Escorts with online free videos

[theblade]

Dear god. Why does she have a youtube channel. Only thing us males are interested in is Rebecca More geting fucked while we watch and masturbate to her porn videos or pay her to fuck her (but not for £1000).

That said, it looks like her short escort come back did not go that well.   

Rebecca was great in her day provided a great service. Haven’t financial been able to punt for a while now,but fucking her Arse, Spunking over her face area definitely a highlight of mine ( logged in the wank bank)
 She definitely seems to have lost the plot, stupid fees,less service’s offered. Even her Cam fees are ridiculous. I had a few phone chats with her years ago  she was excellent really seemed to get into it.
If I’m honest I don’t understand how people make money on youtube but clearly she thinks she can.
It’s a shame how she gone.

[mace-window]

fixed

Thanks  .

agreed, but apparently floats some peoples boat 

She still floats my boat but hell no am paying £1000 to fuck her with no OWO or CIM.

[mace-window]

Rebecca was great in her day provided a great service. Haven’t financial been able to punt for a while now,but fucking her Arse, Spunking over her face area definitely a highlight of mine ( logged in the wank bank)
 She definitely seems to have lost the plot, stupid fees,less service’s offered. Even her Cam fees are ridiculous. I had a few phone chats with her years ago  she was excellent really seemed to get into it.
If I’m honest I don’t understand how people make money on youtube but clearly she thinks she can.
It’s a shame how she gone.

Like I said on a previous thread on Rebecca More is that her ego is off the roof after she went viral and became  e-celeb for 5 minutes. From charging £1000 per hour for less filthy services which she used to provide back in the day (for far less) to now this Youtube channel. End of the day it's time to move on from Rebecca More as she has gone down a path which most punters would not want to follow. Besides they are many other younger and better looking WG's each day who will be willing provide far better service than Mrs More with one or two being as filthy or even more filthier than prime Rebecca More.

Besides after top 20% of punters had enough with Rebecca More and they decide to see younger and more attractive WG who is willing to provide far more services than Mrs More for same or lesser price (that day may be sooner than we think), maybe she will return back to Earth and reduce her prices back to £150 - £200. Mind you, in an article posted on one of previous threads here on her, she said she don't like the average punter. So I may pass up on her just for that if she returns.

[Avg_Joe]

<snip> Mind you, in an article posted on one of previous threads here on her, she said she don't like the average punter. So I may pass up on her just for that if she returns.

that sounds more than fair to me, under the guise of "you reap what you sew"

[NightKid]

Bringing the thread back on topic - External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

[davidgood]

Bringing the thread back on topic - External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

Thanks for getting us back on topic. The video link also brings up the work of a mature lady I have played with many times over the years at parties. I think she has already been mentioned.

I thought I was experiencing  de ja vue when I saw the vid, but doing a check of the profile number I see she has already been mentioned;-

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?msg=2919215

But thanks for contributing.

Regards,

davidgood

[extraa]

Violet Tattoo - External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only - the way she holds those legs back is something else!

£20 extra just to kiss, some of these girls really do be taking the micky  and yet OWO is only £10 extra.

[puntingpumping1920]

External Link/Members Only
 
External Link/Members Only
 
External Link/Members Only
 
External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only 
 

 

[Avg_Joe]

jesus, i'm blacklisting more of these than i am watching the videos to the end


between this and the verification photos threads i'm beginning to believe there are hardly any good looking birds working anymore

[mace-window]

jesus, i'm blacklisting more of these than i am watching the videos to the end


between this and the verification photos threads i'm beginning to believe there are hardly any good looking birds working anymore

Well up North we got Tess McGill who has a banging body, Harriet Appleby, Luna__Rose (don't know about their face as I not meet her yet), LailaDevereaux-UK, Eleanor.Rose, Angel Sam and a couple of more I can't think on the top of my head.

Else where Lilth Noir is quite attractive so as well as Spicy Paradise, TIFFANY_SNOW, Your Hidden Secret, Hayley-x-x, Broganswan, Lady_Phoenix, EnglishStormDesireX, Welsh Barbie, Scarlett_knight21, LucyLou, Taylor-Jay, Mexican SophieSophie, Lucy Mayer, Ellie_30_Rose, Jessy Blue, aliciaxdarling, Vixen Verity, NaughtyHannah and many more. Again looks are different to each person. It just where you look and find which WG you find attractive with a good review ratio. But I will agree, with this time and age, their a lot of sub par ladies (on looks) these days. For me looks are important but knowing I will get a good service (good review ratio) is more important to me that good looking WG who don't put an effort on the meet or remove certain services on her like list.

