General Forum
categories
I wish CC would change things with respect to the rules for soft core. I think it would help both members and hosts. And it could help distinguish between glamour and little shy. Plus, it could stop the endless debates we keep having here.
Something like the following would be good:
Glamour: can do whatever she wants in both open and 121. (This is what both glamour and little shy are now other than restricted sessions.)
Little Shy: has the option to get naked in open, must get naked in 121 if requested within 5 minutes of the member having entered 121 (not 5 minutes from the request, rather, as long as he's been in video at least 5 minutes). Again, the exception would be that she can get naked in open with a password.
Not So Shy: must get naked in open or 121 after 5 minutes of member having entered video if he asks (not 5 minutes after the request, rather, as long as he's been in video at least 5 minutes). This is essentially the rule now but it eliminates any debate about how long into the chat a host must get naked in not so shy
Instant Action: host must get naked in open and 121 from the moment she is asked. A strip shouldn't take more than 1 minute unless that is what the viewer requested a slow strip.
There really isn't any change for not so shy or instant action here. I just think setting time limits helps avoid confusion although personally, 99% of the time, I never had a not so shy host or instant action host stall. I've had a few not willing to strip in open, but usually, they both will strip right away when asked when they are willing to strip and follow the rules.
The real problem is soft core, namely glamour and little shy. First, there is not a significant diffference between the two under the rules for nonrestricted sessions.
Second, all the soft core hosts do their own thing so you never know what to expect. I think just ONE category, namely Glamour, should be for that situation.
Third, it is annoying as a member not to know what to expect., and while my proposal still allows for some uncertainty, it does make it so just one category is reserved for the situation where the member is never sure if a host might strip, namely glamour.
Why do we need two categories where the rules are basically the same? So a host can have two sessions open at the same time where the rules are essentially identical? That's not a good reason. So a 500 people aren't online in one category at once? That won't happen, as I will explain.
Right now, many hosts strip in little shy open and 121, and often right away. Those hosts don't need the flexibility to do what they want that Glamour provides and would be fine staying in little shy.
Therefore, you won't see 500 glamour hosts under my proposal. The numbers might increase, but I think some glamour hosts that are willing to strip, including in open, might move from glamour to little shy too. Despite some guys liking to chat and nothing more, most guys want nudity as evidence by the 100000 posts on soft core and soft core hosts and most hosts provide it so those glamour hosts that strip anyway would be fine in little shy.
I also would make clear that in not so shy and instant action open, a host must strip if any viewer in open requests it. Who the host listens to in terms of what to do in the show is up to her, but if nudity is mandatory, saying "sorry I'm chatting" causes problems since you usually cannot check with the host from text chat if she's giving a show. In the alternative, the rule could be that in hard core, nudity is not required if the host is already just chatting with a member but I think that might cause more confusion since sometimes members enter video at about the same time and it looked like she wasn't with anyone for both of them when they chose open. (In other words, if at the same time, both see open and 121 options and think she is alone.)
I would permit hosts to have more than one session, including both soft core and hard core, but 1) a maximum of two sessioin like now and 2) a reminder that they must follow the rules of the given category. Too many not so shy hosts say go 121, including those with little shy sessions.
One last thing, until such a change is made, I definitely would recommend that glamour and little shy hosts say in their profiles if they will strip in open. Many members avoid those categories completely since they don't want to be bothered jumping into text chat all of the time and asking what to expect. I sometimes will ask, but when I see a high price for open, I usually just assume that I will be told 121 since this is what usually happens, but I am probably missing some hosts that would strip in open and they are losing out on having another customer. They should really take the time to put in their profiles what they do.
I think my proposal gives hosts that like flexibility to do what they want everything whenever they want they need except I would limit it to one category, namely glamour. This would include hosts that some days are in the mood to strip, be it open or just 121, and sometimes are not. and would accomodate hosts just comfortable getting topless, for example. For those hosts always willing to strip but truly like privacy or the extra money from 121, there is little shy. For those that like to at least chat a few mintues before stripping so they are more comfortable, there is not so shy. And for hosts that don't care about chatting before stripping there is instant action. I think everyone is accomodated and things are much more clear this way.
Something like the following would be good:
Glamour: can do whatever she wants in both open and 121. (This is what both glamour and little shy are now other than restricted sessions.)
Little Shy: has the option to get naked in open, must get naked in 121 if requested within 5 minutes of the member having entered 121 (not 5 minutes from the request, rather, as long as he's been in video at least 5 minutes). Again, the exception would be that she can get naked in open with a password.
Not So Shy: must get naked in open or 121 after 5 minutes of member having entered video if he asks (not 5 minutes after the request, rather, as long as he's been in video at least 5 minutes). This is essentially the rule now but it eliminates any debate about how long into the chat a host must get naked in not so shy
Instant Action: host must get naked in open and 121 from the moment she is asked. A strip shouldn't take more than 1 minute unless that is what the viewer requested a slow strip.
There really isn't any change for not so shy or instant action here. I just think setting time limits helps avoid confusion although personally, 99% of the time, I never had a not so shy host or instant action host stall. I've had a few not willing to strip in open, but usually, they both will strip right away when asked when they are willing to strip and follow the rules.
The real problem is soft core, namely glamour and little shy. First, there is not a significant diffference between the two under the rules for nonrestricted sessions.
Second, all the soft core hosts do their own thing so you never know what to expect. I think just ONE category, namely Glamour, should be for that situation.
Third, it is annoying as a member not to know what to expect., and while my proposal still allows for some uncertainty, it does make it so just one category is reserved for the situation where the member is never sure if a host might strip, namely glamour.
Why do we need two categories where the rules are basically the same? So a host can have two sessions open at the same time where the rules are essentially identical? That's not a good reason. So a 500 people aren't online in one category at once? That won't happen, as I will explain.
Right now, many hosts strip in little shy open and 121, and often right away. Those hosts don't need the flexibility to do what they want that Glamour provides and would be fine staying in little shy.
Therefore, you won't see 500 glamour hosts under my proposal. The numbers might increase, but I think some glamour hosts that are willing to strip, including in open, might move from glamour to little shy too. Despite some guys liking to chat and nothing more, most guys want nudity as evidence by the 100000 posts on soft core and soft core hosts and most hosts provide it so those glamour hosts that strip anyway would be fine in little shy.
I also would make clear that in not so shy and instant action open, a host must strip if any viewer in open requests it. Who the host listens to in terms of what to do in the show is up to her, but if nudity is mandatory, saying "sorry I'm chatting" causes problems since you usually cannot check with the host from text chat if she's giving a show. In the alternative, the rule could be that in hard core, nudity is not required if the host is already just chatting with a member but I think that might cause more confusion since sometimes members enter video at about the same time and it looked like she wasn't with anyone for both of them when they chose open. (In other words, if at the same time, both see open and 121 options and think she is alone.)
I would permit hosts to have more than one session, including both soft core and hard core, but 1) a maximum of two sessioin like now and 2) a reminder that they must follow the rules of the given category. Too many not so shy hosts say go 121, including those with little shy sessions.
One last thing, until such a change is made, I definitely would recommend that glamour and little shy hosts say in their profiles if they will strip in open. Many members avoid those categories completely since they don't want to be bothered jumping into text chat all of the time and asking what to expect. I sometimes will ask, but when I see a high price for open, I usually just assume that I will be told 121 since this is what usually happens, but I am probably missing some hosts that would strip in open and they are losing out on having another customer. They should really take the time to put in their profiles what they do.
I think my proposal gives hosts that like flexibility to do what they want everything whenever they want they need except I would limit it to one category, namely glamour. This would include hosts that some days are in the mood to strip, be it open or just 121, and sometimes are not. and would accomodate hosts just comfortable getting topless, for example. For those hosts always willing to strip but truly like privacy or the extra money from 121, there is little shy. For those that like to at least chat a few mintues before stripping so they are more comfortable, there is not so shy. And for hosts that don't care about chatting before stripping there is instant action. I think everyone is accomodated and things are much more clear this way.
RE: categories
ignore the part about little shy being able to get naked in open with a password....
I was originally thinking of making no nudity in glamour and little shy open but changed my mind to give hosts more flexibility. I deleted it under glamour, but I forgot to delete that part under little shy
At first I thought it might make things more clear to members, but I want hosts to have the flexibiity that they have now. I just want to distinguish between glamour and little shy and so I think little shy should have to get naked 121 otherwise why have two categories as I said.
I was originally thinking of making no nudity in glamour and little shy open but changed my mind to give hosts more flexibility. I deleted it under glamour, but I forgot to delete that part under little shy
At first I thought it might make things more clear to members, but I want hosts to have the flexibiity that they have now. I just want to distinguish between glamour and little shy and so I think little shy should have to get naked 121 otherwise why have two categories as I said.
RE: categories
There is no chance any of your suggestions will ever change the structure of this site. This site is unique in its own way. It has become a niche site. It gives certain non traditional cam site viewers what they want and can't find at most other sites.
I've been a member since 2000 and witnessed great change over that time. CC was one of the first cam sites. The structure has remained much the same over the years with the exception of adding 2 categories, that of Glamour Girls as a bridge from non adult to adult and Instant Action for the traditional cam site visitor.
They did add 4 screen sizes recently to meet viewer demand, but the site remains unchanged otherwise and as long as they continue to prosper, I do not see any other changes coming now or in the future.
I've been a member since 2000 and witnessed great change over that time. CC was one of the first cam sites. The structure has remained much the same over the years with the exception of adding 2 categories, that of Glamour Girls as a bridge from non adult to adult and Instant Action for the traditional cam site visitor.
They did add 4 screen sizes recently to meet viewer demand, but the site remains unchanged otherwise and as long as they continue to prosper, I do not see any other changes coming now or in the future.
RE: categories
I explained it in detail to try to be clear. I think that I was except I made a mistake and had to post the "edit".
In a nutshell, I am combing glamour and little shy into just glamour. It would be a category where hosts could do what they want in both open and 121. I then change little shy to say, okay, do what you want in open (in case you truly are shy and just want 121), but in 121, you must strip.
Without this change, glamour and little shy are the same and there is no need for two categories. Pllus, using my idea helps reduce all of the debate about stripping only in 121. It would not go away entirely, but at least for little shy hosts, a member would know he could see her naked if he was in 121. This is the case with many glamour and little shy hosts right now. Very few will say they only strip for certain guys. Most will strip for anyone in 121, especially every Colombian host I have met on CC, lol.
Mine is not a perfect solution since there will always be some uncertainty because one category, namely glamour, would still let hosts do whatever they want, but it would at least let members know which hosts will at least get naked even if in 121 at a higher price.
Nothing in what I say really changes anything other than stopping glamour and little shy from being the same thing and allowing members to have a better idea of whom to visit if they want guaranteed nudity even if it must be 121. This is a porn site, after all, so at least let members know which hosts will act like they actually are working on one, lol.
With constant posts about this issue in the general forum and constant questions by viewers in the viewer forum about whether a host strips, clearly some reorganization of categories is necessary. People might still ask about Glamour hosts and what they do, but I think the amount of posts about what hosts do and the categories would go way down.
In a nutshell, I am combing glamour and little shy into just glamour. It would be a category where hosts could do what they want in both open and 121. I then change little shy to say, okay, do what you want in open (in case you truly are shy and just want 121), but in 121, you must strip.
Without this change, glamour and little shy are the same and there is no need for two categories. Pllus, using my idea helps reduce all of the debate about stripping only in 121. It would not go away entirely, but at least for little shy hosts, a member would know he could see her naked if he was in 121. This is the case with many glamour and little shy hosts right now. Very few will say they only strip for certain guys. Most will strip for anyone in 121, especially every Colombian host I have met on CC, lol.
Mine is not a perfect solution since there will always be some uncertainty because one category, namely glamour, would still let hosts do whatever they want, but it would at least let members know which hosts will at least get naked even if in 121 at a higher price.
Nothing in what I say really changes anything other than stopping glamour and little shy from being the same thing and allowing members to have a better idea of whom to visit if they want guaranteed nudity even if it must be 121. This is a porn site, after all, so at least let members know which hosts will act like they actually are working on one, lol.
With constant posts about this issue in the general forum and constant questions by viewers in the viewer forum about whether a host strips, clearly some reorganization of categories is necessary. People might still ask about Glamour hosts and what they do, but I think the amount of posts about what hosts do and the categories would go way down.
RE: categories
"but I think the amount of posts about what hosts do and the categories would go way down."
I don't think CC wants the number of posts go down. I think the opposite, the more the merrier. Whatever gets the most viewers or potential viewers to the site is what CC wants.
I don't think CC wants the number of posts go down. I think the opposite, the more the merrier. Whatever gets the most viewers or potential viewers to the site is what CC wants.
RE: categories
omg!!! i'm horrible!!! i suggested making things easier for members and clearer for all.
And if you READ, you will see that I note that some little shy hosts would move to Glamour. Is this so horrible? You would have to say you work in glamour and not little shy? OMG!!!! How awful!!!
If you READ, you will see that my idea gives you 100% control to do what you want, just as you have now. The difference is that instead of two categories doing this, there would only be one. If you didn't like the idea of stripping after 5 minutes for any random guy that goes 121 with you, then you just would need to go to glamour which is probably where you belong anyway based on your post, lol.
And if you READ, you will see that I note that some little shy hosts would move to Glamour. Is this so horrible? You would have to say you work in glamour and not little shy? OMG!!!! How awful!!!
If you READ, you will see that my idea gives you 100% control to do what you want, just as you have now. The difference is that instead of two categories doing this, there would only be one. If you didn't like the idea of stripping after 5 minutes for any random guy that goes 121 with you, then you just would need to go to glamour which is probably where you belong anyway based on your post, lol.
RE: categories
"If you didn't like the idea of stripping after 5 minutes for any random guy that goes 121 with you!!"
Sorry, didnt get ur idea why to make instant action category from lilttle shy??
Sorry, didnt get ur idea why to make instant action category from lilttle shy??
RE: categories
Sorry, but don't you know the rules now, which are as follows:
Glamour: host can do what she wants in both open and little shy
Little Shy: host can do what she wants in both open and little shy. ( I only change this to say she should get naked in 121 so it is different than Glamour, otherwise, why have two categories?)
Not So Shy: hosts must strip in open and 121 in a reasonable time period. As I indicated elsewhere, CC thinks 10 minutes is too long so clearly they have an idea of what is "reasonable" even if they don't give an actual number. I only use numbers to try to make things more clear to all.
Instant Action: hosts must strip right away in both open and 121
So let's see, I do two things:
1. I distinguish between glamour and little shy but saying little shy hosts need to strip in 121. If they don't like this, they still can use glamour. And if you don't like time limits, then fine... change the wording to within a reasonable time. But the term "reaonable" is vague and as I said, CC has a time limit in mind anyway.
2. I put a specific time limit for not so shy to avoid confusion. (And I guess I say 1 minute for Instant Action for the same reason.) But again, CC has a specific idea of what they think is reasonable and it is less than 10 minutes.
All you hosts are getting all upset when I am really taking nothing away from you except the name "little shy". What is the big deal about that name?
And what I do will help hosts that are now avoided by members who want guaranteed nudity even if just 121. Most little shy hosts strip. Changing little shy makes it clear to members who these hosts are and will probably get those hosts more members since many members probably avoid soft core altogether since they want certain nudity.
I take NOTHING away from little shy hosts except the name and help members know who will strip even if just 121 (which can help hosts too since now members know they can visit those hosts for a show). Why are you so upset?
Glamour: host can do what she wants in both open and little shy
Little Shy: host can do what she wants in both open and little shy. ( I only change this to say she should get naked in 121 so it is different than Glamour, otherwise, why have two categories?)
Not So Shy: hosts must strip in open and 121 in a reasonable time period. As I indicated elsewhere, CC thinks 10 minutes is too long so clearly they have an idea of what is "reasonable" even if they don't give an actual number. I only use numbers to try to make things more clear to all.
Instant Action: hosts must strip right away in both open and 121
So let's see, I do two things:
1. I distinguish between glamour and little shy but saying little shy hosts need to strip in 121. If they don't like this, they still can use glamour. And if you don't like time limits, then fine... change the wording to within a reasonable time. But the term "reaonable" is vague and as I said, CC has a time limit in mind anyway.
2. I put a specific time limit for not so shy to avoid confusion. (And I guess I say 1 minute for Instant Action for the same reason.) But again, CC has a specific idea of what they think is reasonable and it is less than 10 minutes.
All you hosts are getting all upset when I am really taking nothing away from you except the name "little shy". What is the big deal about that name?
