Uncle Pokey

Old FRs

36 posts in this topic

For the serious punter looking to research recommendations I really doubt that, in the majority of cases, reports over around three years old are of great reliability/value.

On the other hand, if Galahad's database can stand it, for contributors of older-than-three years FR's, these can still reward same with happy memories and it would be a shame to deny them such and, more significantly, the opportunity to contribute a more up-to-date FR would be of value.

So my suggestion would be to delete from exhibition more than three year old reports, allow existing reports over that time to be viewed (nostalgically) by their authors alone, but to allow said authors the opportunity to send an up-to-date FR. Given the latest legislation, the opportunity for such long-term authors to express a view on whether they feel the lady acts of her own free will would be a useful addition to the FR system

Uncle Pokey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the serious punter looking to research recommendations I really doubt that, in the majority of cases, reports over around three years old are of great reliability/value.

On the other hand, if Galahad's database can stand it, for contributors of older-than-three years FR's, these can still reward same with happy memories and it would be a shame to deny them such and, more significantly, the opportunity to contribute a more up-to-date FR would be of value.

So my suggestion would be to delete from exhibition more than three year old reports, allow existing reports over that time to be viewed (nostalgically) by their authors alone, but to allow said authors the opportunity to send an up-to-date FR. Given the latest legislation, the opportunity for such long-term authors to express a view on whether they feel the lady acts of her own free will would be a useful addition to the FR system

Uncle Pokey

I reckon... If Galahad had wanted to do that.... he would have done it by now !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
opportunity for such long-term authors to express a view on whether they feel the lady acts of her own free will would be a useful addition to the FR system

Uncle Pokey

As the law came into effect from 01.04.2010 Old field reports are not relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep FRs if possible (and allowed by the Lady)

good memories.

nice history of punting-dom in UK

and interesting to see some ladies have been round for ages, and sometimes you can almost see them develop into divas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think by deleting vintage fr's, more people would perhaps attempt 'various methods' of quickly replacing them with new ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So my suggestion would be to delete from exhibition more than three year old reports, allow existing reports over that time to be viewed (nostalgically) by their authors alone, but to allow said authors the opportunity to send an up-to-date FR. Given the latest legislation, the opportunity for such long-term authors to express a view on whether they feel the lady acts of her own free will would be a useful addition to the FR system

Uncle Pokey

Are you trying to upset me - that will be 66% of my FRs gone leaving me with 3 ? :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to view the punting pedigree of the author of a report, which will help to decide how much credence to give a report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like to view the punting pedigree of the author of a report, which will help to decide how much credence to give a report.

I agree with that, If the ladies been around for a while I will read all her FR's, sometimes you can see a WG develop Into a superstar.

But I can understand punters will take recent FR's more seriously than old ones, as has been said before, I wished we could update or post new FR's on a lady, without having to delete the old FR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with that, If the ladies been around for a while I will read all her FR's, sometimes you can see a WG develop Into a superstar.

.

Maybe she just becomes more discerning ? :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe she just becomes more discerning ? :o

Well Mel you know the old saying, "practice makes perfect"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can we get all mtenga's fr's back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with that, If the ladies been around for a while I will read all her FR's, sometimes you can see a WG develop Into a superstar.

But I can understand punters will take recent FR's more seriously than old ones, as has been said before, I wished we could update or post new FR's on a lady, without having to delete the old FR.

Indeed. A new FR once a year per lady would be useful in my view, one ever is too strict IMO.:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. A new FR once a year per lady would be useful in my view, one ever is too strict IMO.:o

Well thats It, but will the big man G consider It? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well thats It, but will the big man G consider It? :o

All posters that are interested in this can do is PM Galahad in my view.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the reason for having them there, is for other guys to be able to read and choose. So keeping them hidden away in a 'personal nostalgia box' seems unfair to new punters. They are there to help and stop guys being ripped off?

And of course, the ladies would be furious at having their 'gold stars for good behaviour' suddenly being taken back for selfish reasons. Should actors have to give back their Baftas and Oscars because the film is a few years old?

Perhaps people who have prof quals here should just rip up their papers and scrub it off their CV too, if they're not recent...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is that providing there are no techie problems in keeping them in the system historic FRs should be kept as part of the excellent punting database that PN provides.

Old reports enable one to check the long term credibility of Reporters and can provide an interesting history of long established ladies, although I know many will have retired or changed their names over the years.

As regards more than one report per lady or party (as I understood they were the rules) I thoroughly agree with Smiths that more than one report should be allowed as it allows one to show how a lady may have progressed.

Interestingly I have just seen someone called HG, do a second report on an LM Party so maybe the rules are being relaxed now?

Regards,

davidgood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old FRs do catch a lot of girls out on the age thing though, where in 2010 they are claiming to be 24 yet in 2002 they were 21 :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another good reason to keep them then eh, Howard! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should be kept as an anthropological record.

One day, in thousands of years, archaeologists will dig up the server containing them, boot it up, and come to the conclusion "well, at least some of them enjoyed themselves."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree...Jack Harris' List of Covent Garden Ladies (now by Hallie Rubenhold), or maybe Galahad's List of UK Ladies? All noted and dated with every punter/lady that ever was, 1999-

What a brilliant historical paper that would be.

I love history, I do!

It will be part of UK subcultured history, of that, I'm very sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for Scotland...

'Ranger's Impartial List of the Ladies of Pleasure in Edinburgh'. (1740's +)

Google that, the book is not possible to buy.

I'm so glad that I even got to know of it at all.

(Thanks 'Verbatim' for the email!) :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reviews of establishments could do with a bit of a prune. Several seem to be dead ends and a few of the asian establishments seem to be closing up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old FR's are pretty useless however they do tell us a bit about the author, if he has been punting for many years I would trust his reports more than someone who is a complete novice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for Scotland...

'Ranger's Impartial List of the Ladies of Pleasure in Edinburgh'. (1740's +)

Google that, the book is not possible to buy.

I'm so glad that I even got to know of it at all.

(Thanks 'Verbatim' for the email!) ;)

googled it.

Call me a pervert, but this article has a few extracts..

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6945809.ece

Wonder if PN or this board will be read in similar fashion in 300 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Old FR's are pretty useless however they do tell us a bit about the author, if he has been punting for many years I would trust his reports more than someone who is a complete novice.

I would agree, an FR has a declining value with the passage of time, but it does still retain some value as you note.

For prolific FR authors there will always be plenty of FRs to check against, but for less frequent authors (*confesses ;)*), there won't be much to read if you only look at the most recent xx months. It is often by looking at the collective FRs of a particular author that you will best gauge a feel for what they look for, like etc. Similarly, quite a lot can be gauged by reading FRs over a period of time for a particular WG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now