Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

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


Author Topic: "I had a crap time but she did what she says on the profile"  (Read 1104 times)

Offline Marmalade

I seem to see a lot of reviews where the punter clearly didn't have the great time with his purchase that he imagined he would have, yet, for some strange reason, still gives it a "positive" rating or at worst a "neutral."

Excuses include "she did what she said on her profile so I can't complain." In other words, the punter blames himself after spending money, making what seemed like a good decision yet ended up unsatisfied. Although there are doubtless cases of complete idiots with unreasonable expectations, I can't see many people spending £80 in a restaurant, not enjoying their meal, and then saying it was ok just because the menu said "temptingly delicious noodles with our unique sauce" even though he got a pot fucking noodle.

Do people imagine there is some mythical objective standard out there that means a prostitute's service is somehow "good" or "ok" even if they didn't really enjoy it??

When I read reviews like that I generally conclude that the reviewer wrote them in some sort of "fairness to the prossie" rather than fairness to other punters. Being a punter, I am more likely to identify, I think, with other punters' evaluation of their own experience; rather than a prossie's self-evaluation, whether that self-evaluation is made by herself, or vicariously through a punter who is being less than honest with himself.

A fluffy abd non-fluffy may well have a different experience of the same prostitute, or a crap shag may 'seem' great if one is too pissed to remember anything except emptying one's balls and forgetting to wet-wipe them, but there seems to be a difference between reviews that attempt to rate the prossie in some psychic be-fair-to-her manner, and those that honestly rate the experience.

Admittedly, some people can't tell the difference, and I'm sure their prossies would be delighted to help out by writing the reviews for them.

Offline Sonny Crockett

I agree with what you said. I would only write a positive review of my experience if I felt I had an exceptional time or if the experience was somewhat different to other punts I had. If there were negative aspects, then I would highlight those in my positive review.
Banning reason: Troll

Interesting thread. I keep my perspective simple, did I leave with a smile on my face and would I return?

I am often amazed when I read a review when the service described would IMO be a negative, but the OP views it as a positive.  Each to their own at least they post a review and we can translate it into our own perspective. The one thing that does make me  :dash:, is when a neg review is posted and you get non reviewers responding with a "shame you had a shite time, she gave me the same crap service 3 months ago"  :diablo:

The one thing that does make me  :dash:, is when a neg review is posted and you get non reviewers responding with a "shame you had a shite time, she gave me the same crap service 3 months ago"  :diablo:

That drives me nuts, to me its the poster saying haha I could have saved you, especially if they have been members a while.

Offline Sonny Crockett

Interesting thread. I keep my perspective simple, did I leave with a smile on my face and would I return?

I am often amazed when I read a review when the service described would IMO be a negative, but the OP views it as a positive.  Each to their own at least they post a review and we can translate it into our own perspective. The one thing that does make me  :dash:, is when a neg review is posted and you get non reviewers responding with a "shame you had a shite time, she gave me the same crap service 3 months ago"  :diablo:

+1

For me, the other thing I would like to add is that when it comes to a negative review, I hate it when White Knights come on board and try to discredit the review. White Knights find it acceptable that the Pro$$ie gives a bad service, insults the punter by messing them about with bollocks, or has a lack of interest in what the punter wants.
Banning reason: Troll

Offline cueball

Grading a review is tricky but I have my "walk back to the motor test"

Giggling with a spring in my step = positive

Wondering if I should have bothered = neutral

Regretting the experience = negative


That's how I work it.


Offline Marmalade

Grading a review is tricky but I have my "walk back to the motor test"

Giggling with a spring in my step = positive

Wondering if I should have bothered = neutral

Regretting the experience = negative


That's how I work it.

Nice one in my books. A grading of your experience rather than prossie hypotheticals.

On the flipside of this, if a punter has a good experience, gets a good service, the girl was good looking and he knew the cost up front, is it fair to leave a negative for circumstances outside the girl's control?  There's that review in the Scotland section where all of the above is true but the punter left a negative because HE chose to drive 80-odd miles to the punt, 80-odd miles back and got a case of buyer's remorse afterwards. 

Offline smiths

I seem to see a lot of reviews where the punter clearly didn't have the great time with his purchase that he imagined he would have, yet, for some strange reason, still gives it a "positive" rating or at worst a "neutral."

Excuses include "she did what she said on her profile so I can't complain." In other words, the punter blames himself after spending money, making what seemed like a good decision yet ended up unsatisfied. Although there are doubtless cases of complete idiots with unreasonable expectations, I can't see many people spending £80 in a restaurant, not enjoying their meal, and then saying it was ok just because the menu said "temptingly delicious noodles with our unique sauce" even though he got a pot fucking noodle.

Do people imagine there is some mythical objective standard out there that means a prostitute's service is somehow "good" or "ok" even if they didn't really enjoy it??

When I read reviews like that I generally conclude that the reviewer wrote them in some sort of "fairness to the prossie" rather than fairness to other punters. Being a punter, I am more likely to identify, I think, with other punters' evaluation of their own experience; rather than a prossie's self-evaluation, whether that self-evaluation is made by herself, or vicariously through a punter who is being less than honest with himself.

