Zero AdultWork feedback, WG won't take booking

[Stalinator]

My AW account has zero feedbacks. This seems to be an issue for some WGs that won't entertain bookings from Zero feedback members.
Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

[Roth]

My AW account has zero feedbacks. This seems to be an issue for some WGs that won't entertain bookings from Zero feedback members.
Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

Move on to those that will see you.  Plenty that will.  Leave them feedback and ask them to leave you feedback.  That way you will slowly build up what you need to see the prossie that demand you already have feedback. 

[smiths]

My AW account has zero feedbacks. This seems to be an issue for some WGs that won't entertain bookings from Zero feedback members.
Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

[Roth]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

That's the alternative.  Depends on how much of a desert you punt in and how desparate (or not) you are I guess? 

[Stalinator]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

As far as I am now concerned it is their loss. I shall spend my money elsewhere.

[Redhead Lover]

We all have to start somewhere. Unless you live in the outback were there's only one girl for 100 miles, there should be plenty of girls who'll take your first booking.  As long as you're polite with your emails/txts, there shouldn't be a problem. I have seen a few profiles saying they only book if you've got more than <insert number here> feedbacks. Well, there loss as their phones and fannys get cobwebs.  Worst case, hotlist/bookmark them for a later date and treat yourself then.

[AnthG]

My AW account has zero feedbacks. This seems to be an issue for some WGs that won't entertain bookings from Zero feedback members.
Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

Why not just phone the girl for a booking on the day she wants to work. As she likely will put her phone number up onto AW this day as she needs to pay to display it. She wont know your feedback score then.

Or why not just email the girl via her personal email address > quite often you see on profiles the message "Or email me outside the protections of adultwork" and then a hotmail address for the girl is there on the adultwork page.

Just setup a punting email account and email her from there to that. And if you want to say to her you are Stalinator from UKP.

[Marmalade]

Ditto Smiths but with Roth's comment. Big difference between punting in London and Edinburgh.
If you want to have the option to punt birds with that insist on feedback, build some up with birds that don't. Simples.

[James999]

What's her profile link?

Always get someone else who has feedback to book her and you turn up 

[agent47]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

Agree i have feedback results just in the double figures now , all of which are positive and quite complementary   but 3 of the girls are now inactive and 1 was a Neutral (things got lost in translation and the meet never happened) but this one WG i booked who has tons of feed back rings me to say she wont see me because of the 3 inactive girls and the 1 neutral and she said and i quote '' i dont mean to be rude but you could be anyone''  Although now i still want to see her just so i can pound the fucking shit out of her   

[smiths]

Agree i have feedback results just in the double figures now , all of which are positive and quite complementary   but 3 of the girls are now inactive and 1 was a Neutral (things got lost in translation and the meet never happened) but this one WG i booked who has tons of feed back rings me to say she wont see me because of the 3 inactive girls and the 1 neutral and she said and i quote '' i dont mean to be rude but you could be anyone''  Although now i still want to see her just so i can pound the fucking shit out of her 

Mark my words, it will be photo and address ID required by some WGs next, then criminal record checks, all this feedback bollocks needed by the service buyer is the start of a slippery slope.

[The_Don]

My AW account has zero feedbacks. This seems to be an issue for some WGs that won't entertain bookings from Zero feedback members.
Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

Many other W/G out there, that don't required feed back.

As I stated below (in 2015) I have 0 feed back on A/W account (no change to this currently).

That doesn't stop me from punting:

Its up W/G how they wish to conduct bookings and who they wish to see.

But don't care for or have very little use, for some part of the AW systems (emails, RB, bookings, feedback, etc). Its to open to abuse and misuse, IMO.

Currently, I won't change the way I book (and pay for) a W/G, regardless of her feedback or reviews, on UKP or A/W.

Its just the way I punt.  No phone number =  no booking from me.

Feedback on A/W required = No booking from me.

My A/W account is 4 + years old and it has no feedback on it and its going to stay that way for some time.