And what I do will help hosts that are now avoided by members who want guaranteed nudity even if just 121. Most little shy hosts strip. Changing little shy makes it clear to members who these hosts are and will probably get those hosts more members since many members probably avoid soft core altogether since they want certain nudity.
I take NOTHING away from little shy hosts except the name and help members know who will strip even if just 121 (which can help hosts too since now members know they can visit those hosts for a show). Why are you so upset?
RE: categories
I change very little and take absolutely nothing away from hosts except the name little shy if they want to do what they want in open and 121. All they would need to do is go to glamour
And I make things a bit more clear for members who would like to know if a certain host strips. Right now, they know that all hosts in not so shy and instant action strip if they are following the rules. They also know that many glamour and little shy hosts strip, but they are not sure which ones. What I do is give them a better idea pof who will strip although it is not a perfect solution since I preserve a host's freedom to do what she wants whenever she wants if she chooses glamour.
Guys post a lot about frustration with soft core. And they post a lot about whether a hosts strip when she is soft core. Sometimes the frustration that guys feel will cause them to post that they avoid soft core altogether and that means they are not spending money on many soft core hosts that would strip for them.
My idea helps these members and these hosts. Get that through your head!!! It will help BOTH members AND hosts, but take NOTHING away from hosts except the name "little shy" since they will need to move to "glamour" if they like the current rules. The time limits just add clarity, but as I said elsewhere, CC has time limits anyway even if they don't state them publicly.
You and people like you are the ones who should "give it up"! My idea helps members, will give some hosts more business, and takes NOTHING away from little shy hosts that like to be able to do what they want except the name "little shy".
People like you simply don't like being told what to do. That's fine. That's what Glamour is for under my proposal. You reall need two categories for that? I take nothing away from hosts and give them an option which will allow them to market themselves better to members and make more money and make things easier on members. What is so horrible? I take nothing away and add things?
And I make things a bit more clear for members who would like to know if a certain host strips. Right now, they know that all hosts in not so shy and instant action strip if they are following the rules. They also know that many glamour and little shy hosts strip, but they are not sure which ones. What I do is give them a better idea pof who will strip although it is not a perfect solution since I preserve a host's freedom to do what she wants whenever she wants if she chooses glamour.
Guys post a lot about frustration with soft core. And they post a lot about whether a hosts strip when she is soft core. Sometimes the frustration that guys feel will cause them to post that they avoid soft core altogether and that means they are not spending money on many soft core hosts that would strip for them.
My idea helps these members and these hosts. Get that through your head!!! It will help BOTH members AND hosts, but take NOTHING away from hosts except the name "little shy" since they will need to move to "glamour" if they like the current rules. The time limits just add clarity, but as I said elsewhere, CC has time limits anyway even if they don't state them publicly.
You and people like you are the ones who should "give it up"! My idea helps members, will give some hosts more business, and takes NOTHING away from little shy hosts that like to be able to do what they want except the name "little shy".
People like you simply don't like being told what to do. That's fine. That's what Glamour is for under my proposal. You reall need two categories for that? I take nothing away from hosts and give them an option which will allow them to market themselves better to members and make more money and make things easier on members. What is so horrible? I take nothing away and add things?
RE: categories
Lots of hosts hate this and will respond "I'm not Instanat Action" even though they will do exactly the type of show I want, lol. I usually prefer a slow dance and strip, but even if one tries to explain himself, the second the question is asked of a soft core host, she often assumes the member is a two minute man. Plus, some hosts are smart enough not to put their promises in writing.
It would be great if hosts put this type of information in their profiles, but most choose not to do so. The result of all this is that members will often avoid soft core hosts based on what is written in the forums even though most will actually strip in open or at least 121.
I think a lot of those "only 121" hosts would benefit from my idea but obviously, at least in terms of posters, hosts don't like it or don't understand my point. They see words like "must" and things like "5 minutes" and go insane when the reallity is they still have the ability to choose what they want to do if they pick glamour, and in terms of time limits, as I have explained, CC looks at things the same way even if they don't give a specific number.
By the way, ever notice all the glamour hosts that post in the host forum about how angry they are that some glamour hosts get naked and have naked profile pics? I am far from the only one that would like to see some changes, and I bet some glamour hosts would like to see nudity eliminated altogether and just allow sexy dancing, et cetera, something I do not do.
It would be great if hosts put this type of information in their profiles, but most choose not to do so. The result of all this is that members will often avoid soft core hosts based on what is written in the forums even though most will actually strip in open or at least 121.
I think a lot of those "only 121" hosts would benefit from my idea but obviously, at least in terms of posters, hosts don't like it or don't understand my point. They see words like "must" and things like "5 minutes" and go insane when the reallity is they still have the ability to choose what they want to do if they pick glamour, and in terms of time limits, as I have explained, CC looks at things the same way even if they don't give a specific number.
By the way, ever notice all the glamour hosts that post in the host forum about how angry they are that some glamour hosts get naked and have naked profile pics? I am far from the only one that would like to see some changes, and I bet some glamour hosts would like to see nudity eliminated altogether and just allow sexy dancing, et cetera, something I do not do.
RE: categories
I respect what you are saying and agree except for one thing: there is no need to have two categories where the rules are the same even if both are soft core.
My idea would let glamour hosts do what they want, when they want, just as you seem to like, but instead of letting little shy hosts do the same, I say "Okay, if you are little shy, at least be willing to get naked in 121, otherwise, pick glamour where it is your option when to strip and for whom."
I don't think this is a big deal for hosts since they would just need to switch categories from little shy to glamour if they want complete control, and would help others get business if they don't mind only 121 since members would know they had guaranteed nudity there.
I would look at freedom of choice versus names such as "soft core" and "hard core". There are actually rules about when a host must masterbate, for example, but this rarely seems to be a topic of discussion. Rather, nudity is clearly the central issue as opposed to how "hard core" a host gets so that is what I focus on.
All I do is make it so the categories are a bit better defined in terms of who has the choice. There could be other ways to do this as well, but leaving things as they are now serves no purpose, and personally, I think drives away members from some soft core hosts since they don't want to be bothered with asking or deal with uncertainties.
And as I said elsewhere, based on the host forum, clearly not all glamour hosts are happy that so much nudity occurs there. My idea might push some hosts that strip a lot in glamour and don't mind doing so to little shy since they might get more customers that way.
My idea would let glamour hosts do what they want, when they want, just as you seem to like, but instead of letting little shy hosts do the same, I say "Okay, if you are little shy, at least be willing to get naked in 121, otherwise, pick glamour where it is your option when to strip and for whom."
I don't think this is a big deal for hosts since they would just need to switch categories from little shy to glamour if they want complete control, and would help others get business if they don't mind only 121 since members would know they had guaranteed nudity there.
I would look at freedom of choice versus names such as "soft core" and "hard core". There are actually rules about when a host must masterbate, for example, but this rarely seems to be a topic of discussion. Rather, nudity is clearly the central issue as opposed to how "hard core" a host gets so that is what I focus on.
All I do is make it so the categories are a bit better defined in terms of who has the choice. There could be other ways to do this as well, but leaving things as they are now serves no purpose, and personally, I think drives away members from some soft core hosts since they don't want to be bothered with asking or deal with uncertainties.
And as I said elsewhere, based on the host forum, clearly not all glamour hosts are happy that so much nudity occurs there. My idea might push some hosts that strip a lot in glamour and don't mind doing so to little shy since they might get more customers that way.
RE: categories
I agree to an extent, but knowing a member actually means how much he is willing to spend on you.
RE: categories
Sorry but I think your comments are so out of line. The hosts are not robots on time clocks. Obviously you shouldn't go to little shy or Glamour ever because YOU are disappointed so just stick to the hardcore and then you won't be tempted to waste your time with your thinking that MOST don't find fun and satisfaction with how things are. I am glad that most members don't think they should have a remote control and timer for the pure entertainment. Get some porn movies and then you'll be happy!!
RE: categories
1) I am changing nothing about not so shy and instant action other than putting a 5 minute time limit to help clairfy things. CC agrees that there should be a time limit since I once waited 10 minutes for a host in not so shy to strip but she didn't and they asked me not to wait so long next time. I guess CC thinks you are a robot too, lol, since they have a time limit in their minds. While they don't define what is reasonable, clearly they think stripping must occur in less than 10 minutes.
2) as for little shy 121, once again I just think there should be a time limit so everyone is clear about things. If you want to change it to 10 minutes for example since it is "little shy", then fine, but clearly there needs to be some standard as to what is "reasonable" and in fact, one exists in CC's mind given what they ahve said to me about not so shy.
3) as for changing little shy to host's choice in open but must strip in 121, why do you need glamour and little shy if you don't make a change? Answer: you don't. And many hosts have this exact policy so why not make a category for them? I think it would help them since many member avoid glamour and little shy hosts thinking that they will never strip.. This way, the "only 121" hosts have a place to go and members will visit them instead of ignoring them. Additionally, if hosts don't always want to strip in 121, they can just go to glamour. What's the big deal about switching categories?
4) You are wrong about me. I like hosts from all categories and sometimes will chat with instant action hosts and get shows from glamour hosts. But there are definitely times when members are frustrated by the games hosts play and the lack of clarity. All I try to do is take away some of the confusion. Clearly there are enough posts and emails to CC (not just from me, lol) that demonstrate a change would be helpful.
The bottom line is that you want to be treated with respect and want to do whatever you want. Fine. First, I always treat hosts with respect. Second, you can work in Glamour and do whatever you want even if you are now little shy and must get over the idea of changing categories. But there is a third, namely as a paying customer, I expect respect too which means (1) many hosts out there need to stop with all the bullshit and (2) CC should more clearly define categories to help their PAYING customers know what exactly they are paying for.
I do NOTHING to inhibit your freedom. I simply limit you to one category.
2) as for little shy 121, once again I just think there should be a time limit so everyone is clear about things. If you want to change it to 10 minutes for example since it is "little shy", then fine, but clearly there needs to be some standard as to what is "reasonable" and in fact, one exists in CC's mind given what they ahve said to me about not so shy.
3) as for changing little shy to host's choice in open but must strip in 121, why do you need glamour and little shy if you don't make a change? Answer: you don't. And many hosts have this exact policy so why not make a category for them? I think it would help them since many member avoid glamour and little shy hosts thinking that they will never strip.. This way, the "only 121" hosts have a place to go and members will visit them instead of ignoring them. Additionally, if hosts don't always want to strip in 121, they can just go to glamour. What's the big deal about switching categories?
4) You are wrong about me. I like hosts from all categories and sometimes will chat with instant action hosts and get shows from glamour hosts. But there are definitely times when members are frustrated by the games hosts play and the lack of clarity. All I try to do is take away some of the confusion. Clearly there are enough posts and emails to CC (not just from me, lol) that demonstrate a change would be helpful.
The bottom line is that you want to be treated with respect and want to do whatever you want. Fine. First, I always treat hosts with respect. Second, you can work in Glamour and do whatever you want even if you are now little shy and must get over the idea of changing categories. But there is a third, namely as a paying customer, I expect respect too which means (1) many hosts out there need to stop with all the bullshit and (2) CC should more clearly define categories to help their PAYING customers know what exactly they are paying for.
I do NOTHING to inhibit your freedom. I simply limit you to one category.
RE: categories
Why do you have such an attachment to the words "little shy", if that's where you are now? All you would need to do is go to Glamour if things were done the way I suggested. NOTHING else would change for any little shy host that wants to be able to do what she wants in both open and 121. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! You really need two categories like that? For what purpose, if I may ask?
RE: categories
You put way too much emphasis on a name and original intent and ignore what actually happens.
Glamour, whatever it was originally intended to be, is basically the same as little shy except glamour hosts are less likely to strip in open and will more likely requie 121. A number of glamour host will strip in open and 121 and some little shy hosts won't strip in either open or 121. It all depends on the host.
Nothing I suggest takes away from a host''s flexibility to do what she wants. I just suggest putting hosts that only want to strip when they want to in one category instead of two. It will make it easier for member to know what to expect.
Without making changes, then there really is no purpose for having two categories despite any original intent of CC. Both glamour and little shy essentially have the same rules and are used for the same things. A member never knows what to expect, and while he can ask in text chat, many hosts hate this and usually will respond something along the lines of "I'm not Instant Action" even if a member would be willing to chat awhile and want a slow strip intead of instant nudity. Sometimes it is nice to know that if one wants nudity, he will get to see it sooner or later, but many hosts hate being asked. My idea helps eliminate some of this problem since at least he knows he can get nudity for certain hosts in 121.
Glamour, whatever it was originally intended to be, is basically the same as little shy except glamour hosts are less likely to strip in open and will more likely requie 121. A number of glamour host will strip in open and 121 and some little shy hosts won't strip in either open or 121. It all depends on the host.
Nothing I suggest takes away from a host''s flexibility to do what she wants. I just suggest putting hosts that only want to strip when they want to in one category instead of two. It will make it easier for member to know what to expect.
Without making changes, then there really is no purpose for having two categories despite any original intent of CC. Both glamour and little shy essentially have the same rules and are used for the same things. A member never knows what to expect, and while he can ask in text chat, many hosts hate this and usually will respond something along the lines of "I'm not Instant Action" even if a member would be willing to chat awhile and want a slow strip intead of instant nudity. Sometimes it is nice to know that if one wants nudity, he will get to see it sooner or later, but many hosts hate being asked. My idea helps eliminate some of this problem since at least he knows he can get nudity for certain hosts in 121.
RE: categories
The hosts in Softcore know exactly what they are doing be keeping the paying customer in the dark about what she does or does not do in pvt. In other words, the host want it both ways. Most know that once a member sees them naked they will be off to next host and not back again. And as a member I can confirm that as being true. But by holding up the possibility of being naked, she keeps customers coming back to her pvt and spending more money.
RE: categories
"Glamour was intended for hotter hosts that put the time, money into wardrobe, body etc to be glamourous."
According to cc, Glamour is intended to be a bridge between Non Adult and Adult categories.
According to cc, Glamour is intended to be a bridge between Non Adult and Adult categories.
RE: categories
It is hard to remember at this point, but the original intent of glamour was what you described. It was more of a bridge between non adult and adult where a host could be sexy, wear sexy clothes, do a sexy dance and talk about adult topics.
Before glamour, nonadult hosts were allowed to do more "adult things". After glamour, CC became very strict about what nonadult could do.
What then happened was that instead of just being sexy and glamouress like you describe, it basically became little shy. There really is no difference between the two. Glamour hosts strip in open, for example.
If you want a change where glamour has no nudity at any time, or maybe just 121, but hosts can act sexy and show panties and talk about sex, that would be okay, but I think it would annoy hosts. They would need to keep jumping from glamour to little shy to do shows although they could have two sessions and set prices according to what they do in video.
In sum, forget about the word "glamour". Your definition is correct, but it does not apply any more. Just look at some of the nude profile pics, lol. It is the same as little shy except hosts may charge more and are a bit less likely to strip. It really has nothing to do with being glamouress at this point for most hosts.
Under my suggestion, you could just use glamour even if you didn't feel so glamouress, :-) And if it was a day you were always willing to strip in 121, then you could have a little shy session open at the same time and charge a bit more there than your glamour 121. And when the member asks you to strip in glamour 121, if he isn't a regular, send him to little shy 121 where he pays more. You can do this now too, except under my idea, he won't assume no stripping in glamour and little shy and just go to not so shy or instant action so you would have a better change of getting video in your little shy session.
Before glamour, nonadult hosts were allowed to do more "adult things". After glamour, CC became very strict about what nonadult could do.
What then happened was that instead of just being sexy and glamouress like you describe, it basically became little shy. There really is no difference between the two. Glamour hosts strip in open, for example.
If you want a change where glamour has no nudity at any time, or maybe just 121, but hosts can act sexy and show panties and talk about sex, that would be okay, but I think it would annoy hosts. They would need to keep jumping from glamour to little shy to do shows although they could have two sessions and set prices according to what they do in video.
In sum, forget about the word "glamour". Your definition is correct, but it does not apply any more. Just look at some of the nude profile pics, lol. It is the same as little shy except hosts may charge more and are a bit less likely to strip. It really has nothing to do with being glamouress at this point for most hosts.
Under my suggestion, you could just use glamour even if you didn't feel so glamouress, :-) And if it was a day you were always willing to strip in 121, then you could have a little shy session open at the same time and charge a bit more there than your glamour 121. And when the member asks you to strip in glamour 121, if he isn't a regular, send him to little shy 121 where he pays more. You can do this now too, except under my idea, he won't assume no stripping in glamour and little shy and just go to not so shy or instant action so you would have a better change of getting video in your little shy session.