A fluffy abd non-fluffy may well have a different experience of the same prostitute, or a crap shag may 'seem' great if one is too pissed to remember anything except emptying one's balls and forgetting to wet-wipe them, but there seems to be a difference between reviews that attempt to rate the prossie in some psychic be-fair-to-her manner, and those that honestly rate the experience.

Admittedly, some people can't tell the difference, and I'm sure their prossies would be delighted to help out by writing the reviews for them.

I have a zero tolerance policy nowadays so if it wasn't a good punt or attempted punt as I saw it I have and would do a negative review.

On the flipside of this, if a punter has a good experience, gets a good service, the girl was good looking and he knew the cost up front, is it fair to leave a negative for circumstances outside the girl's control?  There's that review in the Scotland section where all of the above is true but the punter left a negative because HE chose to drive 80-odd miles to the punt, 80-odd miles back and got a case of buyer's remorse afterwards.
Well he sounds a bit of a dick of the other extremes IMHO.

Offline Marmalade

On the flipside of this, if a punter has a good experience, gets a good service, the girl was good looking and he knew the cost up front, is it fair to leave a negative for circumstances outside the girl's control?  There's that review in the Scotland section where all of the above is true but the punter left a negative because HE chose to drive 80-odd miles to the punt, 80-odd miles back and got a case of buyer's remorse afterwards.

I think there's several examples on the Scotland forum just now of varying cases but it's surely better to air the subject I feel rather than pick on individual ones.

I don't mean isolated cases where the punter acted against all common sense. You could also have the case of a punter who thinks it's a great idea but is disgusted with the idea of prostitutes after he's emptied his balls in one. Both might be 'justified' in saying it was a shit punt but I think such reviews are in the minority. They can be put into context by that  punters other reviews or lack of other reviews.

I'm thinking more of a large number of reviews that seem to follow a repeated pattern, where the guy points out lots of valid reasons why it was a shit punt, but then gives it a neutral or positive "in fairness to the lady." Often these seem to be written in all sincerity but where the punter simply hasn't developed a sense of clarity that the review is for punters, not feedback to prossies.

Absurdly negative punts are readily given perspective if the prossie is any good: she will get plenty of business and some of that business will elicit lots of positive competent reviews.  Absurdly positive punts on the other hand tend to go unnoticed until someone has the balls to stop kidding himself and point out the negatives. Until then, they provide a numerically misleading indication, making the grading system less valuable.

Many prossies worry unduly about reviews. They should worry about their service and also the accuracy of their advertising ('profiles'). Top performers barely bother to check their reviews as they get solid bookings based on their service and value for money, not what people say about them. So all this crap about "in fairness to the prossie" or "in fairness to her profile" is utter bollocks unless you're a Trading Standards Officer. There is no basis to worry about being fair to prossies, only to being fair and honest with oneself and other punters. Feedback from genuine prossies that don't have to worry about reviews of their service confirms this.

I know people who make spagetti bolognese and they use tomatoes and meat and pasta, just like it says on the recipe. They serve it on time and even offer a nice napkin to wipe. But it still tastes fucking inedible. Now if they are my friends I maybe say, "how lovely!" But I wouldn't say or even think that in a restaurant where I'm paying for it. Even if I didn't throw it at the chef, I would tell my real friends if the subject came up, not the waiter who kept addressing me as his friend.

So in my mind it comes down to who are you reviewing for? Who are your 'friends'?

I posted this on the review thread. Reposting here as more relevant....

I've seen this question come up a few times Marm and I struggle with it whenever I have a less than satisfactory punt. In my head I have it straight but would be useful to debate. For me:

- neutral: wouldn't return because of prossie mis-selling on appearance but not service.  For example "little white lies" on size and age.
- negative: wouldn't return because of big black lies eg CIM or OWO with no intention, shite service or bad attitude

Since becoming a punter I have wondered why just then three options, don't know what I would put in its place but good, bad and ugly ain't much of an option. It would probably be better as a scale of 1 - 10. It would then give a better scope and indication of what you thought.

Since becoming a punter I have wondered why just then three options, don't know what I would put in its place but good, bad and ugly ain't much of an option. It would probably be better as a scale of 1 - 10. It would then give a better scope and indication of what you thought.

I disagree, why muddy the waters even more?  If people can't agree on what constitutes "Positive", "Negative" or "Neutral", then how do you think we'll reach a consensus on the differences between a 7/10 and an 8/10 punt?

For me:
Positive: I'll be back.
Neutral: Probably won't again but might if I'm stuck.
Negative: Wish I hadn't.

Others will disagree, your plan would just make the disagreements bigger.

I was just pondering the same, PM. The neutral is a bit of a cop out (even with my justification above.

Positive - I'd go back but note these caveats (if any doubts)
Negative - I'd not go back

Makes it a straight choice with no cop out.

If I enjoed myself its a positive reveiw, pure and simple

I do not like FK or any kind of oral on me (by a wg). So if they do not do that I would still score postive (assuming everything else was as I wanted)

Offline Flunt

Any review is a little piece of the jigsaw of the decision making process. I just read the other thread about 1-10 ratings and would have no idea where to start with that.

I do my reviews as a recommendation with caveats for positives. Neutrals are a cop out but being fair to the pro$$ie is also being fair to punters. There are shit punts to be had and deserving of a negative review but there are punts where I wouldn't want to scare punters off nor would I recommend.


Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)