Ok, so lots of differing opinions on the subject. Here’s a few of my thoughts on this topic.
Reviews: If you don’t read them or pay much attention to them, no worries, skip over the threads. As been stated before, no one is forcing you to read anything. I do the same Underground threads, they’re not my thing, but that doesn’t mean other guys can’t read them if they want to. How many of you read every article on every page of a newspaper or magazine? Read whatever interest you.
Now should banned agency/indies reviews be allowed? My opinion is yes. We’re here on UG to find out info on these girls, good or bad. Most of us use this info to help us choose which girls we want to see. Unless you’re a complete newbie, no one here really just logs onto Eros or CL, find a girl they like, and book an appointment without checking her out in the usual sources. If you’re reading UG, then you obviously know about most of the other escort info/ads/review sites. There’s no way you’re not doing your homework on this girl before the appointment. Granted, some sites are total BS or reviews are greatly exaggerated but even then, you take those reviews with a grain of salt.
I think Julies was banned from the site, (or not banned but was shown the door) but there was still reviews and discussions of her girls. Most guys here were split over the quality (older vs. younger) of Julies girls. But it was agreed that most of her girls gave good, sometimes great service for the price, some notable exceptions were Bunny and Mika. Like BMM said, whether they were actual reviews or just discussions of the girls, that provided enough info for someone to decide if they wanted to see a certain Julies girl. OTOH, it also helped guys decide to not see certain girls. Some guys raved about Domino and Marilyn, but both really didn’t do anything for me, regardless of performance. Both were pushing 50, and had tongued more ass than a forest full of Charmin.
My opinion is that a review, good or bad, is the deciding factor for most guys before they see a provider. We’ve all seen the hot pictures of that visiting/new/old provider on Eros, say to ourselves, I wanna stick my cock in her, and her rate is what I’m willing to pay. But the lack of info on her makes you think it’s a Bait and Switch or a rip-off. So you post an ISO on her. The info and/or reviews that follows is what decides it. Am I saying that reviews are the be all and end all when it comes to deciding who to see? No, guys will ultimately choose who they want to see based on factors that matter to them, like looks or ethnicity, but for the most part, reviews will be a factor in that decision making process.
This brings us to a thornier issue. *** was banned for cheating Slinky and UG. Should we give them more “air time” by reviewing these girls. Ultimately that is up to Slinky and Allen and the operators of this board. But given the current state of affairs in this hobby of ours (I’m referring to the LE activity of late), guys are more likely to use a sure thing. ***, given all the infamy around it and its owner, does offer some great looking girls at a reasonable rate. But are we, as someone previously said in this thread, cutting off our noses to spite our faces? Guys will still see her girls even though the agency is banned. Without the UG shilling filter in place, most hobbyists will only have those other boards to search. And there isn’t too much objectivity over there. But with ***, there is also a wide range of their girls’ service levels. They have their stars, who are always booked on every tour, and they have their average performers, and they have their “one cup and out the door you go” girls. But you wouldn’t be able to tell that by reading the other boards. How often do you read or hear about the one-cuppers? All you ever hear about is the “legends” of ***. So any useful info about these girls are either censored or drowned out over there. That doesn’t really help much.
And while *** and its owner are banned from UG for good reason, what about the girls that work for her or other banned agencies? Are they being unfairly punished for the actions of the owner? They are the ones who are doing the actual grunt work (ok, let’s hear from the peanut gallery), fucking and sucking us everyday. Shouldn’t we praise the good one and shine a spotlight on the ones who don’t perform? I know, I know, good reviews will bring them more attention, more attention means they get busier, it’s a vicious cycle; but how many times after reading a BillF review of a Julie’s girl that you just wanted to get over there and try out the standing 69? Do reviews, of banned and non banned providers help weed out the poor performers?
So are we contributing to this, by not reviewing or discussing *** girls? Just to play Devil’s Advocate for a moment, who is on the losing end of this, *** or UG? *** is still in business, being banned from UG hasn’t really hurt their business (although their business model may have turned some guys off). And UG is still going strong (but we could always use more advertisers). But is the UG membership, posters and lurkers alike, at a disadvantage because we’re not getting all the info that we could?