[king tarzan]

jesus, i'm blacklisting more of these than i am watching the videos to the end


between this and the verification photos threads i'm beginning to believe there are hardly any good looking birds working anymore

Go to the agencies and take your pick 😋😋👅👅👅😋

AW is reduced to jeremy kyle show (now defunct)/prisoner cell block H cast members..

[bossanova]

External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

 

[king tarzan]

External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

 

did you have cereal when you watched it??

[GlennQuagmire]

Looks hot, but flipping expensive, won't be getting a visit from me.

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

A couple of different vids:
External Link/Members Only

Also a load here:
External Link/Members Only

[simpleton69]

Looks hot, but flipping expensive, won't be getting a visit from me.

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

A couple of different vids:
External Link/Members Only

Also a load here:
External Link/Members Only

All those links seem to lead to cam show videos

All he AW feedback is for either cam and chat booking and there is no escort reviews

Proberley hi prices to discourage escort bookings / enquires

[Tomtom69]

 External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

[Stealthmode]

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

She looks to have balloned

[mace-window]

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

Loads of negative reviews and she think she is worth £500 per hour! GTFO of  here .

[Avg_Joe]

Loads of negative reviews and she think she is worth £500 per hour! GTFO of  here .

hidden feedback, 4 negative out of 40 ... yeah, fuck of to the blacklist

[Polowacka]

Looks hot, but flipping expensive, won't be getting a visit from me.

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

A couple of different vids:
External Link/Members Only

Also a load here:
External Link/Members Only

Also seems to be listed here External Link/Members Only at a more reasonable £250

[king tarzan]

Loads of negative reviews and she think she is worth £500 per hour! GTFO of  here .

I think i will play Madonna "like a virgin" on repeat all night

[Kev40ish]

Offline Avg_Joe
Banned
 
Posts: 3,032
Reviews: 27
Banned reason: White knight.
Banned by: daviemac

Surprised at this ban, I have never noticed him to white knight in his previous 3032 posts...
Always appeared a valuable contributor.

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

[mace-window]

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

A shame that this WG got like more negative/neutrals than positives.

[mace-window]

Offline Avg_Joe
Banned
 
Posts: 3,032
Reviews: 27
Banned reason: White knight.
Banned by: daviemac

Surprised at this ban, I have never noticed him to white knight in his previous 3032 posts...
Always appeared a valuable contributor.

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

I wonder to. He seemed like cool cat but hi who knows.

[simpleton69]

Offline Avg_Joe
Banned
 
Posts: 3,032
Reviews: 27
Banned reason: White knight.
Banned by: daviemac

Surprised at this ban, I have never noticed him to white knight in his previous 3032 posts...
Always appeared a valuable contributor.

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

Was thinking the same thing
I did look back at his recent posts and could see anything to controversial

[themaserman]

 I know Ella has been mentioned on here before but she's a game girl walking around
Shepherds Bush with a big load drying on her face (hope it's not been pasted before)

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

[daviemac]

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

Not everything is done publicly.

[MrMatrix]

Offline Avg_Joe
Banned
 
Posts: 3,032
Reviews: 27
Banned reason: White knight.
Banned by: daviemac

Surprised at this ban, I have never noticed him to white knight in his previous 3032 posts...
Always appeared a valuable contributor.

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

I too am surprised at this ban for the same reasons you say Kev. He was a positive and proactive member of the forum and as such I'm sorry to see this banning.

When I see a historically reliable member banned I sometimes think a temporary banning could be considered for say a month or something (as old Admin did occasionally). I compare his contribution to the many leeches and lurkers and there's no comparison. If he was in the latter group he could just sit there and make no contribution and have his own opinion without breaking any rules and he'd still be here.

I can only assume he was warned before or something to which the moderator has alluded. In which case he should have taken heed. The rules on White Knighting are quite clear IMO.

[Your_dark_knight]

Popped up in my area recently. Took a bit of digging on UKP but I found her name when she did a porn.

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

She's on my HL now.

Excellent work / find - though her profile now looks like she’s lost a lot of weight.

