coupled with the I.D. search function on here might yield you with all you need to know. Again, my starting point is that you are first looking for your preferred criteria before you look at reviews - I accept that your suggestion is the reverse.

Moreover, as some have already mentioned, given the scrutiny that both new members and new reviews (rightly) attract, I think the lists might even help to draw out the touts, fluffies and desperate/bad service providers.

Fair point.

Offline west8

Fair point, although the region search tool on AW coupled with the I.D. search function on here might yield you with all you need to know. Again, my starting point is that you are first looking for your preferred criteria before you look at reviews - I accept that your suggestion is the reverse.

Yep, you're right. But I've almost stopped using Adultwork for searching for new talent. UKP is much better (and much faster).

For me, the major issue with AW is the buggy as fuck code, the fucking javascript and the occasional drop down menu freezes. It's not a local or browser compatibility issue either. AW needs a complete code rewrite - and faster raw processing power to serve up queries to their myriad databases a LOT faster.

The more info that can be pulled from AW and included here on UKP, the better as far as I'm concerned. This site already owns virtually every first spot when searching Google for a WG by name, so the more that can be migrated here and the less I need to use AW, the better.

Don't know if you folks agree?

Offline Ben4454

''Hey babykins, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi. Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. xx''

 :kissgirl:

A point that was mentioned however this is something which already exists in every network of the site.

- What is stopping prossies writing fake reviews and or encouraging fluffies to do the same.
- What is stopping prossies adding to the punting WIKI and adding good publicity to their name or removing bad publicity.

We have to understand that corrupt information and advertising is something which is apart of this site and something we will never fully eradicate. However - with good moderation and regulation the punting tables would be adding more value to the punter than removing it.

Perhaps the objective is to remove the incentive for touts and prossies to add more points to their name. Perhaps instead of a score leader board using numeric values there would be no table but a simple list. Once prossies have a good amount of points she is on the list neither 1st or 6th. This list will be reviewed and past reviews and the member will be cross-referenced quickly to assess the authencity. A member with over 400 posts can only add to the point system. This means a headache for any tout or prossie who wants to keep making new membership to bump themselves up on the list.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 03:19:42 PM by Ben4454 »
Banning reason: Ignored admin warning after temporary banning and signed up to malicious troll anti-UKP site

Offline Ali Katt

No, because it's subjective, you would also need a score based system to track it ideally. It also means the less popular girls don't get reviewed which means punters choose from a "limited menu" if they are new to the scene or that area. And lets not forget all the cheerleaders and fluffbombs. A good review on here works wonders, look at AW all the most popular girls have reviews on here, not a coincidence.

Offline NightKid

No. It would just give the increasing number of forum fanboys more opportunities to tout their favourite pro$$ies.  :mad:

Thirded.

Of course it could be exploited. But we've all seen how easily the touters/fake punters/fluffies/pimps/WGs posing as punters get exposed - and banned.  :)

Plenty still slip through the cracks ... you're still here, aren't you?  :rolleyes:

Offline 306

Quote from: Bangers and Gash on Today at 10:26:21 am
''Hey Westie, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi again . Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. westie xx''
Banning reason: Constantly making nonsensical useless posts + Constantly ignoring admin requests

Offline akauya

''Hey babykins, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi. Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. xx''

 :kissgirl:

Bang on   :D

Not only the above but we will also have some punter coming along and saying "hey guys, guess what, you know that prossie topping the charts? well, I have shocking info about her" he will then, for suspense, refuse to give the shocking info. Then after some time he will start a thread informing us about the shocking info...  :rolleyes:

Offline Sedlmayer

Bang on   :D

Not only the above but we will also have some punter coming along and saying "hey guys, guess what, you know that prossie topping the charts? well, I have shocking info about her" he will then, for suspense, refuse to give the shocking info. Then after some time he will start a thread informing us about the shocking info...  :rolleyes:

 :drinks:

Offline smiths

''Hey babykins, I noticed on UKP that I've dropped from being 1st all the way down to 6th - that's not good for business. Would you be a darling and pop in another glowing review of our last magical meeting, you know, the one where I came 8 times on your big juicy cock - and I'll let you bareback me in the jacuzzi. Don't tell anyone of our little arrangement as I only do this for special, sexy guys... like you. xx''

 :kissgirl:

Absolutely spot on B&G. :thumbsup: For ME this site is all about a punters credibility as I see it. No changes will ever change that central point for me. So if I think a punter has credibility I will take his word, if I don't think he has credibility I wont just take his word, I require additional info from another punter I do find credible.

This modus has served me well over two punting forums for years. The only thing I would like to see happen on here is that ALL WGs are banned as in my view they add very little, though I fully understand its up to admin what he does. What I particularly dislike is when a WG joins to post on her own review thread, nine times out of ten even if its a positive review they find something to complain about and a fair percentage then lose their rag when challenged by a punter.

 The heart of why this happens in my observations is because some if not many WGs and their pimps don't like the idea of being reviewed in the first place, they wish it was 20 years ago. Well wake up and smell the roses is my message to them. Ensure you offer ALL punters a good service and positive feedback that will get you more punters will follow, if you offer bad service it might well get on here.