RE: categories
I don't want to have to read a rule book.
It's easier just NOT TO READ all the "endless debates" on whatever it is that so terrible. My friend in Little Shy likes the option to be able to say, I don't feel like stripping today. And that does not trouble me at all. And I don't care if that bothers you.
It's easier just NOT TO READ all the "endless debates" on whatever it is that so terrible. My friend in Little Shy likes the option to be able to say, I don't feel like stripping today. And that does not trouble me at all. And I don't care if that bothers you.
RE: categories
All she would need to do is go to Glamour. And it doesn't bother me that she can choose what she wants to do. But I think that should be limited to one category.
If you are going to have categories, then there should be a distinction among them. If you want a site that says hosts can do whatever they want, that is fine, but then eliminate the categories and unless a host makes verifiable promise, she is able to do whatever she wants. Or make it simple and have two: (1) hosts that strip only when they are in the mood and (2) hosts that always strip.
You attack me without understanding the underlying point of my post. And I am not really doing anything significantly different than what CC does now. The most significant change is that I say hosts should strip in little shy 121. Without such a change, why even have glamour and little shy? As for the time limit, that is just to avoid confusion, and CC does that anyway as I state in another post where I say they told me I shouldn't have waited 10 minutes for a not so shy host to strip.
If you are going to have categories, then there should be a distinction among them. If you want a site that says hosts can do whatever they want, that is fine, but then eliminate the categories and unless a host makes verifiable promise, she is able to do whatever she wants. Or make it simple and have two: (1) hosts that strip only when they are in the mood and (2) hosts that always strip.
You attack me without understanding the underlying point of my post. And I am not really doing anything significantly different than what CC does now. The most significant change is that I say hosts should strip in little shy 121. Without such a change, why even have glamour and little shy? As for the time limit, that is just to avoid confusion, and CC does that anyway as I state in another post where I say they told me I shouldn't have waited 10 minutes for a not so shy host to strip.
RE: categories
I may be wrong, but I rather feel that even if your proposals were implemented you would soon simply find another subject to have "endless debates" about!
RE: categories
The fact is there are other sites much, much larger than CC will ever be. I am not the thread starter. But I like most members go to other sites too. I like the variety. I like competition. But I do agree with you to a certain extent. For me CC is the best chat site on the net. They have no equal. There are many very smart and nice looking hosts to chat with. That's why I'm here.
RE: categories
I wasn't complaining. I just said it was the best chat site on the net. Is that a complaint?
RE: categories? - here's an idea, scrap them...
I've not been here long, and have not really had many favourites, and so far categories mean nothing to me. I think that a host should be able to do what they like, this depends on relationship with host, mood, and many other things, and they (you) should not be expected to perform just because you are in IA for example. I have enjoyed simply chatting to hosts in IA, and have had wild times with hosts in glamour. Category is meaningless. It is the person who attracts my attention, not what they will do...but that's just me.
To give a member a clue if they need one as to mood etc of the host, why not post it up on hosts biography, or just ask (nicely!) in text chat?
To give a member a clue if they need one as to mood etc of the host, why not post it up on hosts biography, or just ask (nicely!) in text chat?
My opinion of Softcore categories
This is only my opinion. I think the Softcore categories are very successful in terms of making money for themselves and the site. I form my opinion by talking in paid videochat with Sotfcore hosts and reading posts from both viewers and hosts in this forum.
I think there are many viewers that get sexual satisfaction from being denied nudity and sex in pvt. In fact I think most viewers on this site can be described that way. I don't understand what makes these guys tick, but CC and the hosts in Softcore are smart enough to know about these kind of guys and takes advantage of it.
Kudos to CC and the Softcore hosts for knowing how to market themselves to this niche market. And then of course there is always IA for the more traditional type of viewers.
I think there are many viewers that get sexual satisfaction from being denied nudity and sex in pvt. In fact I think most viewers on this site can be described that way. I don't understand what makes these guys tick, but CC and the hosts in Softcore are smart enough to know about these kind of guys and takes advantage of it.
Kudos to CC and the Softcore hosts for knowing how to market themselves to this niche market. And then of course there is always IA for the more traditional type of viewers.
RE: My opinion of Softcore categories
I think many guys just tired from too much nudity in cam-sites, if its so easy to get that they lose hunter interest. They feel themselves more tempted if it hard to get and also some find more exciting to get naked a girl,they a bit know already and dreamed about, than total stranger.
RE: My opinion of Softcore categories
" think many guys just tired from too much nudity in cam-sites"
I never get tired of naked girls.
I never get tired of naked girls.
RE: My opinion of Softcore categories
OMG if that was true the sites like CC would be going out of business and not increasing at rapid rates....lol So funny!!
Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
Casablancka wasn't sure that she could come online so she wanted me to wish you a very Happy Birthday!!!
Let me see how she would do this:
Happy Birthday Moni!!! Kiss you my baby!!! Have a great day!!!
How is that? (Hope I got the day right, lol. 20 June?)
I will wish you one too.... And thanks for the show the other day. Mmmmmm. (Nope, not telling you who I am, hehehe.)
Let me see how she would do this:
Happy Birthday Moni!!! Kiss you my baby!!! Have a great day!!!
How is that? (Hope I got the day right, lol. 20 June?)
I will wish you one too.... And thanks for the show the other day. Mmmmmm. (Nope, not telling you who I am, hehehe.)
RE: Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
Still a hot looking woman though at some point she has to think about retirement.....
RE: Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
Thank u all, for nice wishes! And to those of u, lame asses, with mean comments-u just make me laugh!:) Im one happy person, and i dont care what u think of me, cuz i dont think of u at all!:D Yay!))
And Billy, when ill be thinking of "retirement" ill ask for an opinion, but not u! :D
And Billy, when ill be thinking of "retirement" ill ask for an opinion, but not u! :D
RE: Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
Not to long ago there was a analysis done of what men are searching for on internet porn sites. They tabulated the words men used in search engines. The results were kind of surprising. They suggest that if this work you are in now continues to interest you that the opportunity exists to continue it into old age. A summary of the results follows:
Though the popularity of adult women doesn’t quite reach the stratospheric heights of teens, it’s worth observing that more men search for fifty-year-olds than search for nineteen-year-olds. But you may be equally surprised to discover there is significant erotic interest in sixty- and seventy-year-old woman. Also a significant number of the searches were for "chubby" or "fat" women.
I don't believe I know you MonikaBabe, but Happy Birthday anwyay.
.
Though the popularity of adult women doesn’t quite reach the stratospheric heights of teens, it’s worth observing that more men search for fifty-year-olds than search for nineteen-year-olds. But you may be equally surprised to discover there is significant erotic interest in sixty- and seventy-year-old woman. Also a significant number of the searches were for "chubby" or "fat" women.
I don't believe I know you MonikaBabe, but Happy Birthday anwyay.
.
RE: Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
I actually had the research article listed in my original post with the link but CC would not let it be posted that way.
So google search something along the lines of "men, pornography, search" and you will find a number of links siting the study.
I did not know that CC does not like links in these forums.. but evidently it is forbidden.
So google search something along the lines of "men, pornography, search" and you will find a number of links siting the study.
I did not know that CC does not like links in these forums.. but evidently it is forbidden.
RE: Happy Birthday MonikaBabe!!!
No problem Kazoooo. I don't even listen to my own opinion. The important thing is I will still be checking you out regularly even when you are old and grey....just hang on to that nurse's outfit. Kisses.
Romanian 101
I just learned something today. I was telling a Romanian host that is special to me that she was trying to steal my heart and saying that she was a thief. Then, I decided to say that she was a thief in Romanian and saw that the word for thief is "hot".
After meeting a lot of beautiful women here, including many Romanian women, and let us say, after having a variety of experiences, that seems to be the perfect word for thief for many reasons, hehe. (Okay, she told me that "hot" was the masculine form of the word, and "hoata" is for a woman, but that ruins my story.)
After meeting a lot of beautiful women here, including many Romanian women, and let us say, after having a variety of experiences, that seems to be the perfect word for thief for many reasons, hehe. (Okay, she told me that "hot" was the masculine form of the word, and "hoata" is for a woman, but that ruins my story.)
RE: Romanian 101
the pronouncing for the male-thief (hot) is "hotz" while for the female-thief is "hoatza"...
RE: Romanian 101
you are learning a valuable lesson from a Romanian woman it m ay feel like your heart is being stolen now but later you will realize it was just your money ....... not thats hot, hotz or hoata anyway you want to slice it
RE: Romanian 101
So is she stealing your heart? If u have feelings for her tell her. In the end, we are all human and hosts have feelings too.
RE: Romanian 101
She hasn't stolen it completely, lol. I just had an instant personal connection with her and find her to be a special person. She seems to feel the same, but it is the internet and a porn site, lol, so one needs to be careful.
It's happened before a few times. I just hope it doesn't happen again. Feeling a personal connection is expensive, lol., especially at the beginning when you want to get to know the person better. (I guess it can get even more expensive later with gifts and stuff, lol.)
It's happened before a few times. I just hope it doesn't happen again. Feeling a personal connection is expensive, lol., especially at the beginning when you want to get to know the person better. (I guess it can get even more expensive later with gifts and stuff, lol.)
RE: Romanian 101
I apologize if I offended anyone, including Romanian hosts.
I was just joking around that hot women lead to guys spending lots of money and women stealing their hearts, and that sometimes, a hot host is not very honest so the word "thief" might also apply. I certainly don't think that of all hosts.
Sorry, once again.
I was just joking around that hot women lead to guys spending lots of money and women stealing their hearts, and that sometimes, a hot host is not very honest so the word "thief" might also apply. I certainly don't think that of all hosts.
Sorry, once again.
RE: Romanian 101
girl, get a life! the nice guy was just making a joke about different langauges. If you want a real offensive guy, post yr name and I will come and be a real jerk. I might even be as rude as you!
For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
I know there are many that have rooms in Glamour or Little Shy and a room in Not So Shy or IA at the same time. So how do you handle the conflicts?
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Let me just point something out to all that do not know this, both hosts and members:
HOSTS MUST STRIP AND BE 100% NAKED IN OPEN SESSION IN BOTH NOT SO SHY AND INSTANT ACTION IF THE MEMBER REQUESTS THIS!!! HOSTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REQUIRE THAT THE MEMBER GO 121 FOR FULL NUDITY IN EITHER CATEGORY!!! PLUS, INSTANT ACTION HOSTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DELAY STRIPPING, AND NOT SO SHY HOSTS CANNOT STALL BY TRYING TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION MORE THAN A COUPLE MINUTES!!! ACTING IN ANY OTHER WAY IS A VIOLATION OF CC'S RULES AND POLICIES AND WILL ENTITLE THE MEMBER TO A CREDIT ON HIS ACCOUN T AND RESULT IN POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST THE HOST!!!
Having said that, several hosts I know that have soft core and hard core sessions will tell me to go 121 if I visit them in little shy (which is 100% okay and within the rules), but will strip for me in open in not so shy, as they are required to do. The PROBLEM is some not so shy hosts, and instant action hosts, try the old "go 121" bullshit, including those that have sessions in soft core and hard core.
Other than trying to get more money when in soft core by asking to go 121 (since I guess they assume they will not get at least two viewers in open session), I think most hosts with soft core and hard core sessions will do the exact same thing in both, assuming the session is a nonrestricted session which is the case 90% of the time. Occasionally, I've run into a host that will strip only in her hard core session, but that is rare. Usually, they do it in both sessions, but as indicated, may try for extra money by saying go 121 when in soft core. I just hate the ones that try the same thing when in hard core! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!
HOSTS MUST STRIP AND BE 100% NAKED IN OPEN SESSION IN BOTH NOT SO SHY AND INSTANT ACTION IF THE MEMBER REQUESTS THIS!!! HOSTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REQUIRE THAT THE MEMBER GO 121 FOR FULL NUDITY IN EITHER CATEGORY!!! PLUS, INSTANT ACTION HOSTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DELAY STRIPPING, AND NOT SO SHY HOSTS CANNOT STALL BY TRYING TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION MORE THAN A COUPLE MINUTES!!! ACTING IN ANY OTHER WAY IS A VIOLATION OF CC'S RULES AND POLICIES AND WILL ENTITLE THE MEMBER TO A CREDIT ON HIS ACCOUN T AND RESULT IN POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST THE HOST!!!
Having said that, several hosts I know that have soft core and hard core sessions will tell me to go 121 if I visit them in little shy (which is 100% okay and within the rules), but will strip for me in open in not so shy, as they are required to do. The PROBLEM is some not so shy hosts, and instant action hosts, try the old "go 121" bullshit, including those that have sessions in soft core and hard core.
Other than trying to get more money when in soft core by asking to go 121 (since I guess they assume they will not get at least two viewers in open session), I think most hosts with soft core and hard core sessions will do the exact same thing in both, assuming the session is a nonrestricted session which is the case 90% of the time. Occasionally, I've run into a host that will strip only in her hard core session, but that is rare. Usually, they do it in both sessions, but as indicated, may try for extra money by saying go 121 when in soft core. I just hate the ones that try the same thing when in hard core! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Just don't be so shy about how you feel next time !! ;)
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
I guess I couldn't be a glamour or litle shy host. I am honest, don't mind stripping, and like showing myself on cam, lol.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
I also don't know how this works but I can tell you guys, I know there are even "non-adult" hostesses with a adult room too give exclusive service and special company for loyal returning customers!
But I feel this is category-hopping is cheating to the other customers and CC should stop this, because you have too spend a lot of money too become a regular and build trust before you get special treatment!
But I feel this is category-hopping is cheating to the other customers and CC should stop this, because you have too spend a lot of money too become a regular and build trust before you get special treatment!
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Isn't actually recruiting members to your adult room from a non-adult room where there are very few girls???? What makes that right??
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
"you don't need to be special, a regular or a big spender."
You speak of IA of course and I agree, but being a regular and big spender is no guarantee of being special and treated to a nude show by any Softcore hosts. I know this from my own experience. In fact I've had much more luck with Softcore hosts I spent less with than the ones I've spend thousands.
So to spend less and see more just forget Softcore and go to IA.
You speak of IA of course and I agree, but being a regular and big spender is no guarantee of being special and treated to a nude show by any Softcore hosts. I know this from my own experience. In fact I've had much more luck with Softcore hosts I spent less with than the ones I've spend thousands.
So to spend less and see more just forget Softcore and go to IA.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
I can understand why you would be annoyed, but at least they are complying with the rules unless they have both a nonadult and adult session open at the same time. I'm pretty sure that this is not allowed.
Just look at them as glamour hosts that won't show you anything for a long time and after you spent a lot of money, and then, when they do, it will be in 121 for even more money. It is basically the same thing.
This is how I look at the few not so shy hosts that put they only strip in 121 in their profiles. If I read it first, as annoyed as I am since it is against the rules, at least I didn't enter video and waste my money on them so I just look at them as little shy hosts that picked the wrong category and decide if I want to pay the 121 price. I never have written CC about a not so shy host that had warned me in her profile that she was only 121 AND I had read it. But I have no obligation to read a profiles (and often don't), nor does she have a right to say only 121, so if I just jump into open without having seen her "only 121" statement in the profile,and want nudity in not so shy, it is strip or yet another "Dear CC" email.
In terms of your problem, it would be best if an adult screen name could never be used in non adult and vice versa. That wouldn't solve everything, but at least you would know when she is in adult mode or nonadult mode. The problem is, the one host I can think of that does what you say is always 121 when she jumps to glamour so even if she had two names, you probably would never get to see her do anything anyway.
I know it can be frustrating when you really want to check out someone and it costs too much, but just release your frustration with another host. There's always another hot one available, and maybe you will be so frustrated that you won't need to stay in video long to get to the release point so you wil save money and be better off, lol. Then you can just imagine releasing all over that nonadult category jupming host's face and disrespecting her just like you felt she disrespected you, lmao. (And while I respect women, when they don't respect me, it sometimes is nice to look at them as objects just like they look at me as some wallet.)
Just look at them as glamour hosts that won't show you anything for a long time and after you spent a lot of money, and then, when they do, it will be in 121 for even more money. It is basically the same thing.