[daviemac]

I suppose it shows as a warning but not sure what your not allowed to post 

In which case he should have taken heed. The rules on White Knighting are quite clear IMO.

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

[king tarzan]

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

Your a fair cop moderator... so I will leave at at that fair fact..

[NightKid]

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

Doesn't sound like anything severe enough to warrant a banning though? 

[Kev40ish]

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

I was just being curious. I would always trust your decisions, even without you explaining yourself.
But thank you for the update 

[daviemac]

Doesn't sound like anything severe enough to warrant a banning though? 

Are you kidding me, what would you call trawling through an escorts reviews on her behalf and reporting what HE, not her, thought shouldn't be in them.  She is a member here so could and should do that herself, it is not up to punters, on a punting forum, to do it for them 

Anyway I've said all I'm going to say if you don't agree take it up with those who make the decisions. Maybe posts such as yours is why explanations are not normally given.

[daviemac]

I was just being curious. I would always trust your decisions, even without you explaining yourself.
But thank you for the update 

Following NightKid's questioning the decision it will be the last anyone gets.   

[Kev40ish]

Following NightKid's questioning the decision it will be the last anyone gets.   

I totally understand, you do not have to justify your decisions to anyone.

[Payyourwaymate]

Doesn't sound like anything severe enough to warrant a banning though? 

You may not think that, but imagine if there were several members that started to do that, it would potentially affect the transparency of reviews shifting the balance more in WGs favour against punters. Punters will then be reading reviews which are not completely transparent and getting nasty surprises just because other members want to white knight WGs reviews putting the the WG in a better light from the reality. Would that not be against the ethos of the site? White knighting a WG that they are a better provider than they really are or white knighting in general is one thing, but attempting to manipulate information on reviews of others is quite serious I think.

[daviemac]

I totally understand, you do not have to justify your decisions to anyone.

To make matters worse he was active on the thread on the other forum and knew the escort had reported the review she was concerned about, he also knew I had raised this same issue with Head1 to have it clarified. So if anyone thinks him going back over all her reviews and picking bits out he didn't agree with is not being a white knight then I despair.

[Charlie Chalk]

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

Good of you to clarify Davie, although there was no need to do so. The way this site works is that Head1 runs the site with some Mods & helpers. His word goes. If anyone doesn't like it, then they don't have to use the site. That's pretty much the way is was with original Admin too - it isn't a democracy. I have to say that people do tend to get a fair crack of the whip, the banhammer only seems to be used as a last resort from what I've seen.

In this case - what an idiot! I know the thread and the issue concerned and had a quick perusal of the previous reviews to see if I could spot any issues, just out of nosiness. The difference is, I didn't do anything about it because it was nothing to do with me and the WG in question could/should have done this herself. Acting in this way is a pretty clear case of WKing IMHO - if he was that bothered he could/should have flagged it to the WG and let her do it, not take it upon himself to act on her behalf. It's a shame to lose a valuable and prolific member but it does show that everyone needs to stick to the rules and no-one is immune.

Anyway, enough OT - has anyone good some good vids to lighten the mood??

[daviemac]

Just realised this thread  is for escort vids.... Will relocate it.   

Can't be moved to off topic, can you just re-post in there and I'll delete this one.   

[thecat250]

Nothing like trashy over-the-top escort video to get back on topic 

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only
 

[Waterhouse]

Can't be moved to off topic, can you just re-post in there and I'll delete this one.   

Cheers DM.

[NightKid]

You may not think that, but imagine if there were several members that started to do that, it would potentially affect the transparency of reviews shifting the balance more in WGs favour against punters.

Not really, as we know the person who did it received a banning instead. And I think the act itself could be a matter of perspective because I'm not sure I'd consider a person reporting posts unnecessarily to be as much a white knight as someone who defends a prossie outright ... though it's funny you mention transparency cause we apparently have a moderator whose reaction to a simple thought is to shut it down instead, which is something I find more despairing. 

We can only hope there were warnings given before the ban at least, as I know that's what OldAdmin would've done. 

[daviemac]

Not really, as we know the person who did it received a banning instead. And I think the act itself could be a matter of perspective because I'm not sure I'd consider a person reporting posts unnecessarily to be as much a white knight as someone who defends a prossie outright ... though it's funny you mention transparency cause we apparently have a moderator whose reaction to a simple thought is to shut it down instead, which is something I find more despairing. 

