I have in the past taken a chance on girls without a face picture but they would have to tick a lot of boxes, right age, area, dress size etc.
If I had a short list and only one showed her face then that is the one I would book ------ would you pay £120 for a new dress without seeing it first, no of course you wouldn't.
Yes, I see what you mean, of course it's better for the punter to see what he is getting first. I was just pointing out that a lot of WGs (the vast majority on AW where I am anyway - the majority of face pics here are obvious PG scams) would rather die than show their face on a paid-sex / porn site
. I wouldn't for any amount of money, it's just personal choice. The way I see it , and I imagine this is the main reason behind most WGs not showing faces, is that once you put something on the interweb, it's there forever. There will always be a record you can never fully get rid of. I mat a guy once who collected
full screenshots of WG's profiles and had ones stored from 4 years before I met him.
As you often advocate on here, you can always walk if you don't find the merchandise suitable to you. If the location is close by, then not much of a loss if you don't fancy her, if you do fancy her then bingo you may have found a new gem.
I imagine if punters kept rigidly to a must-have-face-pic rule then they would drastically reduce the odds of finding decent "punts", just be sheer numbers.