This is how I look at the few not so shy hosts that put they only strip in 121 in their profiles. If I read it first, as annoyed as I am since it is against the rules, at least I didn't enter video and waste my money on them so I just look at them as little shy hosts that picked the wrong category and decide if I want to pay the 121 price. I never have written CC about a not so shy host that had warned me in her profile that she was only 121 AND I had read it. But I have no obligation to read a profiles (and often don't), nor does she have a right to say only 121, so if I just jump into open without having seen her "only 121" statement in the profile,and want nudity in not so shy, it is strip or yet another "Dear CC" email.
In terms of your problem, it would be best if an adult screen name could never be used in non adult and vice versa. That wouldn't solve everything, but at least you would know when she is in adult mode or nonadult mode. The problem is, the one host I can think of that does what you say is always 121 when she jumps to glamour so even if she had two names, you probably would never get to see her do anything anyway.
I know it can be frustrating when you really want to check out someone and it costs too much, but just release your frustration with another host. There's always another hot one available, and maybe you will be so frustrated that you won't need to stay in video long to get to the release point so you wil save money and be better off, lol. Then you can just imagine releasing all over that nonadult category jupming host's face and disrespecting her just like you felt she disrespected you, lmao. (And while I respect women, when they don't respect me, it sometimes is nice to look at them as objects just like they look at me as some wallet.)
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Wow do you need that many rooms to make any money here? Also, you have two rooms in Glam open at the same time??
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Yes they are all adult but the hardcore categories are all about nude shows while their counterparts in Softcore are more chat than anything. So there can be conflict.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Even though Fetish is in the Hardcore section nude show is not required as most hosts there do nail or foot show or are Dominas.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
Dear, for me main rule in any cats is viewers wish. Doesn't mean I ready to do everything that they want though, some things I never do and refuse, but mostly I try to satisfy my viewers as I get paid for it and remember about it. Always a problem for me if a viewer cant explain what he wants and what he likes and thinks I have to guess about it...in that case I can do what I want to do...not always its the same as he wanted, but it was his fault.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
"some things I never do and refuse"
Yes and you have that option in Softcore as well as in Fetish. So we agree.
Yes and you have that option in Softcore as well as in Fetish. So we agree.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
"If u mean nudity, I do it if that viewer wish,"
You certainly do not speak for most Softcore hosts who consider nudity hardcore.
You certainly do not speak for most Softcore hosts who consider nudity hardcore.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
In pornography softcore meaning no penetration, so full nudity and masturbation without dildos and any penetration is still softcore. If someone doesnt know it, not my problem.
RE: For hosts that have rooms in both hardcore and softcore
I actually agree with you but you will find a large number of softcore hosts that still consider full or partial nudity hardcore.
Password protected question for hosts
If I was never in your pvt before and came to your room and saw it was password protected and I sent you a request for password via CC Mail, how would you respond?
RE: Password protected question for hosts
I'd be surprised if you got a response at all lol! Generally a host will set up a password protected session for a 'special' member and it will be at a special low rate for that member only, maybe even free. So you are unlikely to get a response unless you are that 'special' member, in which case u would probably already know the password. No harm in trying though. Good luck!
RE: Password protected question for hosts
if i don.t know who u are (at all), if u don.t know who am i, why would u ask me for such a favour? just for money? u don.t know me so it.s not about being with me.
try this experiment: do 3*, 4* and 5* restaurants simply offer password protected steaks for strangers coming in from nowhere?
i know all members prefer to ignore how much HOSTS spend to be online, everybody requests underwear-outfits-heels-toys-intense lightning-good camera-good internet, well... they cost money we don.t get them from the sky...
shortly, the password protection session is a feature handled by the host , one way how the host can reward a big spender and a dearest relationship. ONLY WHEN SHE CAN AFFORD IT.
try this experiment: do 3*, 4* and 5* restaurants simply offer password protected steaks for strangers coming in from nowhere?
i know all members prefer to ignore how much HOSTS spend to be online, everybody requests underwear-outfits-heels-toys-intense lightning-good camera-good internet, well... they cost money we don.t get them from the sky...
shortly, the password protection session is a feature handled by the host , one way how the host can reward a big spender and a dearest relationship. ONLY WHEN SHE CAN AFFORD IT.
RE: Password protected question for hosts
Password protected steaks?? I would never ask for one and have yet to see it on any menu :)
RE: Password protected question for hosts
a few hosts here actually will use password in open even if you are not a regular member, but most of the time they are more expensive hosts.
Personally, I don't ask for passwords 99,99999% of the time. It feels too awkward like I'm saying "Hey. I don't want to pay so much. Give me a discount please." And I don't ask hosts to lower their price either, 99,99999% of the time.
The only time I ask is if I know a host very, very well (usually over a year) or if I see she uses passwords a lot as if it is normal for her to give them out instead of just to a few members. I have mentioned in text chat that I just saw her with a password to see what she says the reason for it was, but I don't usually ask for it.
I even have avoided asking for a discount when I mention a host raised her price and she says she will lower it for me. I don't want to cause her a problem with other members so once again, I don't like asking for passwords or discount in almost all cases. At most, I just point out that maybe the host is playing favorites and is creating an bit of an awkward feeling in me. When in video, you want to feel like you are being treated equally and don't want to think a host likes someone better than you, after all. It creates a distant feeling and you feel like she rather be with somebody else.
Personally, I don't ask for passwords 99,99999% of the time. It feels too awkward like I'm saying "Hey. I don't want to pay so much. Give me a discount please." And I don't ask hosts to lower their price either, 99,99999% of the time.
The only time I ask is if I know a host very, very well (usually over a year) or if I see she uses passwords a lot as if it is normal for her to give them out instead of just to a few members. I have mentioned in text chat that I just saw her with a password to see what she says the reason for it was, but I don't usually ask for it.
I even have avoided asking for a discount when I mention a host raised her price and she says she will lower it for me. I don't want to cause her a problem with other members so once again, I don't like asking for passwords or discount in almost all cases. At most, I just point out that maybe the host is playing favorites and is creating an bit of an awkward feeling in me. When in video, you want to feel like you are being treated equally and don't want to think a host likes someone better than you, after all. It creates a distant feeling and you feel like she rather be with somebody else.
RE: Password protected question for hosts
Thanks to all who replied. I did think it was for special or preferred viewers. And I agree with it. It is good marketing.
RE: Password protected question for hosts
I have seen one session where the prices where exactly the same but still needed a password.
RE: Self respect
noone can decide someone else's self respect.it like morals a unique thing that only wee feel.i have friend(girl)who has a much,much different code of beliefs & behaviour than i do.it doesn't change who we are.we accept each other & enjoy each others company....:--) it's best summed up by a quote i read"an alcoholic is anyone who drinks more than you"think about it :--)
RE: Self respect
I completely agree with you. Sex with 3 guys? so what. If she was willing and had a great time, good for her. One life, live and love...sex and sexuality should be embraced as being good and healthy and part of lifes adventure, and respected, not something to be ashamed of...
RE: Self respect
But would you want her to be your girlfriend after hearing that?? I think I am hearing some double standards quietly...
RE: Self respect
Why would that be a problem??? As long as she did it before we met. And if it was during our relationship I would hope I was one of the guys. What is different in having three at the same time or three in a row???
RE: Self respect
No I don't think I have some double standards here, though if you can see something I can't see, i would be interested to know why you say that.
Actually, no double standards at all, if I had a gf that had had sex with 3 men, and I saw no issue in that, then I would expect her not to complain if I have sex with 3 women (dream away Gary <sighs> :)
Actually, no double standards at all, if I had a gf that had had sex with 3 men, and I saw no issue in that, then I would expect her not to complain if I have sex with 3 women (dream away Gary <sighs> :)
RE: Self respect
"who cares what the others think about you afterwards"...
Well, obviously her boyfriend cared and that should really be an issue in a serious relationship!
But I know, for some people the word "relationship" means nothing, who then wonder when their relationships fail after things surface. At some point in a serious relationship everything must and will surface anyways, especially since guys brag about their achievements like using a woman in a threesome like a tissue and then throwing it away...
So it is not only about her alone, it is also about HIM, this togetherness is what "relationship" means. And HE obviously doesn't like others thinking of his girlfriend as a "slut". I can totally relate, can't you?
I know we are talking about double standards for promiscuous behaviour here for men and women, but for me personally it would be a big final turn-off because of different values...
Well, obviously her boyfriend cared and that should really be an issue in a serious relationship!
But I know, for some people the word "relationship" means nothing, who then wonder when their relationships fail after things surface. At some point in a serious relationship everything must and will surface anyways, especially since guys brag about their achievements like using a woman in a threesome like a tissue and then throwing it away...
So it is not only about her alone, it is also about HIM, this togetherness is what "relationship" means. And HE obviously doesn't like others thinking of his girlfriend as a "slut". I can totally relate, can't you?
I know we are talking about double standards for promiscuous behaviour here for men and women, but for me personally it would be a big final turn-off because of different values...
RE: Self respect
One word "Nymphomaniac"
Think that should be a warning to him that one just isn't enough!!
Think that should be a warning to him that one just isn't enough!!
RE: Self respect
it's a sign that the girl and he do not share the same values. what she finds acceptable and fun, he finds repulsive. so he is better off without her.
RE: Self respect
It speaks to different values. For me, thats a huge turn off and i'd probably dump her. Sexuality for me is all about expression of love and passion for each other, not fulfilling my own sexual wants. She obviously didn't have those feelings for those 3 guys at the same time, or care very much what they thought or felt. I wouldn't have sex with 3 girls, not ever. I won't have sex with one if i don't truly care for her. . thats obviously a very different view than nearly everyone, i know.
RE: Self respect
Sorry to appear a bit persoanl, though do your values mean no lone masturbation for you?
RE: Self respect
I love myself, so no problems there :)) But seriously, i'm never with someone if i don't care about them, it's not just about sex for me, there's ALWAYS a higher component of understanding and compassion.
RE: Self respect
...and third thoughts - with values and principles like that, what are you doing here, on an adult cam site?
RE: Self respect
Considering i've only ever talked to the like, 2 girls i've ever take pvt here, i'm not being hypocritical at all..
Don't project yourself onto everyone else.
Don't project yourself onto everyone else.
RE: Self respect
No I won't bite.....no I've said too much, apologies. Enjoy your time on CC :)
RE: Self respect
hmmm I respect your values perhaps you arrived at that after years of error and trys... but I think it's a bit arrogant to write about it on an adult site. I mean you choose a girl that suits you need to care for her etc. and the gils who work here are then what to you? Do you teach them here how a real relationship should look like? And then off you go in a search for an ideal love? Or do you think you help them out financially while in video?
Sorry if I sound angry but sometimes this male approach irritates me. I mean I understand myself what I do here and when someone comes and starts telling me about what values in life...this makes me feel more shitty...if you know what I mean. Such talks on an adult websites are sometimes pointless.
Sorry if I sound angry but sometimes this male approach irritates me. I mean I understand myself what I do here and when someone comes and starts telling me about what values in life...this makes me feel more shitty...if you know what I mean. Such talks on an adult websites are sometimes pointless.
RE: Self respect
You have issues you need to get over because i said nothing like that. Now if you're out having gang bangs and sleeping around with any guy who ave you regardless of what kind of man he is, then yeah you have problems.
RE: Self respect
hmm I have never done anything on your list.))
And I doubt you are a psychologist.
I just wondered how your care for a woman in general can be combined with your CC experience. Meaning that CC girls here are constantly in a virtual gang-bang situation. Unless they are strictly non-adult and sit full-dressed all the time.
And I doubt you are a psychologist.
I just wondered how your care for a woman in general can be combined with your CC experience. Meaning that CC girls here are constantly in a virtual gang-bang situation. Unless they are strictly non-adult and sit full-dressed all the time.
RE: Self respect
Well the ones i visit do sit there dressed, atleast as far as i know, i'm not gonna pry into their business, i only know what she and I do. Besides, you're not really equating this with real gangbangs are you?
I'm also not looking to save or teach anyone here, you're big girls, you can take care of yourself, especially when many of you make damn good livings doing this. Hell the girls i know make more money than i do lol :))
I hope i'm not coming off too ... judgmental or anything, its not my intention. Just from the original post, i have different values than someone who would gangbang, and knowing that would most likely cause the relationship to end. It wouldn't be too terribly different from learning she's been with a ton of guys separately either. I guess i'm a little naive when it comes to the importance of the intimacy in sex :/
I'm also not looking to save or teach anyone here, you're big girls, you can take care of yourself, especially when many of you make damn good livings doing this. Hell the girls i know make more money than i do lol :))
I hope i'm not coming off too ... judgmental or anything, its not my intention. Just from the original post, i have different values than someone who would gangbang, and knowing that would most likely cause the relationship to end. It wouldn't be too terribly different from learning she's been with a ton of guys separately either. I guess i'm a little naive when it comes to the importance of the intimacy in sex :/
RE: Self respect
Well I completely agree with you that gangbang is not a nice thing. Although it is a powerful fantasy. Strictly speaking I don't fantasize about bees and flowers in bed *blush* but 1 partner has always been enough for me.
My point with gangbang thingee on this site is that
some men take this work of chathosts so simply... My bf for example saw how much money I make and offered me to go on expensive holidays...Meaning we pay for each other of course. And I don't like expensive holidays he prefers- they are not relaxing and boring. And then you have to earn money to pay bills again. And so you sit there and think is it a normal male approach? Do men like kinda supermodels with huge appetite for sex? Or is it a bad relationship?
Well I am not ready to end this relationship right now, for various reasons.
Well I am always happy to have a nice member in video, as you describe it- sitting probably dressed and chatting, making jokes. But sometimes I think- screw all nice members! who simply don't want to see that you are in a bad mood sometimes or who relax you too much by spoiling you and then you have to deal with not nice members...which feels like a mental gang bang afterwards.
You see my point- there are friends who are there for you just to do nice things with and there are the ones who really sees you through...and sees things realistically.
I try to be not personal. It's just my concideration. Perhaps I try to figure out where my relationship is going...
My point with gangbang thingee on this site is that
some men take this work of chathosts so simply... My bf for example saw how much money I make and offered me to go on expensive holidays...Meaning we pay for each other of course. And I don't like expensive holidays he prefers- they are not relaxing and boring. And then you have to earn money to pay bills again. And so you sit there and think is it a normal male approach? Do men like kinda supermodels with huge appetite for sex? Or is it a bad relationship?
Well I am not ready to end this relationship right now, for various reasons.
Well I am always happy to have a nice member in video, as you describe it- sitting probably dressed and chatting, making jokes. But sometimes I think- screw all nice members! who simply don't want to see that you are in a bad mood sometimes or who relax you too much by spoiling you and then you have to deal with not nice members...which feels like a mental gang bang afterwards.
You see my point- there are friends who are there for you just to do nice things with and there are the ones who really sees you through...and sees things realistically.
I try to be not personal. It's just my concideration. Perhaps I try to figure out where my relationship is going...
RE: Self respect
But if you don't like and can't really enjoy the vacation, why don't you just tell your boyfriend and talk about it?
It's a waste of hard earned money and a mood-killer, so you should really just learn to communivcte your real needs. Yes, most men like to spoil their loved ones and so maybe he thinks that you like this kind of vacation and it's just a miscommunication?
Bottom line: Keep your emotional distance, draw the line. Don't ever compare the men you meet here and their fantasies you are burdened with here with your real relationship. You should know your boyfriend better and all you have to do in a relationship is to openly talk to him to solve any problem. Also about your fantasies ;)
It's a waste of hard earned money and a mood-killer, so you should really just learn to communivcte your real needs. Yes, most men like to spoil their loved ones and so maybe he thinks that you like this kind of vacation and it's just a miscommunication?
Bottom line: Keep your emotional distance, draw the line. Don't ever compare the men you meet here and their fantasies you are burdened with here with your real relationship. You should know your boyfriend better and all you have to do in a relationship is to openly talk to him to solve any problem. Also about your fantasies ;)
RE: Self respect
Well sayed, I would add to you that all unfullfiled, unsaid fantasies or secrets hurt a relationship and these lead to a break-up sooner or later (worse later).
It not only hurts yourself because it will always hang over you two and stops from your relationship become any closer, it also hurts him if he is thinking wrong of you and what you really want!
So you should really jump over your own shadow and tell him what is hidden and what you really need (from him)!
It not only hurts yourself because it will always hang over you two and stops from your relationship become any closer, it also hurts him if he is thinking wrong of you and what you really want!
So you should really jump over your own shadow and tell him what is hidden and what you really need (from him)!
RE: Self respect
honestly, I am sometimes lazy to try to solve communication problems. :( bad me
txs for your replies
txs for your replies
RE: Self respect
I doubt that I would have much in common with a woman that had three guys going at her at once. She would probably be a lot more wild than I would ever be, otherwise, she probably would have never tried it.
