@cuddlefaery In the Walmart/target example, I don’t think that is really a valid comparison anyway because pros here specifically agreed to not have non-platonic profiles elsewhere. The people who potentially get banned are people that are reported and their links provided, and they typically are still given the option to choose between their non-platonic sites they run or this profile unless it is proven they were offering sexual services as well. It feels like the argument here is that pros should be able to violate the terms of service pro contract they agreed to because they don’t think they should have to follow that rule. Unfortunately they will risk being banned by doing that.
Edit: I’m also not ignoring any of the things you said I was. The scenarios you are listing are not any that I have banned anyone for.
@sophie4404 Yes that unfortunately happens, and it’s almost always the guy that makes the sexual request and then retaliates when they are rejected.
@Charlie_Bear the rule about not having sex related accounts is in the Pro Contract, not the site TOS, as if it were in the TOS it would apply to enthusiasts as well as pros - and I double checked the TOS when this whole thing started to make sure I hadn't missed it somehow.
The argument I've been trying to make
isn't that pros should be allowed to break the rule - it's that perhaps the rule needs to change because it isn't doing what it is intended to do, and it's in a legal and liability gray area depending on the jurisdiction. By all means, if people sign something, they need to be held to it. But essentially we have an advertising site (CC) trying to dictate to self-employed entrepreneurs (pros) how they run their fully independent business and what they do in their spare time - which has absolutely no bearing on the advertising site from a legal standpoint.
We are not technically independent contractors for CC - the site doesn't sell cuddle services to clients at set rates for us and we provide the set services a la Lyft/Uber/DoorDash/etc. We are fully independent and CC is simply trading advertising space in exchange for commission. They can legally dictate how we use that space, but the legality of dictating how our business functions off-site is where the trouble lies. And that's just talking the strictly legal/business side of things and not the ethics which I discussed in the pro forum 😅
I'm not a lawyer, and it's going to vary wildly by location - but I've worked 2-3 contract based jobs at a time simultaneously for over 20 years now across multiple state moves... I've picked up a bit lol. I don't at all mean to imply any one mod or admin is somehow crossing lines or doing all the things previously mentioned. This isn't an attack - it's intended as a discussion intended to incite others to problem solve.
I know I can be a long-winded pain in the ass, but I trust if I cross the line y'all will let me know 😅
@cuddlefaery Yes you are right, I had meant the pro contract, my apologies. And I know you don't mean me specifically. I just clarified that since I was the one being addressed.
@Charlie_Bear You are the best mod ever ! The disappointment to CC I used to had a year ago ( due to couple times helpless reporting ) is gone bc you and other new mods are here ! I feel more confident about CC now ! Thank you !!!
@cuddlefaery If you do decide to stop supporting this site because it's discriminatory you could always just become an enthusiast. If you're not financially supporting intolerance it helps some, though you would still be part of the community so in a way you're still supporting it. Of course it's not like you could go to another website either since this sort of thing is extremely rare. As far as I know this is the only website of its kind.
@ChessGirl Haha well thank you 🥹 Though honestly I’d argue that I am probably the opposite but despite my mistakes I am trying to help as best I can.
@Charlie_Bear -cares
@Charlie_Bear
I'm pretty sure if they were known for doing that at their job at Walmart, their managers at their second job at Target may reconsider their employment.
See, this is exactly the kind of stigma I'm against. Why should Walmart care what their employees do in their personal lives outside of work as long as they're not doing anything illegal? Having profiles on those other sites is not illegal, and it doesn't dictate the kind of person or worker they are. And unless they're literally advertising their services at work, Walmart should mind their own business.
@cuddlefaery
They can legally dictate how we use that space, but the legality of dictating how our business functions off-site is where the trouble lies.
I agree.