We can only hope there were warnings given before the ban at least, as I know that's what OldAdmin would've done. 

The decision came from higher up than me, would you like me to pass on your concerns to them?? Likewise if you have any concerns about the way I conduct myself as a moderator you need to take it up with the owner or Admin, or would you like me to do so on your behalf. I have no objections to reporting myself in case I was doing something wrong, I've done it loads of times.

I try to act as openly and honestly as I can which is why I thought, as it concerned a longstanding member, I would give a bit more information than would normally be made available.

He sent a massive report going over all her reviews, which go back 4 years, picking things that he either though she wouldn't like or that she'd told him she didn't like.  None of which were against the rules.

[NightKid]

I try to act as openly and honestly as I can which is why I thought, as it concerned a longstanding member, I would give a bit more information than would normally be made available.

That's all well and good. So there wasn't really any need for you to react as you have earlier to my first post then, don't you think?

Not trying to pick a fight with you here fella, but I don't think what I said initially was particularly wrong either. Anyway, we've taken this thread off topic enough so let's digress. 

[daviemac]

That's all well and good. So there wasn't really any need for you to react as you have earlier to my first post then, don't you think?

Not trying to pick a fight with you here fella, but I don't think what I said initially was particularly wrong either. Anyway, we've taken this thread off topic enough so let's digress. 

Every post you have made on this thread has either questioned the reasons for the ban or have been an attempt to undermine me as a mod. So why don't we just get this into perspective.

Your first post. -

I too am surprised at this ban for the same reasons you say Kev. He was a positive and proactive member of the forum and as such I'm sorry to see this banning.

When I see a historically reliable member banned I sometimes think a temporary banning could be considered for say a month or something (as old Admin did occasionally). I compare his contribution to the many leeches and lurkers and there's no comparison. If he was in the latter group he could just sit there and make no contribution and have his own opinion without breaking any rules and he'd still be here.

I can only assume he was warned before or something to which the moderator has alluded. In which case he should have taken heed. The rules on White Knighting are quite clear IMO.

  My response. - 

Not sure if I should be doing this but as he was an established member. -  Following a thread on another site, he trawled through an escorts reviews, going back several years, and reported ones that contained information he thought shouldn't be there. The escort concerned could and should've done this herself. Though there is nothing that needs to be removed.

Then you come out with -

Doesn't sound like anything severe enough to warrant a banning though? 

Despite my best efforts to explain the reason for the ban, I thing I was not required to do, you still couldn't let it go so now I would like an explanation to the meaning behind the comments in this post. -

Not really, as we know the person who did it received a banning instead. And I think the act itself could be a matter of perspective because I'm not sure I'd consider a person reporting posts unnecessarily to be as much a white knight as someone who defends a prossie outright ... though it's funny you mention transparency cause we apparently have a moderator whose reaction to a simple thought is to shut it down instead, which is something I find more despairing. 

We can only hope there were warnings given before the ban at least, as I know that's what OldAdmin would've done. 

[NightKid]

I'm just gonna leave it here so you go ahead and carry on reading into it while deciding whether to ban me for expressing an opinion or not if you want. 

[daviemac]

I'm just gonna leave it here so you go ahead and carry on reading into it while deciding whether to ban me for expressing an opinion or not if you want. 

Had I wanted to ban you it would've been done by now, however the unfortunate thing is, that due to your reaction, there will be no further explanations for any actions the mods or Admin take. A situation that affects all members.

 

[Kev40ish]

I'm just gonna leave it here so you go ahead and carry on reading into it while deciding whether to ban me for expressing an opinion or not if you want. 

I think the issue is your questioning Daviemac and his moderation. I find him fair and am sure Head1 would pull him up if he overstepped his position.

If you have an issue with him I think you should report him and let Head1 decide. Old Admin is not here anymore, but I’m sure he’d defend the actions taken...

Personally if I was a Mod I’d ban you just for being obnoxious

[king tarzan]

I think the issue is your questioning Daviemac and his moderation. I find him fair and am sure Head1 would pull him up if he overstepped his position.

If you have an issue with him I think you should report him and let Head1 decide. Old Admin is not here anymore, but I’m sure he’d defend the actions taken...

Personally if I was a Mod I’d ban you just for being obnoxious

to tamper with reviews the good yes and stay and bad be made invisible is obviously tampering.. it is that simple..
Dave done nothing wrong.. he is fair square to be honest..