I also doubt that this was a one time experience for her. That doesn't mean she has done something like that more than once, but I have a feeling that she has other fantasies that she wants to fulfill that are probably just as wild. I cannot imagine she just wanted a one time experience like that and now she is over it.
I personally much rather be with someone I was emotionally close to than some wild 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 situation. But if I had some type of connection to both woman, I wouldn't mind a 2 on 1. I'm not sure that I could handle a 3 on 1, lol, but again, if I was close to the people involved, I wouldn't mind it. But I don't think I would want it with 2 or 3 other women unless I knew them pretty well. I think anything other than 1 on 1 would be awkward for me if I didn't know both women well.
But this story sounds like she really didn't have much of a connection to these 3 guys so it is something that would turn me off. Plus, I have a "one dick in the room" rule, lol.
I guess for me, the answer comes down to what was her connection to the 3 guys involved and their connection to each other. If it was just a bunch of strangers like in some porn movie, that would probably turn me off when I thought about it. But if it was just 4 friends that decided to get wild one night and try something, I suppose that I could deal with it better. I do have to admit that the thought of my gf having being gang-banged by 3 guys would turn me off under any circumstances if I was serious about her. If it was a casual relationship, I wouldn't care that much, but like I said before, I just cannot imagine she would not want to do things like that more often so I might have a difficult time trusting her. Maybe 2 on 1, but 3 is so excessive, it is just hard to mentally process, lol.
I keep going back and forth... I will stop now. Maybe I just need to try it myself and get a better perspective, lol.
I also doubt that this was a one time experience for her. That doesn't mean she has done something like that more than once, but I have a feeling that she has other fantasies that she wants to fulfill that are probably just as wild. I cannot imagine she just wanted a one time experience like that and now she is over it.
I personally much rather be with someone I was emotionally close to than some wild 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 situation. But if I had some type of connection to both woman, I wouldn't mind a 2 on 1. I'm not sure that I could handle a 3 on 1, lol, but again, if I was close to the people involved, I wouldn't mind it. But I don't think I would want it with 2 or 3 other women unless I knew them pretty well. I think anything other than 1 on 1 would be awkward for me if I didn't know both women well.
But this story sounds like she really didn't have much of a connection to these 3 guys so it is something that would turn me off. Plus, I have a "one dick in the room" rule, lol.
I guess for me, the answer comes down to what was her connection to the 3 guys involved and their connection to each other. If it was just a bunch of strangers like in some porn movie, that would probably turn me off when I thought about it. But if it was just 4 friends that decided to get wild one night and try something, I suppose that I could deal with it better. I do have to admit that the thought of my gf having being gang-banged by 3 guys would turn me off under any circumstances if I was serious about her. If it was a casual relationship, I wouldn't care that much, but like I said before, I just cannot imagine she would not want to do things like that more often so I might have a difficult time trusting her. Maybe 2 on 1, but 3 is so excessive, it is just hard to mentally process, lol.
I keep going back and forth... I will stop now. Maybe I just need to try it myself and get a better perspective, lol.
RE: Self respect
She might get disease like STD! She need to see doctor ASAP to find out if she have or not? If she doesn't have one then She better stay with only one guy in real life for rest of her life.
RE: Self respect
The key word here is self. Self respect has nothing to do what others think of you but what you think of yourself.
RE: Self respect
I was and am always willing to fill or at least try to fill my partner's needs, but kept being pushed away (that marriage lasted 20yrs plus and it ended for many reasons, but the icing was when i found my partner on a sex site right after repeatedly turning me down). and in the few other relationships other than that, i was cheated on, and yet each time I was more than willing to try and fill my partner's needs, even to simply having sex at all....lol....so needless to say each relationship was ended. No i am not angry nor bitter as i would rather be alone than be played for a fool. ANYWAY........
Many say they in relationship but not getting needs met, while some answer with well why be in relationship.
I believe that if two people are happy together even if a need is not being met then stay where you are, if ur both happy with how things are.
We all know that often a need is not being met either because one is not liking sex any more or cant have sex with their partner.
as well as other reasons ...such as the appetite is too much for her or she not give it to me enough or she went to the store or is at work and i horny now and refuse to wait till she gets home, or i a selfish person and want my cake and eat it too.
but also a need is not being met because either one or both partners do not talk about the need and how to resolve, so the one not getting the need met stops trying and just continues on with life and ends up on sites like this OR FOR SOME having sex in real with someone else.
i do see both sides and i understand both sides, there are pros and cons to both.
HOWEVER, in all the responses i have read on this thread, some say it ok to be on here when u have someone and some say it not and others dont care either way.
One thing that has not been mentioned or asked is those of u that r in relationship and on here having ur need met, does ur partner know you are on here? and if ur partner does not know ur on here why not? a bit of a contradiction when it comes to honesty in the relationship don't u think?
People are so worried about how they are feeling and what they are not getting with their partner, yet no one seems to give a rats ass about the partner who has no clue that their mate is on a sex site having the missing need met so to speak.
I would much rather my partner and i talk of the missing need and find a way to resolve it, if that is possible. But I would be in no mood to talk of resolving or having any understanding if i found out that my partner was going behind my back and having that need met.
I just find it odd that all this talk of relationships and being with that person threw thick and thin, and how some would dump someone if they found out about something in the past that happened and how no one wants to share their partner nor have the negatives images or thoughts of what their partner did in the past, and how some would want to know if she or he did a gang bang or had slept with many, but no one has hit on how the person who has no clue that their so called partner is even on a site like this. That really says alot of how those of u in a relationship think and feel about ur partner and the relationship.
Anyway just a small observation, and i am sure i will get those of u giving ur opinions and and comments objecting to what i have said, but one thing you wont be able to do is in your heart deny that what i have said is a valid point, something to consider and possibly even true.
Best wishes to everyone.....:)
Many say they in relationship but not getting needs met, while some answer with well why be in relationship.
I believe that if two people are happy together even if a need is not being met then stay where you are, if ur both happy with how things are.
We all know that often a need is not being met either because one is not liking sex any more or cant have sex with their partner.
as well as other reasons ...such as the appetite is too much for her or she not give it to me enough or she went to the store or is at work and i horny now and refuse to wait till she gets home, or i a selfish person and want my cake and eat it too.
but also a need is not being met because either one or both partners do not talk about the need and how to resolve, so the one not getting the need met stops trying and just continues on with life and ends up on sites like this OR FOR SOME having sex in real with someone else.
i do see both sides and i understand both sides, there are pros and cons to both.
HOWEVER, in all the responses i have read on this thread, some say it ok to be on here when u have someone and some say it not and others dont care either way.
One thing that has not been mentioned or asked is those of u that r in relationship and on here having ur need met, does ur partner know you are on here? and if ur partner does not know ur on here why not? a bit of a contradiction when it comes to honesty in the relationship don't u think?
People are so worried about how they are feeling and what they are not getting with their partner, yet no one seems to give a rats ass about the partner who has no clue that their mate is on a sex site having the missing need met so to speak.
I would much rather my partner and i talk of the missing need and find a way to resolve it, if that is possible. But I would be in no mood to talk of resolving or having any understanding if i found out that my partner was going behind my back and having that need met.
I just find it odd that all this talk of relationships and being with that person threw thick and thin, and how some would dump someone if they found out about something in the past that happened and how no one wants to share their partner nor have the negatives images or thoughts of what their partner did in the past, and how some would want to know if she or he did a gang bang or had slept with many, but no one has hit on how the person who has no clue that their so called partner is even on a site like this. That really says alot of how those of u in a relationship think and feel about ur partner and the relationship.
Anyway just a small observation, and i am sure i will get those of u giving ur opinions and and comments objecting to what i have said, but one thing you wont be able to do is in your heart deny that what i have said is a valid point, something to consider and possibly even true.
Best wishes to everyone.....:)
what is real?
Being on CC reminds me of Jimi Hendrix' song "Love or Confusion". I have gotten very close to a few people here when it wasn't even my intention to do so and now my mind is all messed up.
There are times that I don't even know what I feel, what I want or whom I really love. I don't know if anything is real. And now, just when I was sort of figuring it out, I met someone else that I had an instant connection with, and she seems to feel the same way. We're not ready to go get married tomorrow or anything, but there is this natural closeness between us.
I know some people are good actresses, but these are people I talk to a lot and that seem interested in meeting me. And we talk outside CC (instant messaging, phone) and seem close. I think we have a real relationship, and other than the one I just met, I don't visit them much.
I guess that as the song says, I just need to meet them and find out what is real. Maybe I am just lonely and will love anyone that seems nice and since so many hosts live on CC, they are the same way. That scares me more than anything.... What if none of this is real? :( Or maybe I will see that I love two people and won't know what to do.
True love should automatically push you in one direction, I would think. But when everything is online, and the relationship can only go so far, it seems to push me in different directions. And I know that I could hurt someone which is the last thing I want.
What is real? :(
Jimi Hendrix - "Love or Confusion":
Is that the stars in the sky
Or is it rain falling down?
Would it burn me if I touch the sun, yeah
So big, so round?
Will I be truthful, yeah
In, uh...
In choosin’ you as the one for me?
Is this love, baby
Or is it, uh... just confusion?
Oh, my mind is so messed up
Goin' round 'n' round
Must there be all these colors
Without names, without sound?
My heart burns with feelin' but...
Oh, but my mind is cold and reeling
Is this love, baby, or...
Or is it confusion?
Oh, my head is pounding, pounding
Goin’ 'round and 'round and 'round and 'round
Must there always be these colors
Without names, without sound?
My heart burns with feelin'
Oh, but my mind is cold and reeling
Is this love, baby
Or is it... uh
Just, uh.... confusion?
Oh you tell me, baby
Is this....
Love (or confusion)
We must get together and, uh..
And find out...
Exactly what we’re tryin’ to do...
(Love or confusion?)
There are times that I don't even know what I feel, what I want or whom I really love. I don't know if anything is real. And now, just when I was sort of figuring it out, I met someone else that I had an instant connection with, and she seems to feel the same way. We're not ready to go get married tomorrow or anything, but there is this natural closeness between us.
I know some people are good actresses, but these are people I talk to a lot and that seem interested in meeting me. And we talk outside CC (instant messaging, phone) and seem close. I think we have a real relationship, and other than the one I just met, I don't visit them much.
I guess that as the song says, I just need to meet them and find out what is real. Maybe I am just lonely and will love anyone that seems nice and since so many hosts live on CC, they are the same way. That scares me more than anything.... What if none of this is real? :( Or maybe I will see that I love two people and won't know what to do.
True love should automatically push you in one direction, I would think. But when everything is online, and the relationship can only go so far, it seems to push me in different directions. And I know that I could hurt someone which is the last thing I want.
What is real? :(
Jimi Hendrix - "Love or Confusion":
Is that the stars in the sky
Or is it rain falling down?
Would it burn me if I touch the sun, yeah
So big, so round?
Will I be truthful, yeah
In, uh...
In choosin’ you as the one for me?
Is this love, baby
Or is it, uh... just confusion?
Oh, my mind is so messed up
Goin' round 'n' round
Must there be all these colors
Without names, without sound?
My heart burns with feelin' but...
Oh, but my mind is cold and reeling
Is this love, baby, or...
Or is it confusion?
Oh, my head is pounding, pounding
Goin’ 'round and 'round and 'round and 'round
Must there always be these colors
Without names, without sound?
My heart burns with feelin'
Oh, but my mind is cold and reeling
Is this love, baby
Or is it... uh
Just, uh.... confusion?
Oh you tell me, baby
Is this....
Love (or confusion)
We must get together and, uh..
And find out...
Exactly what we’re tryin’ to do...
(Love or confusion?)
RE: what is real?
I felt exactly the same way about a few of my regular viewers over the years!
RE: what is real?
Love, or the promise of love , or even just the attention of a woman, I guess, has driven many otherwise rational, sensible and sane men half way around the world to find it. Such is the power of sexual attraction and infatuation. This is a real effect, though may not be sensible, may even be a little crazy. There have been many posts on this forum like yours, it seems a common theme, you are not alone. What are you looking for here? Friendship and fun, or a long term partner? Or as you say, maybe one leads to the another...
RE: what is real?
feelings are ALWAYS real,no matter how you get them.you can't change or stop your feelings,all you can do is try to react,accept & adapt to them :--)
RE: what is real?
Virtual relationships are totally different than in person....You believe what you want to believe...you hear what you want to hear and obviously you like what you see....which is probably not typical in daily meetings.
RE: what is real?
What is real is the love you have for the woman who sleeps in the same bed as you, the warmth of her body, the touch of her hand, the smell of her perfume, and the feeling of her lips on yours. What is unreal and confusing is fantasizing about the love you have for a woman that you can only see on a video screen. I married the amazing sexy and wonderful girl who I fell in love with at CC, so I give you the benefit of my experience.
Question for Adult Hosts
Do any of you like having 2 or more men watching you at the same time? I assume u like the money, but do you find it exciting to turn on 3 or 4 men at once?
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
A few times I have had a host ask if multiple viewers all wanted to talk in open. When we all did it was super hot, and the host went wild!
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
I've always gone 121 as I thought that was what a host preferred, plus it's...121 like it says. Though you have just made an open session sound very interesting, especially if, like you say, the host loves it too...I will try anything once.
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
If the audience is watching in silence it.s ok, but when the Viewer no. 4 asks to see the back side while the Viewer no.1 is already requested the front side, or when one wants zoom while another doesn.t want zoom it.s crazy for hosts. And it depends how much friendly we are with the first arrived one, maybe we have also a particular conversation/fantasy ongoing. Normally when a guy wants privacy he should select the 121 sessions.... or else he should expect being partially unsatisfied. And when a guy has requests to ask but he jumps into an ongoing session he should expect to become the first viewer at his turn or to be ignored. Of course, if he only loves to watch in silence he can jump anytime. I think it.s a matter of respect for the OTHERS.
Personally I had up to 12 members same time in my room (on another site) and it was great , no stress and best ratings. I also had just 2 and the second guy was demanding and unrespectfull until I kicked him out lol.
Personally I had up to 12 members same time in my room (on another site) and it was great , no stress and best ratings. I also had just 2 and the second guy was demanding and unrespectfull until I kicked him out lol.
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
Great account of open sessions, from your experience. I think I'll stick to 121 after all :)
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
"of course i prefer to chat than ddo a show"
We know, G l a m o u r.... We know, lol. But at least you picked the right category unlike many here.
We know, G l a m o u r.... We know, lol. But at least you picked the right category unlike many here.
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
"of course i prefer to chat than ddo a show..."
No kidding, really? Wow, what a revelation!
No kidding, really? Wow, what a revelation!
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
You should have used your screen name for that comment!! It is certainly not spoken for all girls in GLAMOUR!!
RE: Question for Adult Hosts
Yes to the money, or yes to being turned on by more than one man at once? Just curious.
CC Relations in a nutshell....
A while back I noticed that a host I had known well had returned to CC. We were "friends" in the sense we chatted a lot in and out of videos. I knew a bit about her life and she mine. I looked forward to spending time online with her. We knew each other and spoke often for over 2 years. Then she left. No goodbye. No keep in touch. But...that is the CC way.
So...about a year passes and she comes back.... I go to chat with her...hey...it's me. Who? "Bob from Boston" (named changed to protect the innocent). Who? Bob from Boston... and I related a few things we had in common and joked about and things I knew she liked....Oh yeah she said. Want to see me in Pvt? And that is CC in a nutshell...
So...about a year passes and she comes back.... I go to chat with her...hey...it's me. Who? "Bob from Boston" (named changed to protect the innocent). Who? Bob from Boston... and I related a few things we had in common and joked about and things I knew she liked....Oh yeah she said. Want to see me in Pvt? And that is CC in a nutshell...
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
Yes my friend we are but on line ATM machines to hosts. I expect nothing more.
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
Excuse meee, but I had the opposite situation : there are guys who spend a lot on adult sites and landed in my room the second time forgetting they was already visiting me back in a while. This can happen only to very very VERY horny guys, mostly when they are distracted by a stressfull job, but it happens.
Anyhow, it.s easier to make them feel good when I already remember them with their likes/dislikes and obviously it.s a challenge to make them remember me for the future, I converted wonderfull regulars after such fun sessions.
Anyway, when a guy asks me "do u remember me" I ask him back if HE remembers me :))))
Anyhow, it.s easier to make them feel good when I already remember them with their likes/dislikes and obviously it.s a challenge to make them remember me for the future, I converted wonderfull regulars after such fun sessions.
