I would agree that possibly the definition of WK is about as ambiguous as the definition of GFE. To me, anyone that represents the facts in an overly exaggerated manner such as a (positive) review, comes to the rescue needlessly as you state, or does anything that violates the integrity and honesty of the system for personal gain or the personal benefit of the provider is a WK. Basically they lie in some fashion for the benefit of themselves and the provider. To me, a person who never has anything bad to say about a provider is a WK. It is statistically improbable that EVERY session is perfect and without some type of needed improvement. Those are the WK's I do not trust.
Introuble, I will point out that overstating a review is not what I understand the term WK to mean. I always thought a WK was someone who would come riding to the rescue of a provider due to a perceived, or actual, problem with something about her or her services which was usually done after a bad review. If this group is posting either false reviews or inflated reviews then they are doing the Wall Street shuffle... pump and dump. Originally Posted by LonesomeDove
My definition of WK (and GFE) may be a little personal, but I see things from a cynical perspective and no provider is perfect. It doesn't mean you have to say something bad about EVERY provider, but many will give a positive recommendation simply because they do not have the balls to be honest and possibly hurt someones feelings therefore never get to see that provider again. THAT IS PERSONAL GAIN.