I don't need some 2 liners on A/W, just to please or state I'm a punter, to a W/G


I use a phone, good manners and cash. The rest is in her hands after that point (service, attitude and VFM)

[LL]

Are there any ways to build feedbacks without sending a fortune?

This question does come up occasionally.
Here's an alternative answer. Yes there is a way. Create fake profiles for prossies. Make bookings with them and leave yourself feedback from them!  It makes a mockery of the whole feedback system but it's already a fucking joke anyway! Good luck.

[Stalinator]

This question does come up occasionally.
Here's an alternative answer. Yes there is a way. Create fake profiles for prossies. Make bookings with them and leave yourself feedback from them!  It makes a mockery of the whole feedback system but it's already a fucking joke anyway! Good luck.

That sounds so mad it may just work.

[ClarkeOfTheCourse]

That sounds so mad it may just work.

Sure, why not. Prossies create fake AW punter profiles to give feedback to each other when their phones get a bit dusty.

Just use a different device or a different browser for the fake profile otherwise you'll be listed as an alias, which raises alarm bells.

[Marmalade]

Mark my words, it will be photo and address ID required by some WGs next, then criminal record checks, all this feedback bollocks needed by the service buyer is the start of a slippery slope.

I disagree. That sort of stuff is mostly brought on by fear of police busts, as in American paranoia.

In my own experience (which is not London or the South) the girls that ask for feedback are either a) beginners who are wary of the whole game, and some of these have been excellent, or b) established WGs who have had a bad experience, usually some bastard roughing them up.

In some areas you have far more numbers and can afford to trim your hotlist cos of no face pic, no phone number, wants feedback and all sorts of other stuff, and that might be reasonable in the area where you punt; but I can say that to do so up here is shooting yourself in the foot.

It just doesn't work like that here, especially if you consistently want the best on offer. By that I mean, the service during the appointment. If the pre-book is against your cut-off that's up to you, but you would be saying you don't want some top service providers, not for their looks or attitude during the punt, but because they don't fit your search requirements.

[Marmalade]

What's her profile link?

Always get someone else who has feedback to book her and you turn up 

A creative idea from James as usual. Perhaps he will offer to make the booking for you.

As the OP is relatively unknown maybe soneone else will decline just in case he's a weirdo and gets himself (under some other poor fucker's ID) blacklisted after "pounding the shit out of her". 

[Marmalade]

The question comes up with fair regularity and sometimes makes me wonder wtf.

It's one thing to say you won't see her on principle, fair enough, but for an experienced punter who uses the booking system and not have any feedback is a bit weird.

Nice picture of Stalin btw... hope that is not your charm offensive...

[Lolapinga_x]

I have it on my profile that I won't see anyone without previous feedback as from experience, the people who contact me via email with no feedback almost always never convert to actual bookings. However, where my number is showing, I'm happy to take calls from non AW users. I mostly take same day bookings, a quick phone call and gauging the tone seems to work for me so don't be put off. If I were you, I wouldn't waste my time emailing, just call and get it out of the way. I sometimes see people based on their calls only and usually ask at some point if they use aw, if they do I tell them to pop through a booking request and I'll be happy to leave feedback.

That probably all sounds a bit contradictory but my little system works for me. Where the number shows, call it. Don't waste time with or hanging about for emails and it gives you a good idea of who you're getting involved with too.

[Steve2]

I have zero feedback on AW and only use it to contact interesting looking profiles with no phone number displayed.

I'd never make a booking on there , only by phone 

[oring123]

you only need like 3 or 5 feedbacks to get a booking so not the end of the world .

[smiths]

I disagree. That sort of stuff is mostly brought on by fear of police busts, as in American paranoia.

In my own experience (which is not London or the South) the girls that ask for feedback are either a) beginners who are wary of the whole game, and some of these have been excellent, or b) established WGs who have had a bad experience, usually some bastard roughing them up.