Anyway, when a guy asks me "do u remember me" I ask him back if HE remembers me :))))
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
Does being rude come natural to you or do you have to work at it?? I guess that you expect every guy that reads that thinks that every host is about the money when I think that many hosts are much deeper than that... Why don't you use your screen name so the 5-15 guys don't bother you!!
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
Yes. I almost never remember about short sessions with different guys. But I always remember about long sessions (as it happen rarely). So if you a viewer wants to be a special for a host he should do something special...for me it can be long (not less than 30 mins) camtocam sessions at least some times (3 for example) in a month... it's enough I remember a guy a long time. More popular hosts might need more. :)
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
"But I always remember about long sessions (as it happen rarely)"
And a long pvt is what 30 minutes pus? And if your price is $4 that comes out to $120 for 30 minutes. I'm guessing you're a softcore host. That is an expensive talk.
And a long pvt is what 30 minutes pus? And if your price is $4 that comes out to $120 for 30 minutes. I'm guessing you're a softcore host. That is an expensive talk.
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
I am softcore host, but I am not only chatting in video and my price is never 4$ always about 2$ in open.
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
"I am softcore host, but I am not only chatting"
You sing too?
You sing too?
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
Same to you...use your screen name so guys under 30 minutes don't bother you! You hosts are money mongers....not happy hosts!
RE: CC Relations in a nutshell....
I was recently in Constanta for a week visiting a host that I met for the first time over 6 years ago (this was the third time we've spent about a week together). The weather, the sex and the overall quality of her company (she's very funny) were great. The most entertaining part of these trips, however, is her stories about some of the lunatics she has as customers - the stories are sometimes hilarious, sometimes bizarre, sometimes sad and occasionally all three. This, for example, blew me away: her best customer over the years has spent over $70K on her in video chat (her net being 35% of that - she works for a different site). Does anyone else not find that amazing?
A True Story
Many years ago on another site I used to visit 2 girls from The Phillipines in non adult category. And over time really wanted to see both naked. After a little over a year both started to try the adult category on some nights, but after chatting so long in non adult I could not bring myself to ask either one to strip. But one of the girls opened a room in the nude category on another site and I went there signed up using another screen name and got her naked. And after waiting so long and so much anticipation, I was disappointed. I won't go into to detail, but she didn't look as good as I had imagined.
I never did see the other one naked. It never dawned on me to open a new screen name on the original site. But that was back in the early days of cam sites and things were very confusing to me. Well they hosts are still confusing , but I have most of the sites down by now. And there's more.
Back in the early days I put way too much information on my email and yahoo IM. and the girl I saw naked moved to the USA. And she had my home phone number form yahoo IM. And yes I got a message on my answering machine. Luckily for me I got the message before my wife. Whew close call. That was years and we still have the same number. I have no idea what ever happened to either one of these girls, but the moral of the story is do NOT give out personal to any host on any site and be careful what you put on your IM services and avoid Facebook completely.
I never did see the other one naked. It never dawned on me to open a new screen name on the original site. But that was back in the early days of cam sites and things were very confusing to me. Well they hosts are still confusing , but I have most of the sites down by now. And there's more.
Back in the early days I put way too much information on my email and yahoo IM. and the girl I saw naked moved to the USA. And she had my home phone number form yahoo IM. And yes I got a message on my answering machine. Luckily for me I got the message before my wife. Whew close call. That was years and we still have the same number. I have no idea what ever happened to either one of these girls, but the moral of the story is do NOT give out personal to any host on any site and be careful what you put on your IM services and avoid Facebook completely.
RE: A True Story
maybe the moral of the story is not to visit porn sites if you're in a committed relationship
RE: A True Story
you are 100% right! I am in a committed relationship and I want at least half the women I see every day!
RE: A True Story
agree with the above. If you're in a committed relationship (married?!) you shouldn't be in places like this. Its as real as cheating in my eyes. If you are, then something is wrong in your relationship and it should end.
RE: A True Story
In a pure moralistic sense you are correct.
But life is rarely that simple. Consider just the following few possibilities. I am sure there are many other reasons people come to places like CC.
1. You have not had sex with your spouse for years. I can think of many reasons why and I am sure you can also.
2. Your relationship is more or less dead but you wish to stay together for the children or just simple economic expediency.
3. You and your spouse have vastly different desires for frequency of sex.
It is true that these reasons may be examples of rationalizations or excuses for immoral behavior.
But on the other hand places like CC are a safer outlet than a full blown affair or hiring a live sex worker. And studies have shown that when men have access to pornography rates of sexual crime actually decline. I am not saying most men on this site are sexual predators. I am just saying that people have sexual drives and they will surface one way or another. And those drives don't have to be just for sex. They could be drives for other types of intimacy. CC provides an outlet in a relatively safe environment.
And where do you draw the line? Is flirting with a co worker cheating?
Is it it cheating if a married woman pictures a movie star while masturbating or having sex with her own pudgy smelly husband? Is picking up a copy of a "dirty" magazine at the store and paging through it wrong?
If only life were black and white.
But life is rarely that simple. Consider just the following few possibilities. I am sure there are many other reasons people come to places like CC.
1. You have not had sex with your spouse for years. I can think of many reasons why and I am sure you can also.
2. Your relationship is more or less dead but you wish to stay together for the children or just simple economic expediency.
3. You and your spouse have vastly different desires for frequency of sex.
It is true that these reasons may be examples of rationalizations or excuses for immoral behavior.
But on the other hand places like CC are a safer outlet than a full blown affair or hiring a live sex worker. And studies have shown that when men have access to pornography rates of sexual crime actually decline. I am not saying most men on this site are sexual predators. I am just saying that people have sexual drives and they will surface one way or another. And those drives don't have to be just for sex. They could be drives for other types of intimacy. CC provides an outlet in a relatively safe environment.
And where do you draw the line? Is flirting with a co worker cheating?
Is it it cheating if a married woman pictures a movie star while masturbating or having sex with her own pudgy smelly husband? Is picking up a copy of a "dirty" magazine at the store and paging through it wrong?
If only life were black and white.
RE: A True Story
Thanks to all who replied, but I did a real bad job at trying to get my point across. The point I was trying to make is that in some cases you can go the extremes trying see something (as relates to cam sites an non adult host nude) and be disappointed in the end. I continued on in my true story, even I put my point across but kept going just to finish my story. Her call to my home had nothing to do with my point. Sorry I did a very bad job at communicating.
RE: A True Story
Actually you did a fine job of communicating. The post responses did drift a bit and I contributed to that. I should have started a new string. Frankly I thought you had a pretty interesting post compared to others.
RE: A True Story
Those are excuses. Any problems in a relationship should be dealt with, not ignored by indulging in other men or women. And staying together for a child in a bad marriage isn't necessarily a good thing. Studies show that it can actually be bad for the child, hell he'll grow up having a warped sense of what a relationship should be like because his parents had a fake one.
Everyone just wants to have fun, so rationalize away. When i'm with someone, i don't come here. If i did, then i shouldn't be with them because they aren't satisfying me, and i'll break up if that doesn't change.
Its definitely not the same as just seeing someone and wanting them, as another poster said. You can hardly control that, but you can control logging on here, and paying someone money to do things your wife or girlfriend should be doing.
Everyone just wants to have fun, so rationalize away. When i'm with someone, i don't come here. If i did, then i shouldn't be with them because they aren't satisfying me, and i'll break up if that doesn't change.
Its definitely not the same as just seeing someone and wanting them, as another poster said. You can hardly control that, but you can control logging on here, and paying someone money to do things your wife or girlfriend should be doing.
RE: A True Story
First off you have to kind of laugh when you consider we are debating morals on what is by and large a porn site.
(My apologies to those folks in categories that are just looking for friends or marriage prospects.)
Anyway your comment on rationalizations makes sense. Motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance are likely to be the death of the species.
But that being said I would still have to say I respectfully disagree. Your post suggests that if your partner can't supply your needs then it is time to break up the relationship.
My experience has been that all relationships of all types are pretty much a compromise. Because in real life nothing is perfect. I have been "in a relationship" for many years. And it has been many years since we have been physical and it is likely we never will be again. Suffice it to say there are some really good reasons for this situation. And yet that does not mean the relationship should be tossed. And I just don't think remaining totally non sexual for the rest of my days on earth is going to happen.
I wish you the best with your choice. And honest to God I respect them. I just hope you don't end up burning through too many relationships. Because sooner or later every partnership hits rocky spots for whatever reason.
And since we both seem to love studies I will leave with this. A study in the US finds that 70 percent of guys are visiting Internet porn sites at least once a month. And what really surprised me is that 30 percent of women are also.
(My apologies to those folks in categories that are just looking for friends or marriage prospects.)
Anyway your comment on rationalizations makes sense. Motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance are likely to be the death of the species.
But that being said I would still have to say I respectfully disagree. Your post suggests that if your partner can't supply your needs then it is time to break up the relationship.
My experience has been that all relationships of all types are pretty much a compromise. Because in real life nothing is perfect. I have been "in a relationship" for many years. And it has been many years since we have been physical and it is likely we never will be again. Suffice it to say there are some really good reasons for this situation. And yet that does not mean the relationship should be tossed. And I just don't think remaining totally non sexual for the rest of my days on earth is going to happen.
I wish you the best with your choice. And honest to God I respect them. I just hope you don't end up burning through too many relationships. Because sooner or later every partnership hits rocky spots for whatever reason.
And since we both seem to love studies I will leave with this. A study in the US finds that 70 percent of guys are visiting Internet porn sites at least once a month. And what really surprised me is that 30 percent of women are also.
RE: A True Story
I just wonder, where did you read about those kinds of drives (sexual and other forms of drives for intimacy)? It's kinda serious question. You can consider me a curious student:) Sources in English are ok.
And I still wonder...what could those reasons for staying in a relation which does not fulfil your needs be?... I am pretty sure though, you won't answer, but I'll try:)
Is it perhaps because you don't have a real life substitute for your partner?... I mean the one who has the the qualities of your wife plus sex, intimacy etc what you lack in a relationship. Or is it your complacency and disbelief that things may be better in another relationship? Or are these hard-core reasons like economic dependancy, children... cannot come up with more:)
thx
Regarding myself... I am in a relationship and I don't know whether it is the one I have always dreamed of:)
And I still wonder...what could those reasons for staying in a relation which does not fulfil your needs be?... I am pretty sure though, you won't answer, but I'll try:)
Is it perhaps because you don't have a real life substitute for your partner?... I mean the one who has the the qualities of your wife plus sex, intimacy etc what you lack in a relationship. Or is it your complacency and disbelief that things may be better in another relationship? Or are these hard-core reasons like economic dependancy, children... cannot come up with more:)
thx
Regarding myself... I am in a relationship and I don't know whether it is the one I have always dreamed of:)
RE: A True Story
I was and am always willing to fill or at least try to fill my partner's needs, but kept being pushed away (that marriage lasted 20yrs plus and it ended for many reasons, but the icing was when i found my partner on a sex site right after repeatedly turning me down). and in the few other relationships other than that, i was cheated on, and yet each time I was more than willing to try and fill my partner's needs, even to simply having sex at all....lol....so needless to say each relationship was ended. No i am not angry nor bitter as i would rather be alone than be played for a fool. ANYWAY........
Many say they in relationship but not getting needs met, while some answer with well why be in relationship.
I believe that if two people are happy together even if a need is not being met then stay where you are, if ur both happy with how things are.
We all know that often a need is not being met either because one is not liking sex any more or cant have sex with their partner.
as well as other reasons ...such as the appetite is too much for her or she not give it to me enough or she went to the store or is at work and i horny now and refuse to wait till she gets home, or i a selfish person and want my cake and eat it too.
but also a need is not being met because either one or both partners do not talk about the need and how to resolve, so the one not getting the need met stops trying and just continues on with life and ends up on sites like this OR FOR SOME having sex in real with someone else.
i do see both sides and i understand both sides, there are pros and cons to both.
HOWEVER, in all the responses i have read on this thread, some say it ok to be on here when u have someone and some say it not and others dont care either way.
One thing that has not been mentioned or asked is those of u that r in relationship and on here having ur need met, does ur partner know you are on here? and if ur partner does not know ur on here why not? a bit of a contradiction when it comes to honesty in the relationship don't u think?
People are so worried about how they are feeling and what they are not getting with their partner, yet no one seems to give a rats ass about the partner who has no clue that their mate is on a sex site having the missing need met so to speak.
I would much rather my partner and i talk of the missing need and find a way to resolve it, if that is possible. But I would be in no mood to talk of resolving or having any understanding if i found out that my partner was going behind my back and having that need met.
I just find it odd that all this talk of relationships and being with that person threw thick and thin, and how some would dump someone if they found out about something in the past that happened and how no one wants to share their partner nor have the negatives images or thoughts of what their partner did in the past, and how some would want to know if she or he did a gang bang or had slept with many, but no one has hit on how the person who has no clue that their so called partner is even on a site like this. That really says alot of how those of u in a relationship think and feel about ur partner and the relationship.
Anyway just a small observation, and i am sure i will get those of u giving ur opinions and and comments objecting to what i have said, but one thing you wont be able to do is in your heart deny that what i have said is a valid point, something to consider and possibly even true.
Best wishes to everyone.....:)
Many say they in relationship but not getting needs met, while some answer with well why be in relationship.
I believe that if two people are happy together even if a need is not being met then stay where you are, if ur both happy with how things are.
We all know that often a need is not being met either because one is not liking sex any more or cant have sex with their partner.
as well as other reasons ...such as the appetite is too much for her or she not give it to me enough or she went to the store or is at work and i horny now and refuse to wait till she gets home, or i a selfish person and want my cake and eat it too.
but also a need is not being met because either one or both partners do not talk about the need and how to resolve, so the one not getting the need met stops trying and just continues on with life and ends up on sites like this OR FOR SOME having sex in real with someone else.
i do see both sides and i understand both sides, there are pros and cons to both.
HOWEVER, in all the responses i have read on this thread, some say it ok to be on here when u have someone and some say it not and others dont care either way.
One thing that has not been mentioned or asked is those of u that r in relationship and on here having ur need met, does ur partner know you are on here? and if ur partner does not know ur on here why not? a bit of a contradiction when it comes to honesty in the relationship don't u think?
People are so worried about how they are feeling and what they are not getting with their partner, yet no one seems to give a rats ass about the partner who has no clue that their mate is on a sex site having the missing need met so to speak.
I would much rather my partner and i talk of the missing need and find a way to resolve it, if that is possible. But I would be in no mood to talk of resolving or having any understanding if i found out that my partner was going behind my back and having that need met.
I just find it odd that all this talk of relationships and being with that person threw thick and thin, and how some would dump someone if they found out about something in the past that happened and how no one wants to share their partner nor have the negatives images or thoughts of what their partner did in the past, and how some would want to know if she or he did a gang bang or had slept with many, but no one has hit on how the person who has no clue that their so called partner is even on a site like this. That really says alot of how those of u in a relationship think and feel about ur partner and the relationship.
Anyway just a small observation, and i am sure i will get those of u giving ur opinions and and comments objecting to what i have said, but one thing you wont be able to do is in your heart deny that what i have said is a valid point, something to consider and possibly even true.
Best wishes to everyone.....:)
RE: A True Story
You raise two questions. The first is about human psychology. And although I have taken courses in psychology I am not a psychologist. I don't think I have space here to do the subject justice. But we humans have needs beyond food and water and shelter. We are social. We need a group to belong to. We want to feel special. We have both kind aspects and cruel aspects. And frankly we are sexual. Just like all creatures. If you want to read about a species that is really interesting, read about one of the two species of chimpanzee called Bonobos:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo
I sometimes wish that our species could be more like the Bonobo. More peaceful and with a lot less hang ups. One of the things they do to facilitate social lives is use sex as a bonding tool.
On the second point it is a bit complex and delicate. And I am reluctant to give specifics. Suffice it to say she was damaged
by another person. So physical relations are not good. But in all other ways the relationship is good. I just believe there is a lot more to a relationship than sexual needs. And I will not toss a person aside because it lacks one aspect. It would feel very cruel for me to do that.
Ultimately I suppose the writer who said I was rationalizing may be correct. The only reply I have to that argument is that to
totally suppress my sexual nature for decades is not achievable. I can honestly say I have never "physically" cheated on her with another woman. But I guess in my imagination I have.
Believe me I wrestle with this issue.
