Quote Originally Posted by minimaleffort View Post
I also agree, censoring and policing is not the answer here, I find scores helpful specially when I already gauged the baseline of the reviewer and can compare to my own preferences. The vague “cute”, “GND”, “glamour” terms don’t help me much personally.
The main issue is less about rating and more about how the post was written. Comparing people’s faces and putting a dollar figure on it is low and hurtful. Referring to someone as a Thai auntie and saying you can buy someone better for $10 more is also low. Finally saying “her face is below average and she is like an auntie” should not be an acceptable behaviour. It is low, hurtful and we know the girls read these posts.

Using a rate system to rate a service such as girl A gave me a 10 service but girl B a 7 from a service perspective is ok, but referring to people’s innate and unchangeable characteristics such as looks and age in such a low manner should not be acceptable even in an punting forum.

I bet even the shops disagree with such behaviour, they are and should be all about the girls physical and emotional wellbeing. Those who can’t understand that or have a problem with it will never understand the real point.

Where is Rooter? Bring him back, he had a sense of humour, never rated anyone, from memory, and never compared anyone in such terms. He had class, as much as one can have amongst us punters. Bring him back, comment on services, AR is about service and don’t make negative comments about people’s physical, unchangeable characteristics.

That’s what it was all about.

P.S apologies for quoting verbatim what should not have been repeated.