In some areas you have far more numbers and can afford to trim your hotlist cos of no face pic, no phone number, wants feedback and all sorts of other stuff, and that might be reasonable in the area where you punt; but I can say that to do so up here is shooting yourself in the foot.

It just doesn't work like that here, especially if you consistently want the best on offer. By that I mean, the service during the appointment. If the pre-book is against your cut-off that's up to you, but you would be saying you don't want some top service providers, not for their looks or attitude during the punt, but because they don't fit your search requirements.

Time will tell on this Marm, an outfit called Stansted Escorts a few years back said they insisted on doing an electoral role check on ALL punters, no idea if they actually did so or not but they said they did on another punting forum.

As i said i don't give in to WGs who try to lay the law down or jump through their hoops to get a booking as its me doing the paying, for ME it comes down to principles, NO WG is worth breaking those principles for. No problem if they don't operate as suits me, i just go elsewhere, plenty more to choose from in my area.

[AnthG]

Sure, why not. Prossies create fake AW punter profiles to give feedback to each other when their phones get a bit dusty.

Just use a different device or a different browser for the fake profile otherwise you'll be listed as an alias, which raises alarm bells.

But why need to do all of that effort. The only reason they are doing it is because they are concerned it will be a timewaster and they want to prove you are a genuine punter.

Just message the girl in response to her issues if she raises them and say something like.

"I know I have no feedback but I am a genuine punter. And I am eager to see you. I can private message you on UKP/UKE to discuss this further if you wish. Are you a member on there".

The ball is there in her court now to either say yes to this offer. But she may just with this accept the booking without it.

If she still says no. Then you coming back in a days time with feedback, wont suddenly make her agree to a booking.

[Marmalade]

Time will tell on this Marm, an outfit called Stansted Escorts a few years back said they insisted on doing an electoral role check on ALL punters, no idea if they actually did so or not but they said they did on another punting forum.

But isn't that a rather different thing Smiths, having feedback is one thing and still fairly anonymous but if you see the person has seen people you also know it at least gives some reassurance. An electoral check is would involve revealing you real identity. I don't see that catching on.

[Ben4454]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

Great post 

I do however understand the security reasons for not seeing a guy with 0 feedback though. Then again how reliable is the adultwork feedback system? People can't leave negatives fearing a negative will be left back, fake people posing as punters/profile buying/swapping which in my opinion should be illegal on AW.

[oring123]

The wg wants to avoid axe killers and the like
Can you blame her ?

[anotherjohn50]

Part of the problem is Awork has  a lot of daydreaming  wankers who use the site for thrill seeking.

They send girls messages enquiring about possible  bookings asking about outfits and going to detail about what they want to do in a booking  and then just don't  show up.

At least if a guy has feedback it proves he is a genuine  punter so the busy girls will pick and choose who they see.

[The_Don]

The wg wants to avoid axe killers and the like
Can you blame her ?

 


Does feed back in A/W guarantee, that someone isn't that way inclined 


The fact is, if you never meet a person, do you know how they will act 


Like I stated before (many times)

A/W is a system that to open to abuse and misuse, IMO.

[smiths]

But isn't that a rather different thing Smiths, having feedback is one thing and still fairly anonymous but if you see the person has seen people you also know it at least gives some reassurance. An electoral check is would involve revealing you real identity. I don't see that catching on.

Well white knight fanboys and some fluffies are so far up WGs arseholes that nothing would surprise me with them.

[Ben4454]

Well white knight fanboys and some fluffies are so far up WGs arseholes that nothing would surprise me with them.

The worst one guys fall for is 'if you webcam with me a couple of times and i get to know you i might meet''

[smiths]

Great post 

I do however understand the security reasons for not seeing a guy with 0 feedback though. Then again how reliable is the adultwork feedback system? People can't leave negatives fearing a negative will be left back, fake people posing as punters/profile buying/swapping which in my opinion should be illegal on AW.