Thanks for all your comments and once again my apologies to the guy who started this thread. The conversation kind of drifted away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo
I sometimes wish that our species could be more like the Bonobo. More peaceful and with a lot less hang ups. One of the things they do to facilitate social lives is use sex as a bonding tool.
On the second point it is a bit complex and delicate. And I am reluctant to give specifics. Suffice it to say she was damaged
by another person. So physical relations are not good. But in all other ways the relationship is good. I just believe there is a lot more to a relationship than sexual needs. And I will not toss a person aside because it lacks one aspect. It would feel very cruel for me to do that.
Ultimately I suppose the writer who said I was rationalizing may be correct. The only reply I have to that argument is that to
totally suppress my sexual nature for decades is not achievable. I can honestly say I have never "physically" cheated on her with another woman. But I guess in my imagination I have.
Believe me I wrestle with this issue.
Thanks for all your comments and once again my apologies to the guy who started this thread. The conversation kind of drifted away.
RE: A True Story
Well I cannot add much there. If she is ill- that's the fact.
On the other hand, people tend to manipulate others, telling that they feel badly which is really creepy. Especially when they want something from you:(
Thx for telling anyway. Next time I meet a guy who seems to like me but does not do any steps further- I will try to be moderately considerate, knowing that many things can happen in life...
And thx for the Bonobo thing- it is an unusual approach))
On the other hand, people tend to manipulate others, telling that they feel badly which is really creepy. Especially when they want something from you:(
Thx for telling anyway. Next time I meet a guy who seems to like me but does not do any steps further- I will try to be moderately considerate, knowing that many things can happen in life...
And thx for the Bonobo thing- it is an unusual approach))
Strange Request for Adult Hosts
I am looking for a host with a large clitoris who looks to show it off. Any offers?
Happy Birthday Casablancka!!!
Happy Birthday my sexy beauty! I hope that you have a wonderful day and are having fun wherever you are. I miss you. Kissssssssssss you.
RE: Happy Birthday Casablancka!!!
Happy bday baby!!!!!!!!! Hope ure having a great day today, as this day is only urs, and may ur every wish come true!! The rest ill whisper to ur ear in private!!!!! Kissssss:*:*
RE: Happy Birthday Casablancka!!!
Happy Birthday Cassie! You are the Hostess with the Mostess!
RE: Happy Birthday Casablancka!!!
thank you dearest everyone fo ur nice wishes,im 25 already,thanks to all,kisssssssssssss and missss xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
RE: Long Fingernails
Personally, I don't like long nails and sometimes get turned off by them if too long, but if you're into that, YourLust had some long nails but she's been gone for a few monhs. You could add her to your favorites in case she comes back. I've seen some others with profile pics of long nails at times but I can't remember any off the top of my head.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
sometimes its fun! even in non adult, hosts will often be naked, or at least haing fun. Some hosts seem to like it,and get excited. maybe by double money!
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
In non-adult getting naked?? I don't think you understood the question.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
My opinion is, unless a member chooses 1-2-1 upon entering or at some point within the session, then he/she has no right to complain about others entering in. I do believe the host should give first-come/first-serve consideration to members who were there first, but that does not mean ignoring the later arrivers. The talented host will strike a gracious balance between giving precedence to those who have been in session longest, and those who come after. But please don't ask me to say how to do it -- I have no idea! lol
As for the member who complains, well, that's too bad, he/she should have selected 1-2-1 when the chance was there.
But, where I have seen this problem exacerbated is the person who arrives late who has no consideration for the member who is ahead of him, and butts in as if it is his own private world, expecting exclusive treatment, rudely disregarding others.
When I enter session, I usually go first into guest chat to see if the host is busy with someone else, and ask if it is okay to enter video. If she says "wait" I wait, if she says, "come on in" I come on in, but text her only in private messages so as not to disturb the other viewers (unless I know I am alone). I am a firm believer that the person ahead of me has precedence over me, and if a show is already in progress (I greet the host in private, and then enjoy the show without requesting or conversing, until the host acknowledges we are alone, or she addresses me personally.
That's just me, but I think it is the best approach, out of courtesy to both the host and other viewers.
As for the member who complains, well, that's too bad, he/she should have selected 1-2-1 when the chance was there.
But, where I have seen this problem exacerbated is the person who arrives late who has no consideration for the member who is ahead of him, and butts in as if it is his own private world, expecting exclusive treatment, rudely disregarding others.
When I enter session, I usually go first into guest chat to see if the host is busy with someone else, and ask if it is okay to enter video. If she says "wait" I wait, if she says, "come on in" I come on in, but text her only in private messages so as not to disturb the other viewers (unless I know I am alone). I am a firm believer that the person ahead of me has precedence over me, and if a show is already in progress (I greet the host in private, and then enjoy the show without requesting or conversing, until the host acknowledges we are alone, or she addresses me personally.
That's just me, but I think it is the best approach, out of courtesy to both the host and other viewers.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Very well stated. Hosts should give precedence to the first guy in open but try to include others, and the first member should have chosen open if he wanted exclusivity. It seems pretty logical and fair to me, and I've posted the exact same thing before. Unfortunately, not all members understand this. Also, some hosts will defer too much to the second guy a lot of the time too in order to make sure she can get his money and basically start ignoring the first member. A good host, however, knows how to keep everyone happy.
I don't know how to communicate with a host already in video when I'm in text chat, however, since most of them don't allow this option. I usually try to wait until she is alone so I can be the first in video, especially since I like to give my cam, but if a host is usually busy, I will do things according to how you explained and enter open even if the host is already with a member.
What I hate is when the other guy stops typing publicly. It is distracting, and, if he's talking about how hard he is and stuff, disgusting. And if using the full screen option, every time he types publicly, it makes the chat window appear which I f-ing hate! CC needs to do something about that.
(In case you didn't know, click in the chat window where you type and then move the mouse cursor ABOVE the window, preferably being to the left or right so as not to block the pic, and the window disappears in a few seconds if nobody, including some rude idiot, types. It only appears when someone types to you or if you go to type, and, unfortunately, some rude idiot typing publicly includes typing to you.)
I don't know how to communicate with a host already in video when I'm in text chat, however, since most of them don't allow this option. I usually try to wait until she is alone so I can be the first in video, especially since I like to give my cam, but if a host is usually busy, I will do things according to how you explained and enter open even if the host is already with a member.
What I hate is when the other guy stops typing publicly. It is distracting, and, if he's talking about how hard he is and stuff, disgusting. And if using the full screen option, every time he types publicly, it makes the chat window appear which I f-ing hate! CC needs to do something about that.
(In case you didn't know, click in the chat window where you type and then move the mouse cursor ABOVE the window, preferably being to the left or right so as not to block the pic, and the window disappears in a few seconds if nobody, including some rude idiot, types. It only appears when someone types to you or if you go to type, and, unfortunately, some rude idiot typing publicly includes typing to you.)
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
"...and the first member should have NOT chosen open if he wanted exclusivity."* Obviously, I mean he should have chosen 121 if he wanted exclusivity.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Well, if he's like me, I don't always know if I want 1-2-1 until i'm in session. I only choose it when I feel that I "need" privacy -- no one else interupting. Coitus Interuptus is one thing, but SomeoneElsus Interuptus is annoying LOL.
If i'm thinking only to chat, then why deprive the host of other potential customers? That's my thinking anyway. Of course, I've have often regretted it, when things have advanced along enough that I'm in the "mood" for some "more". Then I want the privacy - never been a fan of ménage à trois. Well, not when the 3rd person is a guy, anyway ;)
If i'm thinking only to chat, then why deprive the host of other potential customers? That's my thinking anyway. Of course, I've have often regretted it, when things have advanced along enough that I'm in the "mood" for some "more". Then I want the privacy - never been a fan of ménage à trois. Well, not when the 3rd person is a guy, anyway ;)
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Good point... i never thought of that indicating someone else in the room. I knew about the full-screen option, and that it disappears when no one is typing, but guess I've never used it while someone else is in the room along with me. In fact, I seldom use it. I think the two largest screen sizes are poorly designed, and the chat window is too disruptive (even if it does occasionally disappear when no one is typing)
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Oh yeah, back to answering your original question. I have no idea why some would enter when a show is already in progress in non-adult. Except one does not always realize it until he arrives, and if the other member is talking in private messages, he may not realize even then that others are present. You could understand then that he might get upset, thinking he is alone with the host, and she is not giving him the attention he thinks he should have. Some sites, list in a sidebar the members who are in the host's room, but that luxury is not here at CC. And unless the other member is chatting openly, it is not apparent.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Maybe it is time for one price and that is always 121. Make the price midpoint between today's open price and 121 price. Do they really make a lot of money on more than one member being in a video at the same time? Hosts? Your experience?
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Non Adult is not one of my choices on site, but I've heard there is much less business there than in the adult categories. And this would lead me to believe that it is rare to have 2 viewers at same time in paid videochat. Indeed I've heard any viewers at all in rare in Non Adult. But I do not know this for certain but only what I've heard.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Yes good point and you being a host would know far better than I. And you are correct Glamour was designed to this site's bridge between non adult and adult categories. So it is fair to say it has more in common with NA than any of the other adult categories.
RE: Entering an ongoing session - questions
Before entering video it is perfectly obvious if a member is already in the hosts room. On the page where you choose 121 or Open, if you have the option of 121 or Open then the host is alone. If only Open is available then there is already a member in video.
Wheelchair
Hi ,My girlfriend had an accident and in now in a wheelchair. Does anyone know of any girls on here who are disabled or in a wheelcair.
RE: Wheelchair
I'm not sure why he was asking, but I think you could have responded a litte differently. I know that there is at least one long time member here that is in a wheel chair, for example, and the tone of your post isn't exactly sensitive or appropriate.
Of course, I'm not so sure I want to know why he was asking, and something tells me that unless his gf is thinking of being a host, I am not so sure I want to know. But to each his own...
Of course, I'm not so sure I want to know why he was asking, and something tells me that unless his gf is thinking of being a host, I am not so sure I want to know. But to each his own...
RE: Wheelchair
" I know that there is at least one long time member here that is in a wheel chair, for example, and the tone of your post isn't exactly sensitive or appropriate."
He was talking about is girlfriend not another member. And CC determines what is appropriate, not you.
He was talking about is girlfriend not another member. And CC determines what is appropriate, not you.
RE: Wheelchair
A reference to "Special Olympics" in that manner is clearly tasteless. And I was not referring to what is appropriate in the forums where CC tries to allow free speech to the extent possible. Rather, I was referring to how to act in a decent manner in general. CC, to the extent that they can without having a flame war, allows people to post insensitive, socially inappropriate comments, but that doesn't mean making such comments is the right thing to do.
RE: Wheelchair
As a viewer how would you know that there is a member in a wheel chair?? That makes no sense!! Are you also a host...lol
RE: Wheelchair
In my case, a host told me. Also, since there is community chat, a member could have mentioned it publicly. Or, I might personally know the member. But in my case, it is because a host told me a long time ago. And no, she didn't mention his id here... She just told me about him, I think in the context of that she felt bad for him. :(
RE: Wheelchair
That was damn rude. Whelshy had a valid question, and deserved a valid reply, instead of a smartass one. I hope neither you, nor a loved one ever becomes disabled, temporarily or permanently -- well maybe you should, so you can understand just how damn rude and insensitive your reply was.
RE: Wheelchair
Gem, do not assume why someone is asking. I do not know why he is asking, but he may have a very good reason. He may be trying to learn sexual techniques that are pleasing to his disabled partner.
RE: Wheelchair
Hmmm. Good point. Maybe he is trying to learn how to be with someone disabled. I was trying to think of a good reason for his asking and only could imagine he had some strange fetish.
RE: Wheelchair
I don't know hosts in weellchaiir, but if your gf is a strong person can try, for sure will be members who will like to meet her, good luck
RE: Wheelchair
to answer your question, Whelshy, after several quite rude responses, no, unfortunately, I do not know any wheel-chair bound hosts. Perhaps you could email help@camcontacts.com and see if they might be able to steer you in the direction of someone.
RE: Wheelchair
Please share why you would be seeking wheel chair hosts if you have a girlfiriend? Think the question confused many and so the responses were awkward.
RE: Wheelchair
Host, do we ask the same question of the married man, or the man with girlfriend, whose partner is not handicapped? If that is his fetish, who are we to question? If he is hoping for insight -- or someone who might help him with his predicament -- why should it matter to us? His reasons are his own. He asked a simple question, and deserves a simple answer, not some 3rd Degree Interrogation. And the question is not even hard to answer. If I knew someone, I'd be happy to steer him in that direction. Pity we are not on my old site, I knew one who was totally deaf, and one who was physically disabled, but neither of them are now hosting, and have moved on to other things, more power to them.
RE: Wheelchair
Thank you all for your replies and especially those of support. I did actually ask a stright forward question and did not expect it to turn into such a discussion.
It would take far to long to elobrate on my question. Being with somone who is a paraplegic is at times very emotional. So won't go into that. A disabled person is entitled to the best sexual life as anyone else and I want to make our sex life the best I can. I have to learn too and she has to cope with the inability to be able to feel me inside her. Its hard for her. She now has low self esteam in bed and thinks why would anyone want to make love to her anymore. I want to convince her I do and if there are sexual disabled girls out there I am trying to find them and hopefully show her it does not end just have to adapt. But please don't think we don't have a great life together because we do....
It would take far to long to elobrate on my question. Being with somone who is a paraplegic is at times very emotional. So won't go into that. A disabled person is entitled to the best sexual life as anyone else and I want to make our sex life the best I can. I have to learn too and she has to cope with the inability to be able to feel me inside her. Its hard for her. She now has low self esteam in bed and thinks why would anyone want to make love to her anymore. I want to convince her I do and if there are sexual disabled girls out there I am trying to find them and hopefully show her it does not end just have to adapt. But please don't think we don't have a great life together because we do....
hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
I am shy about using C2C, becuase I am not very attractive. Sometimes hosts seem real disappointed when I do not. What should I do? What part of me do you want to see? any advise on how to use c2c or how to explain why I am uncomfortable.
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
"and it seems nobody - host or viewer - can ever please everyone".
The viewer is paying, its not his responsibility to please the host. Its the host's job to please her viewer. For a softcore host to ask for member cam is ok, but if he says no the host needs to drop the subject. As hosts in IA are not allowed to ask for member cam, it is only done in softcore.
Softcore hosts like to talk about the choice they on whether or not they do nude show. Well all members have the choice on whether or not they broadcast their cam on site. And no host can require a member cam in order for her to do nude show. And if you doubt my word, email CC and ask them.
The viewer is paying, its not his responsibility to please the host. Its the host's job to please her viewer. For a softcore host to ask for member cam is ok, but if he says no the host needs to drop the subject. As hosts in IA are not allowed to ask for member cam, it is only done in softcore.
Softcore hosts like to talk about the choice they on whether or not they do nude show. Well all members have the choice on whether or not they broadcast their cam on site. And no host can require a member cam in order for her to do nude show. And if you doubt my word, email CC and ask them.
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
Where does it say that hosts in IA are not allowed to ask a member if he can send cam?
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
I'm glad you asked. Here are the rules;
By signing into this category Chathosts commit to:
•Not sharing details such as age, name, country etc. unless initiated by the Viewer.
•No delaying tactics whatsoever. Chathosts MUST be prepared to immediately start their show as soon as a viewer enters.
•Also getting naked must not take a long time. This is not the category for a slow strip tease show.
•Be prepared to provide an explicit sex show. Not only is the Chathost expected to get naked, but also provide additional explicit content such as open leg shots, and finger or dildo penetration, if requested
By signing into this category Chathosts commit to:
•Not sharing details such as age, name, country etc. unless initiated by the Viewer.
•No delaying tactics whatsoever. Chathosts MUST be prepared to immediately start their show as soon as a viewer enters.
•Also getting naked must not take a long time. This is not the category for a slow strip tease show.
•Be prepared to provide an explicit sex show. Not only is the Chathost expected to get naked, but also provide additional explicit content such as open leg shots, and finger or dildo penetration, if requested
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
I agree and I don't think it is right if a host persists. The hosts that you speak of somehow think that someone is spying on them and would expose them to their world. The ones that persist and that is not their problem have much bigger problems so just go to the next one. I cannot understand why any host would want to make a viewer feel uncomfortable unless they are very immature.
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
if I give you my cam, do you want to see may face, my body, or my penis? What is best for you, so you can give the best show?
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
A member can show you his body on cam no matter what category you are in. A member is not bound by the rules of your's or any other category.
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
OMG who is paying who? What are you thinking wanting to see all three of him? Too arrogant!