Offline west8

Bang on   :D

Not only the above but we will also have some punter coming along and saying "hey guys, guess what, you know that prossie topping the charts? well, I have shocking info about her" he will then, for suspense, refuse to give the shocking info. Then after some time he will start a thread informing us about the shocking info...  :rolleyes:

Miles wide of the mark. I see some are still missing the point. The data is already present on the site. It doesn't need to be altered or adjusted in any way.

I'm simply suggesting it be displayed in tabular form so it's easier to find.

B&G's 'bareback for a favour' theory is fatally flawed for two good reasons:

1. There's nothing whatsoever to prevent that from happening now. It doesn't happen (or is quickly seized upon) precisely because the existing reviews are scrutinised by the membership already. The totals per girl are also displayed on the site (in each review) already.

2. I for one have never posted two positive (one on one) reviews for the same girl. Nor have I any intention of ever doing so. I think it's sufficient to update an existing review unless said review is going to change from a positive to a negative (or vice versa). Therefore, a simple solution is to only include any one review by any one reviewer in the tabulated lists.

To reiterate: I'm not suggesting a revolution here, merely a shuffling of the deckchairs to enable relevant data to be more easily retrieved.

Offline Barry Shipton

If you link reviews to Puntingwiki you can easily tell who the top girls in a region are - just look in the 'popular pages' link and there's one escort who was first to hit 1,000 page views and it will be no surprise to North East members that was Keeva closely followed by Lily Delphine.

Both also have a full page of green positive review tags, and they are closely followed by other popular girls with 700 or 800 views. But also up there near the top is Ruby 1993 - one of the most notorious B&S scammers in the region, which is as it should be as the more people aware of all her fake profiles the better.

I think Admin probably has enough on trying to keep the trolls, touts and scammers off the site and barred from defacing PuntingWiki to develop a scientifically weighted logarithm to deduce who makes it into the top ten.

And I don't think it doesn't really helps those with 'specialist' tastes for Milfs, BBWs, ethnic girls or whatever, but it really doesn't take a lot of research and maybe when there's more take up of people linking reviews to the wiki it will be even easier.

Offline Flunt

The idea has one basic flaw, over time the most popular reviewed pro$$ies will retire and remain at the top of the leader board whilst the new sensations will be nowhere near the top 10, until they have been around for a considerable length of time.

Offline west8

If you link reviews to Puntingwiki you can easily tell who the top girls in a region are - just look in the 'popular pages' link and there's one escort who was first to hit 1,000 page views and it will be no surprise to North East members that was Keeva closely followed by Lily Delphine.

Can't find the 'popular pages' link, am I going blind?


I think Admin probably has enough on trying to keep the trolls, touts and scammers off the site and barred from defacing PuntingWiki to develop a scientifically weighted logarithm to deduce who makes it into the top ten.

That's my point. He doesn't need to. The Top Ten per region already exists in the site DB! We already know how many reviews Platinum Cindy and Michelle Independent, etc (London) have.


And I don't think it doesn't really helps those with 'specialist' tastes for Milfs, BBWs, ethnic girls or whatever, but it really doesn't take a lot of research and maybe when there's more take up of people linking reviews to the wiki it will be even easier.

Agreed, but sub sections could easily be added if and when required.

I'd love to see a 'top ten MILFs in Essex' (by total positive reviews) list! :drinks:



The idea has one basic flaw, over time the most popular reviewed pro$$ies will retire and remain at the top of the leader board whilst the new sensations will be nowhere near the top 10, until they have been around for a considerable length of time.

Nope. No Adultwork profile and/or retirement = removal.


Offline west8

Yes, pest8 thought of it.  :hi:

Which implies that it would otherwise be a good idea. Thanks for changing your mind and lending your support to the idea B&G. :drinks: :hi:

Offline finn5555

Load of bollocks and wouldn't work  :dash: besides the war and peace bullshit reports from snake8 would just clutter up the thread  :crazy:

Offline west8

Load of bollocks and wouldn't work  :dash: besides the war and peace bullshit reports from snake8 would just clutter up the thread  :crazy:

Did you just skip the entire thread and have an attack of the bollocks?

It already works - and already exists. No-one is proposing any 'thread' as you call it either.

Jesus, you're going to start telling me that 2+2 = 165 next.

Offline finn5555

Did you just skip the entire thread and have an attack of the bollocks?

It already works - and already exists. No-one is proposing any 'thread' as you call it either.

Jesus, you're going to start telling me that 2+2 = 165 next.

No it equals 4 you cretin  :crazy:

Offline west8

No it equals 4 you cretin  :crazy:

Wow, I'm impressed. I genuinely thought you were going to tell us that 2 plus 2 equals 22.  :wacko:


Offline finn5555

Wow, I'm impressed. I genuinely thought you were going to tell us that 2 plus 2 equals 22.  :wacko:

Unlike you snake8 I have an education and live in the real world not the world of make believe you reside in  :hi: the door to Narnia is to your right  :sarcastic:


Latest media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)