The A/W FB system has more hols in it than a string vest, and anyway how a WG operates is her business, she just wont get mine if she doesn't operate as suits me. Obviously agree about fakes and this utterly ridiculous bollocks where some punters wont give negative FB in case the WG gives some back in revenge thus potentially putting a future WG off them. This alone shows that A/W FB isn't in the best interests of punters in my opinion, as much use as a chocolate teapot.

And punters have allowed themselves to get themselves into this position which no doubt bad WGs and pimps are loving and laughing their heads off about. IMO the place for FB is UKP where people are questioned about their FB.

[smiths]

The worst one guys fall for is 'if you webcam with me a couple of times and i get to know you i might meet''

IMO the worst thing some punters fall for is to believe A/W is in anyway a legitimate site and treat it as such. In reality its a site run by low lifes with no interest in helping punters. As I have posted before my belief unprovable though it is is that A/W themselves post some of the PG scam profiles up, make credits off them then delete them before setting more up and so on and on. Very easy for them to do this and they have no proper regulation so can easily get away with doing it.

[oring123]

Yes agree ukp feed back is mostly 100% and normally you can conpare at least 3 reports so you can form a fairly safe view of wg

[One Eyed Snake]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

Totaly agree.

[AnthG]

Time will tell on this Marm, an outfit called Stansted Escorts a few years back said they insisted on doing an electoral role check on ALL punters, no idea if they actually did so or not but they said they did on another punting forum.

To be honest, I thought when I seen this last night it might have been a possible exaggeration or something as no way would an agency do that. But I have just seen their website now and their requirements to make a booking with them.

External Link/Members Only

If you would like one of our escorts to visit your home we require certain information for security purposes before we will confirm any booking.

We require your full name, address including post code and a landline telephone number. We will never contact you on your
landline telephone number unless requested to do so and we destroy all of our clients details after a booking.

It is important that you provide truthful and correct details as if we are unable to successfully complete our security checks we will be unable to confirm any booking.

As has been shown on UKE recently. Even the most respected/oldest/trusted Agencies cannot be trusted with any personal details.

External Link/Members Only

I am single and no way would I ever give an agency this kind of info and allow them to do these types of 'securiy checks' on me. Who in the hell uses that Stansted escorts with those types of requirements in place and allow them to have this on you I would like to know. They must be certifiable.

As any negative review about any girl on their books that they dislike and they could release that info publicly. Or do god knows what with it.

[The_Don]

A/W themselves post some of the PG scam profiles up, make credits off them then delete them before setting more up and so on and on. Very easy for them to do this and they have no proper regulation so can easily get away with doing it.

I've seen A/W, removed profiles and taken the credits (for them selfs) of W/G, that I've punted and had positive punts with.

But they let other W/G that are just bad (IMO) continue.

Its greed, on A/W part (IMO)

[AnthG]

I've seen A/W, removed profiles and taken the credits (for them selfs) of W/G, that I've punted and had positive punts with.

But they let other W/G that are just bad (IMO) continue.

Its greed, on A/W part (IMO)

Adultwork used to do a thing where if you were the one who reported the profile as a fake you got your PG credits back. Nobody else did, just you.

However a few times I seen blatant stolen photos in a PG after buying that I then reported with unquestionable proof that they were stolen. and after reported them the profile was taken down but no credits returned to me no more. This was one of the main reasons I stopped buying AW credits.

They are just theives as the 'girl' wouldn't have been getting those credits neither

[smiths]

To be honest, I thought when I seen this last night it might have been a possible exaggeration or something as no way would an agency do that. But I have just seen their website now and their requirements to make a booking with them.

External Link/Members Only

As has been shown on UKE recently. Even the most respected/oldest/trusted Agencies cannot be trusted with any personal details.

External Link/Members Only

I am single and no way would I ever give an agency this kind of info and allow them to do these types of 'securiy checks' on me. Who in the hell uses that Stansted escorts with those types of requirements in place and allow them to have this on you I would like to know. They must be certifiable.