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
"because I want to be sure its not some regular "
You don't perform for your regular viewers?
You don't perform for your regular viewers?
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
Really? The why post this below?
"and I dont do hardcore anyway."
"and I dont do hardcore anyway."
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
Try an old member like me! I have no clue how to record. I can barely use the cam!
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
You are so worried then why are you here?? You provide a service and there is no guarantee's about what will happen. To eliminate mobile users or members that don't show cam is extremely paranoid and I think non-adult would fit you best and then you have nothing to worry about instead of insulting members.
Weren't you the one asking what they want to see recently? LOL the answer would be not your personality!!
Weren't you the one asking what they want to see recently? LOL the answer would be not your personality!!
RE: hosts: Tell me why u like C2C, pls
"and I dont do hardcore anyway."
So why are you worried about being recorded?
So why are you worried about being recorded?
RE: clothes in video chat,question to guys(about hosts)
Jeans, pink panties and pink t-shirt. Make up and straight hair either down or in a ponytail.
look like your current profile photo please
just look like whatever you are using for your current profile pic please. that is all.
RE: clothes in video chat,question to guys(about hosts)
Like you can totally satisfy all members if you wear what they like and still look not even close to what they want....lol.
It has a lot more to do with personality and how real you are!!
Yes looking like you didn't just fall out of bed would be a good idea and put some energy into how you look especially if you want to make the good money you epect...
It has a lot more to do with personality and how real you are!!
Yes looking like you didn't just fall out of bed would be a good idea and put some energy into how you look especially if you want to make the good money you epect...
RE: clothes in video chat,question to guys(about hosts)
If you are not doing well with videos then do something else. After reading some of your other posts it might not be anything that you can change!!
RE: clothes in video chat,question to guys(about hosts)
I saw a host who was just out of the shower, and wrapped in a towel! No make up at all. She looked great, especially when she let the towel fall!
I'm a nice girl with real personality, not a dummy. Please keep that in mind while we are together. ;o)
I see that phrase on many profiles on this and other sites. And the funny is it comes from hosts in the hardcore/nude categories not the Glamour/Little Shy kind of categories you might expect.
But I thought it was ironic and a bit funny as well, so I posted it.
But I thought it was ironic and a bit funny as well, so I posted it.
RE: I'm a nice girl with real personality, not a dummy. Please keep that in mind while we are together. ;o)
has any girl that was really a dummy ever admitted it?
RE: I'm a nice girl with real personality, not a dummy. Please keep that in mind while we are together. ;o)
yes there are some of us that are honest enough to admit when we have stupid moments. NOT all hosts are dishonest., just like not all hosts will say sweet things just to get your money.
and for that one person who will say why don't you post with your name, i say because i am not going to open the door to be accused of self promoting..
Be well everyone...hugggggg
and for that one person who will say why don't you post with your name, i say because i am not going to open the door to be accused of self promoting..
Be well everyone...hugggggg
Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
Keep only technical forum and cc email that's it!
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
if you dont read forums or go to comm chat it will seem like they dont have them , so why bitch about something you use ?
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
He's using a forum he wants to do away with? Sounds like a todder temper tantrum to me.
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
It's my opinion relax!
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
Why should they get rid of them? Because you don't like them? Yes, the world does revolve around you, we know, but still, you really should give a little more reason than what you gave.
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
where would i go between video's if community chat was gone?
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
General forum is the only one I visit, it is well supported by both hosts and members, and the discussion is generally good. I disagree, let's keep this.
RE: Camcontact should get rid of Community chat and General Forum, Viewer only forum
what would I do with my life? :--))
Why are almost 70% of Little Shy hosts that play Strip Hi Lo rated 4 stars or less?
OK some are not the prettiest but most are pretty in my opinion. This has to mean that most girls that have Strip Hi Lo advertised either do not strip at all, only get topless or even though they strip they hold up towel to cover or hand bra. So that would mean that more than half of the girls in Little Shy that have the Strip Hi Lo option are not following the rules. And if true, this is unacceptable.
RE: Why are almost 70% of Little Shy hosts that play Strip Hi Lo rated 4 stars or less?
Do you know what a non sequitur is?
RE: Why are almost 70% of Little Shy hosts that play Strip Hi Lo rated 4 stars or less?
Non sequitur (pronounced /nɒnˈsɛkwɪtər/) is Latin for "it does not follow." It is most often used as a noun to describe illogical statements.
Non sequitur may refer to:
Non sequitur (literary device), an irrelevant, often humorous comment to a preceding topic or statement.
Non sequitur (logic), a logical fallacy where a stated conclusion is not supported by its premise.
Non Sequitur (comic strip), a comic strip by Wiley Miller
Non Sequitur (Star Trek: Voyager), an episode of Star Trek: Voyager
Non sequitur may refer to:
Non sequitur (literary device), an irrelevant, often humorous comment to a preceding topic or statement.
Non sequitur (logic), a logical fallacy where a stated conclusion is not supported by its premise.
Non Sequitur (comic strip), a comic strip by Wiley Miller
Non Sequitur (Star Trek: Voyager), an episode of Star Trek: Voyager
RE: Why are almost 70% of Little Shy hosts that play Strip Hi Lo rated 4 stars or less?
OK I should have explained I counted 54 out of 78 hosts on line in the Little Shy Strip Hi Lo category. And yes the number of girls on line keeps changing as do their ratings. But I still think that even for a snapshot view, that is way too high. And yes I've had it happen to me many times playing Strip Hi lo that the host never did what she was supposed to do when she lost the game.
Would member profiles be a good idea on cc?
I go to many sites and almost all have member profiles. Mine are all blank but no doubt some members do fill them out. I've had many pvts here and at other sites over the years. Some hosts ask many questions and some none at all. I think that almost all viewers that like to use c2c would go for it and on these sites it is free and also optional just like c2c is. And only the host that is in pvt with member can see his profile.
I am one that prefers not to share personal; details about myself
but there are members that for any number of reasons do like to share details with hosts. And that option remains for like minded members. But it does offer a free perk for those who are into such things like c2c and the like.
I like this site overall. And if I can make a suggestion which will help retain current members and add new ones, it increases the the possibilities of continued long term success of this site. So while this specific feature will not benefit me directly, it can do so indirectly over time. And I for one love competition. I don't want to see any cam site fail. I want more. The more there are the better it is for all consumers.
I am one that prefers not to share personal; details about myself
but there are members that for any number of reasons do like to share details with hosts. And that option remains for like minded members. But it does offer a free perk for those who are into such things like c2c and the like.
I like this site overall. And if I can make a suggestion which will help retain current members and add new ones, it increases the the possibilities of continued long term success of this site. So while this specific feature will not benefit me directly, it can do so indirectly over time. And I for one love competition. I don't want to see any cam site fail. I want more. The more there are the better it is for all consumers.
RE: Would member profiles be a good idea on cc?
No. What purpose would it serve? Many members prefer to either not discuss or lie about their personal details. Would the host treat the member better? She is concerned about video minutes...not if you like baseball, music and long walks on the beach.
RE: Would member profiles be a good idea on cc?
Read my post again. It may be something some members would like. The same guys that do c2 c would most likely like this shit. I can tell you there are members on other sites that are into this shit. And no doubt many are members here as well.
RE: Would member profiles be a good idea on cc?
well in my opinion, it's a great idea. i like c2c and i like to share details about myself too, so i like this idea. this would be a big improvement in my eyes.
RE: Would member profiles be a good idea on cc?
A host never has to look at a profile or any pictures on it just as she does not have to look at c2c. Its all a matter of choice.
Stars (again)
Okay. Since someone in a thread below talked about stars, let's rehash the old subject.
This person suggested only letting people vote after 10 minutes to keep fraudulent votes and jealous hosts away. There is a major problem with that idea, namely, almost every host will end up with 5 stars that way. The reason is that, most likely, a guy is only going to stay 10 minutes if he is having a good time, and he will probably just click 5 stars when he leaves.
I have had a few times where after 10 minutes, the host all of a sudden started talking on the phone or whatever, so a 5 star rating quickly drops to 1, but this usually isn't the case. If I am in video over 10 minutes, I am almost definitely going to rate someone 5 stars unless she does something to annoy me after that point. The only other time I wouldn't give a 5 star rating after 10 minutes is if she is really hot so I decided to stay awhile but she is just not that good of a performer, and I simply can't justify to myself giving her 5 stars to be fair to other members. But once again, I am almost always going to give 5 stars if I've been in video 10 minutes or more, otherwise, I probably would have left already.
CC could lower the time required to vote, but of course, the lower the time required, the more the fraudulent vote issue creeps in. Also, there are plenty of hosts that deserve a low rating based on how they act in the first minute or two, so one can argue that it is good to allow a host to be rated after just one minute. I might make it a two mintue minimum instead of 1 second like it is now, but I wouldn't go higher than 2 minutes since I have run into plenty of rude hosts that show their true colors in the first 30 seconds.
One could also suggest making ratings based on time spent in video, but this could give an unfair advantage to lower priced hosts. Or one could make the rating based on money spent with a host, but again, there are flaws with this idea. For example, I know of a few hosts that make lots of money here and have just a couple of rich guys that visit them all of the time. Are they really 5 star hosts or do they just happen to have a special connection with a couple of members that like to visit them all of the time?
Personally, I think the bigger problem with the system is that it is only based on 10 votes. CC tells hosts that it is okay this way since hosts have the opportunity to quickly change their rating, but I think it gives one vote too much weight. I definitely wouldn't do what one site does and look at votes from the first day a host ever worked on a site since you want ratings to reflect recent performance, but I think raising the number of votes from 10 to 20, and perhaps a bit more such as 25, would be a good idea. I wouldn't go higher than that, however, to allow hosts a better opportunity to increase their rating. I just think 10 votes gives one vote way too much weight as I said.
In terms of controlling other problems, there isn't much that CC can do more than they are doing already. They can track IP's but these can be changed. They can try to make it so a member with multiple accounts can only vote once per host, but that doesn't stop a host with an army of fans from attacking another host. They can look for patterns of irregular voting, but again, that isn't necessarily going to lead to a fair and consistent outcome either.
There is one soloution, however, and it is completely in the host's control. Hosts need to understand something: the key to having high ratings is to be a good enough host that a guy that visits you will want to return over and over and presumably give you 5 stars each time. That means you must make a good impression the first time you meet him so he will want to come back and to continue to deliver a good enough performance that he will keep coming back.
It isn't a mystery. This is exactly what the higher ranked hosts do. I have yet to meet the host that is good at her job complain about having less than 4,5 stars. She always complains about not having 5 stars because of some guy that got upset at her for not loving him or some jealous host or whatever. But she is usually a good enough host that she will always have at least 4,5 stars. She might not be as high up on the page as she likes, but she will still be near the top.
As for the hosts below 4,5 stars, sorry ladies, but either you are just not that good of a performer, you are just not that hot and cannot make up for it in other ways such as performance or personality, you are on too many sites, or there is some other reason that is causing this. In a nutshell, you simply don't deserve a higher rating as much as you want one. There is not some army of angry members and jealous hosts attacking you every day. It is simply that you are not one of the best hosts here. Other than making money, I wouldn't worry about that however. It doesn't mean your a bad person or ugly or whatever. It just means you are not particularly good at entertaining a bunch of strangers over the internet.
This person suggested only letting people vote after 10 minutes to keep fraudulent votes and jealous hosts away. There is a major problem with that idea, namely, almost every host will end up with 5 stars that way. The reason is that, most likely, a guy is only going to stay 10 minutes if he is having a good time, and he will probably just click 5 stars when he leaves.
I have had a few times where after 10 minutes, the host all of a sudden started talking on the phone or whatever, so a 5 star rating quickly drops to 1, but this usually isn't the case. If I am in video over 10 minutes, I am almost definitely going to rate someone 5 stars unless she does something to annoy me after that point. The only other time I wouldn't give a 5 star rating after 10 minutes is if she is really hot so I decided to stay awhile but she is just not that good of a performer, and I simply can't justify to myself giving her 5 stars to be fair to other members. But once again, I am almost always going to give 5 stars if I've been in video 10 minutes or more, otherwise, I probably would have left already.
CC could lower the time required to vote, but of course, the lower the time required, the more the fraudulent vote issue creeps in. Also, there are plenty of hosts that deserve a low rating based on how they act in the first minute or two, so one can argue that it is good to allow a host to be rated after just one minute. I might make it a two mintue minimum instead of 1 second like it is now, but I wouldn't go higher than 2 minutes since I have run into plenty of rude hosts that show their true colors in the first 30 seconds.
One could also suggest making ratings based on time spent in video, but this could give an unfair advantage to lower priced hosts. Or one could make the rating based on money spent with a host, but again, there are flaws with this idea. For example, I know of a few hosts that make lots of money here and have just a couple of rich guys that visit them all of the time. Are they really 5 star hosts or do they just happen to have a special connection with a couple of members that like to visit them all of the time?
Personally, I think the bigger problem with the system is that it is only based on 10 votes. CC tells hosts that it is okay this way since hosts have the opportunity to quickly change their rating, but I think it gives one vote too much weight. I definitely wouldn't do what one site does and look at votes from the first day a host ever worked on a site since you want ratings to reflect recent performance, but I think raising the number of votes from 10 to 20, and perhaps a bit more such as 25, would be a good idea. I wouldn't go higher than that, however, to allow hosts a better opportunity to increase their rating. I just think 10 votes gives one vote way too much weight as I said.
In terms of controlling other problems, there isn't much that CC can do more than they are doing already. They can track IP's but these can be changed. They can try to make it so a member with multiple accounts can only vote once per host, but that doesn't stop a host with an army of fans from attacking another host. They can look for patterns of irregular voting, but again, that isn't necessarily going to lead to a fair and consistent outcome either.
There is one soloution, however, and it is completely in the host's control. Hosts need to understand something: the key to having high ratings is to be a good enough host that a guy that visits you will want to return over and over and presumably give you 5 stars each time. That means you must make a good impression the first time you meet him so he will want to come back and to continue to deliver a good enough performance that he will keep coming back.
It isn't a mystery. This is exactly what the higher ranked hosts do. I have yet to meet the host that is good at her job complain about having less than 4,5 stars. She always complains about not having 5 stars because of some guy that got upset at her for not loving him or some jealous host or whatever. But she is usually a good enough host that she will always have at least 4,5 stars. She might not be as high up on the page as she likes, but she will still be near the top.
As for the hosts below 4,5 stars, sorry ladies, but either you are just not that good of a performer, you are just not that hot and cannot make up for it in other ways such as performance or personality, you are on too many sites, or there is some other reason that is causing this. In a nutshell, you simply don't deserve a higher rating as much as you want one. There is not some army of angry members and jealous hosts attacking you every day. It is simply that you are not one of the best hosts here. Other than making money, I wouldn't worry about that however. It doesn't mean your a bad person or ugly or whatever. It just means you are not particularly good at entertaining a bunch of strangers over the internet.
RE: Stars (again)
I agree, 2 minutes works and is the standard on other sites. Why 2 minutes? Because every site will tell you if pvt is not going your way, leave no later than 2 minutes if you expect a credit back to your account. Its clearly a money issue. And I agree the more $ you spend in pvt the harder it is to admit to yourself you made a mistake.
RE: Stars (again)
I forgot one other thing. Besides raising the number of votes from 10 to 20, or maybe 25, I would only count one vote for each member. I believe now one member can vote twice as long as he votes on different days which means that he can account for 20% of a host's rating (2 out of 10). That definitely is way too much control for one member.
If it is 20 votes, and one vote per member, that means he only controls 5% of the rating. And also, it will be a much more representative sample.
There is one downside to all of this. I think ratings will go down. They will be more fair and more reflective of a host's true rating since 20 different people will need to vote, but I have a feeling that since regulars will have less influence this way, rating will go down, and I don't know if CC wants a site where only a few hosts have 5 stars. It looks better when so many hosts have high ratings, although I think it is far from an accurate reflection of the typical host's performance.
If it is 20 votes, and one vote per member, that means he only controls 5% of the rating. And also, it will be a much more representative sample.
There is one downside to all of this. I think ratings will go down. They will be more fair and more reflective of a host's true rating since 20 different people will need to vote, but I have a feeling that since regulars will have less influence this way, rating will go down, and I don't know if CC wants a site where only a few hosts have 5 stars. It looks better when so many hosts have high ratings, although I think it is far from an accurate reflection of the typical host's performance.
RE: Stars (again)
I agree. Excellent idea. That way fanboys will not have the impact they do now