Are Dallas Guys a Bunch of Weak WKs?

I saw a review in Houston about a Dallas girl that was visiting. I was checking her reviews because I had an interest in seeing her. Now, not so much. It was a scathing review of the girl. Based on what was said in the ROS, I would have also given her a No.

It seemed like a hot topic in Houston. I remember from my ASPD days, the Houston guys were always brutally frank in their reviews. It can't be good for any girls planning to travel down there unless they already have positive reviews from there.
Are Dallas guys a bunch of weak white knights (a term I find insulting)?

Got a name or link to the review?

She could have been ill'in from the Houston air.

I would like a distinctive and clear definition of the term. It seems often the board is quick to use the term when a gent is in accordance with a lady, whether he's seen her or not.

I've lived in Houston for 4 years, and loved it off the board . The board's are contaminated with even provider trolls, but I wouldn't base the Houston Board as a great reference for the hobby scene itself , I learned they are very separate...

To my experience, in the H, as far as board success goes, it's about meeting the right people/clique. Its a bit cult-ish if you ask me. But UTR hobbyists have always been my niche of comfort, no matter which city and I've never been one to seek acceptance from the "jocks" of the board allowing them to determine my expiration date in the hobby.

Dallas has no more "WKs" than Houston and vice versa in my opinion.

Even though there are many, not all Dallas guys are WKs, but those are the guys who are most prevalent on the board in the Dallas forums, check the studio and AMP review sections for the worse cases. I do agree with your sentiments about many of the reviews. While it should happen since the provider is getting paid the same, ALL the BCD experiences are not fantastic, but those are the ones mainly reported. The not so good to bad experiences are not being reported due to the drama WKs bring to the review, sometimes instigated by the provider herself since she cannot comment under the review.

It is not necessary to review EVERY experience as many do not choose to do reviews, good or bad, but IMO, if a person feels it is information the community would benefit from or would want to know, and/or the provider has not been reviewed in while, then a review should be written.

In general I would say yes. If you could run a report using “no” vs “yes” recommendations IMO you would see that 95% of the time Dallas guys will say yes. One way to improve on reviews would be to expand the yes or no category. Or include a conclusion line where you can state succinctly giving a yes, however can improve following areas such as IOP, better motel/hotel, etc..

I see a tendency on the Dallas board that if a guy gives a no/negative review the WK will come in and flame him especially if he is new and especially on the AMP board. I’ve done a few negative reviews in my time and gotten crushed to a point you want to say fuck ECCIE not worth the flaming, however if we all did that the board would become useless

Got a name or link to the review?

She could have been ill'in from the Houston air. Originally Posted by bojulay

I looked at the Houston board. I thought that it was recent but not in the last few days. I will try to find it but I'm not going to divulge it is any of this information came from the ROS. I saw her pictures in one of the Dallas reviews that had a bunch of pictures in the ROS. That was what caught my eye and why I was looking at the reviews.

In general I would say yes. If you could run a report using “no” vs “yes” recommendations IMO you would see that 95% of the time Dallas guys will say yes. One way to improve on reviews would be to expand the yes or no category. Or include a conclusion line where you can state succinctly giving a yes, however can improve following areas such as IOP, better motel/hotel, etc..

I see a tendency on the Dallas board that if a guy gives a no/negative review the WK will come in and flame him especially if he is new and especially on the AMP board. I’ve done a few negative reviews in my time and gotten crushed to a point you want to say fuck ECCIE not worth the flaming, however if we all did that the board would become useless Originally Posted by 5150

95%? What is the rest BP girls? How do they become pussy whipped when you are paying for it?

How do they become pussy whipped when you are paying for it? Originally Posted by OldLRRP

Truth is: Raw-Dog accessibility is provided and or promised. Sad, but true in many cases...

Truth is: Raw-Dog accessibility is provided and or promised. Sad, but true in many cases... Originally Posted by Eva Damita

Eva, you asked for a definition of WK. I'll have to think about it. When I was here before, I got a chance to meet a lot of providers. Some at the socials and a couple used to come by for dinner. I cook great Cajun food. The women I met are tough enough. They don't need these men's help; after all, they ain't your sister.

Probably to many guys who think this is Pretty Woman and they can be the savior without having the money. It's like Fast and Furious when Brian loses the race. "I thought if I got in your good graces you would let me keep my car.". Dom "You are in my good graces but you ain't keeping your car.". Just change car for money.

Eva, you asked for a definition of WK. I'll have to think about it. When I was here before, I got a chance to meet a lot of providers. Some at the socials and a couple used to come by for dinner. I cook great Cajun food. The women I met are tough enough. They don't need these men's help; after all, they ain't your sister. Originally Posted by OldLRRP

WK imo, a guy who seeks out or is told about a negative incident, whose entire goal is to discredit and say basically "that was not my experience with her she is a wonderful girl you didn't treat right and she showed me the texts and pms and you are a liar".
The key to me is seeking it out. Which clearly some guys do because they see a new review of a girl and add comments and then post a bunch of photos and say how great she is. Or if someone started saying bad things about a provider in a thread and the guys only comments are related to the provider and nothing of the topic meaning they are trolling or told to come to help.

WK imo, a guy who seeks out or is told about a negative incident, whose entire goal is to discredit and say basically "that was not my experience with her she is a wonderful girl you didn't treat right and she showed me the texts and pms and you are a liar".
The key to me is seeking it out. Which clearly some guys do because they see a new review of a girl and add comments and then post a bunch of photos and say how great she is. Or if someone started saying bad things about a provider in a thread and the guys only comments are related to the provider and nothing of the topic meaning they are trolling or told to come to help. Originally Posted by mydallas1

I agree and will add further to the definition----

The typical WK does not have to be asked or told by his master...err provider about a negative review or comment made about her, he seeks them out as well. Yes, we can all have opinions on our experiences, but the difference in this case is that when a guy comments on another's review or under a comment criticizing the criticizer, saying he is a liar, then that is when the WK indication is prevalent. The WKs do comment on just about every review of that provider, kinda like a quasi pimp and when he reviews her, the experience is reported as over the top and could not get any better. The session may or may not have happened, but he was either told by the provider to give a better than his actual experience glowing review or like a good little boy, he did it on his own! What is amazing is the fact that 99% of the time, the WK does not receive even as much as a discount on her service when he sees her for a session, which makes him even more of an idiot, and there is no rationally talking to these guys as their opinions will be jaded no matter what.

WK imo, a guy who seeks out or is told about a negative incident, whose entire goal is to discredit and say basically "that was not my experience with her she is a wonderful girl you didn't treat right and she showed me the texts and pms and you are a liar".
The key to me is seeking it out. Which clearly some guys do because they see a new review of a girl and add comments and then post a bunch of photos and say how great she is. Or if someone started saying bad things about a provider in a thread and the guys only comments are related to the provider and nothing of the topic meaning they are trolling or told to come to help. Originally Posted by mydallas1

Thanks!

May I add that the above situation sounds like a provider searched her name, found statements she disliked, and went straight to pm a gent she's seen a few times to stand up for her, luring him in with discounted affairs, or playing a "damsel in distress" role you gents easily are susceptible to. That's what REALLY goes on...

I do see ASTONISHING embellishment for props from the "bros" here in DFW...it's actually hilarious how some of you gents make "Goddesses" out of Gremlins.

David you have great points in the above. . . Especially the "quasi-pimp" calling out, lol. A bunch of that here in DFW I certainly recognize as DFW rampant!

I wonder what they really are getting out of it though?

It's also quite possible the girl changed. The hobby can do that to a gal, you know.

Got a name or link to the review? Originally Posted by bojulay

X2