As any negative review about any girl on their books that they dislike and they could release that info publicly. Or do god knows what with it.

So no electoral roll check now, they now want a punters full name. That outfit has been going for years so I must assume they get enough punters to still continue. This is the thing, no doubt there are many punters out their with no idea or interest in UKP and the advice given about punting.

One last point, in the first place I don't see it as smart to book any WG whether through an Agency or as a so called Indie to come to your own home for a punt, now loads of punters say well I haven't had any problems, thing is it only takes one bad WG or pimp so not a risk however small I would take.

[One Eyed Snake]

you only need like 3 or 5 feedbacks to get a booking so not the end of the world .

Might not be the end of world but do you want a prossie dictating to you. Everyone's to start somewhere, I've got good feedback and trying to book a girl in Barnsley its £160 for hr but I'm banging my head against a brick wall, she's so far up her own arse its unbelievable.

[Type_O_Negative]

I do IGNORE all WGs who want positive AW feedback from their clients. I do not own AW account because i do not need it. What for?

Once again: no phone number - no money from me.

[The_Don]

thing is it only takes one bad WG or pimp so not a risk however small I would take.

Indeed.

Incall may limit some issues, that may arise from a bad punt.


For me home is home, not a punting location

 

[smiths]

I've seen A/W, removed profiles and taken the credits (for them selfs) of W/G, that I've punted and had positive punts with.

But they let other W/G that are just bad (IMO) continue.

Its greed, on A/W part (IMO)

Totally agree, and I find it regretful some punters even on here don't see this, but ultimately that's up to them of course.

A/W are a site with a near monopoly who control the whole process of putting a profile up and can and do steal credits as they wish. Its really not healthy for punters for a site to have so much power in my opinion.

[AnthG]

So no electoral roll check now, they now want a punters full name.

And home landline telephone number for that address, not to telephone it but to do 'security checks' with it. They are doing something with that info and it seems pretty clear its for checking up that you live at that address and that number maches the one for that address. Which would be done via the electoral roll on something like 192.com

[smiths]

And home landline telephone number for that address, not to telephone it but to do 'security checks' with it. They are doing something with that info and it seems pretty clear its for checking up that you live at that address and that number maches the one for that address. Which would be done via the electoral roll on something like 192.com

Yes well dodgy.

[Astarter]

My view on this is clear, such WGs can go fuck themselves as I wont be bothering to sing to their tune. Quite simple for me, I am the one paying and I punt to suit me not WGs. I view it as utterly ridiculous that the service buyer allows themselves to be dictated to, but that's up to those that do obviously.

I'm a punter and clearly I'm usually on the punters side of things. But on this one I'll back up the wg.

Wg's with a revolving door policy take more risk and some are happy to arrange meets via text without any clue of who's walking through the door. So if you've no intention to use aw for bookings there are literally thousands of options.

There are many a hidden gem out there who will require you to have feedback and send an initial email to suss you out. Who can blame them, the world is not a place free of nutcases. If a good honest wg is taking some precautionary measures to ensure her safety then good on her! For those of you unwilling to or that feel above the need to contact girls via email or build up feedback then so be it, that's your prerogative. For those of us prepared to put in an extra bit of effort = more girls to choose from, more punting experiences to be had.

[Marmalade]

I'm a punter and clearly I'm usually on the punters side of things. But on this one I'll back up the wg.

Wg's with a revolving door policy take more risk and some are happy to arrange meets via text without any clue of who's walking through the door. So if you've no intention to use aw for bookings there are literally thousands of options.

There are many a hidden gem out there who will require you to have feedback and send an initial email to suss you out. Who can blame them, the world is not a place free of nutcases. If a good honest wg is taking some precautionary measures to ensure her safety then good on her! For those of you unwilling to or that feel above the need to contact girls via email or build up feedback then so be it, that's your prerogative. For those of us prepared to put in an extra bit of effort = more girls to choose from, more punting experiences to be had.