The whole Walmart-Target thing really only comes into play if their conditions of employment includes some kind of a morals clause. There are companies and schools that will fire employees for doing OnlyFans, because they feel it reflects on their image. Rightly or wrongly, that seems to be the position CC is taking -- that if pros are doing adult content elsewhere, it affects the rep of this site.
😞 I feel like giving up here. Feel free to tag me and draw any conclusions you want about my efforts and intentions.
Edit: I personally don’t think what someone does elsewhere means they have the same intent here. I am tasked with enforcing the rules though, so if I’m viewed as some mindless Stormtrooper, so be it I guess.
@Charlie_Bear I don't think anyone assumes you have bad intentions. Of course as a moderator you have to enforce the rules. I'm only criticizing the idea and the rule itself, not you. As I've said, I don't agree with it, but I understand why it exists.
I am a firm believer that sex work is legitimate work and I believe that current stigma and legal prohibitions against sex work make everyone involved less safe.
However, I suspect there are some very good legal reasons for CC to take as hard a line as they do. I’m not a lawyer, but I know the law in the US changed a few years ago that requires websites to police themselves or face charges (see FOSTA). So, I appreciate the work the moderators do to keep this site up and operating by enforcing the rules.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-385
@bekah_cuddles It’s ok, I am prone to taking things personally when tagged so I’m sorry about that. Not the best quality to have as a mod.
Hey all, the purpose of this discussion is to call out the abhorrent behavior of a member here trying to entrap pros with sexual requests and possibly making false profiles using their likeness on non-platonic sites. If you want to discuss your objection to the rule regarding pros not being allowed to have an OnlyFans or being a sex worker outside the site, you are welcome to make a discussion of your own about it and you can link that discussion here. I just want to stop this thread from getting off topic any more than it has because this is not the place for it. Thank you.
What, are you telling me there are a subset of guys who make it their mission to piss and moan about pro cuddlers on here? Wow I never would have thunk that what a surprise!
*chortle
Thank you, @Charlie_Bear for all you do. Your presence here is greatly appreciated, we know your heart is in this community. You're definitely NOT a Stormtrooper!
@Charlie_Bear And certainly not a mindless one!
@bekah_cuddles There are a lot of apps that you can use to record phone calls as well. Demanding a phone call from a stranger though is very off putting and creepy behavior.
@AllAboutSoul @achetocuddle Haha thank you. I guess I’d rather be a stormtrooper than an Battle Droid 🤓
Roger Roger! 😅
@sunnysideup and @bekah_cuddles : please be careful with recording phone calls, it can be against the law in some states without direct permission of BOTH/ALL parties. And depending on the state(s), it could actually be against federal law, too.
Not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with this comment but from the very first sentence, it seems to have been written in bad faith, so let me just stop you right there and retract this little message of yours. [Shake49]
@AllAboutSoul Did not know, thank you!
@Charlie_Bear You seem like a great mod! Keep it up
Let’s put this thread back on track
Wow interesting as a professional I can say that I don't have a only.fans but to think that this website would be mad if you had a side Hussle and that someone would report you just because you don't wanna cuddle them that's is the epitome of misogyny once again I question why I'm on here or even a pro because it's seems like some y'all can't respect a woman's personal life also my prices are cheaper then other woman in my area I don't offer weird services yet I never get any bookings wanna know the difference between me and those woman ... It's not hard to quess anyone this forum post been really 👀 interesting 🤔 (misogyny ,racism,colorism ,fat phobia,trans phobia,ageism ) seems to be a thing going here if you truly care about ppl and cuddling I think the owner of the site should site down with a group of diverse ppl and think about ironing out the policy's better so some ppl don't abuse it and try to hurt other's who are just trying to make ends meet
@DeathbyChocolat my post about halfway down the first page of this thread includes a relevant quote from the site owner which you may find interesting.
@CuddleDuncan the problem is that policy isn't matching that comment. I know they're still discussing the policies, which is why I'm waiting on the deactivating currently to see what comes of said discussions, but words of support only go so far if they are contradicted by actions.