Can I suggest you maybe step back a bit and express your view and what works for you instead of being a social worker?

If prossies need to take precautionary measures all well and good for them, but there are other prossies to advise them on that. The relevance to punters is, how does that affect how I choose to book them?

In some people's cases, it means building up some feedback of your own and/or using the booking system. For others people it means saying fuck it, I can't be bothered with that when there are easier options.

It's hardly for you to condemn another punter on who and how he chooses to book. Not having a go at you, just pointing out that the purpose of this site isn't to take sides: it's to put punters first and help them get value-for-money paid sex.

Most punters are decent people: it doesn't mean they are not because they don't want to use the adultfuckingwork booking system. I think be-nice-to-prossies and play-their-game discussions are more suited to UKE or Saafe. (Or if you actually know nutcases that need to be reported there's Crimewatch and UglyMugs and they have strict reporting guidelines).

We are the customers. We pay the money, fulfil our side of the bargain: how prossies do their work is their business except inasmuch as it affects us, the paying customer.

[smiths]

I'm a punter and clearly I'm usually on the punters side of things. But on this one I'll back up the wg.

Wg's with a revolving door policy take more risk and some are happy to arrange meets via text without any clue of who's walking through the door. So if you've no intention to use aw for bookings there are literally thousands of options.

There are many a hidden gem out there who will require you to have feedback and send an initial email to suss you out. Who can blame them, the world is not a place free of nutcases. If a good honest wg is taking some precautionary measures to ensure her safety then good on her! For those of you unwilling to or that feel above the need to contact girls via email or build up feedback then so be it, that's your prerogative. For those of us prepared to put in an extra bit of effort = more girls to choose from, more punting experiences to be had.

As I stated its for others to do as they wish and unlike you I view ALL WGs as actually having a revolving door policy if they are that popular, cashing in while they can. I have NO interest in wasting my time emailing WGs, no phone number, no business off me.

[Astarter]

Marmalade you contribute a lot on this site which is good. After that last post I now think you are a cunt. Don't need you to police uk punting for me thanks. You go by your rules I'll go by mines. If I want to express myself I will. And when a punter comes on the forum telling wg's to go fuck themself for asking punters to email or have aw feedback, I'm more than entitled to say so. And lastly, although highly unlikely, if a punter reads my post and decides to change their stance on emailing, building up aw feedback to have more choice and find some hidden gems then I've put in a good days work.

My reason for posting if you bothered to analyse properly was not to purely defend the wg. It was to make a valid and informative contribution about how to expand punting opportunities.

You now have the honour to have been the first person to piss me off on here and any further contributions made by you will be read in the knowledge it was posted by a right wank of a guy. Good day to you!

[Astarter]

As I stated its for others to do as they wish and unlike you I view ALL WGs as actually having a revolving door policy if they are that popular, cashing in while they can. I have NO interest in wasting my time emailing WGs, no phone number, no business off me.

I respectfully disagree with your approach. But each to their own, if it works for you then good.

[smiths]

Marmalade you contribute a lot on this site which is good. After that last post I now think you are a cunt. Don't need you to police uk punting for me thanks. You go by your rules I'll go by mines. If I want to express myself I will. And when a punter comes on the forum telling wg's to go fuck themself for asking punters to email or have aw feedback, I'm more than entitled to say so. And lastly, although highly unlikely, if a punter reads my post and decides to change their stance on emailing, building up aw feedback to have more choice and find some hidden gems then I've put in a good days work.

My reason for posting if you bothered to analyse properly was not to purely defend the wg. It was to make a valid and informative contribution about how to expand punting opportunities.

You now have the honour to have been the first person to piss me off on here and any further contributions made by you will be read in the knowledge it was posted by a right wank of a guy. Good day to you!

No idea why you felt the need to post personal abuse towards Marm, he isn't a cunt or a wank of a guy, he is a poster posting his view just as you and I did, no problem disagreeing with others, but why the name calling in this case.