I don’t agree with the notion “if you don’t like it, leave.” While leaving is certainly an option, as is the development of other similar sites, why lead a user-base away in light of attempts at making the existing one safer. The whole point of an open forum in discussing real issues that women who make-up the backbone of the site I might add, are experiencing, is to address the issues they might be facing on said site and figure out how best to handle it without compromising the integrity of the site at hand. If every woman on the site were to leave because of this issue, I don’t think there would be a woman here because I think we’ve all kind of experienced it. No one size fits all approach is expected but having the conversation is fundamental to figuring out what will. Obviously if the conversation has been repeatedly discussed by other female members here, a quality solution has yet to be found so further discussion is necessary, not something to be evaded by bidding everyone who raises awareness on it farewell. I mean, that might be the attitude of some but from my experience thus far, I don’t think it’s shared by those who’ve made the site what it is today.
@Sooson - Thanks for your thoughts. The only reason I wouldn't automate the deletion of an account based on AI is that AI might incorrectly flag something. It's amazingly smart but imperfect. I think the best we could hope for is having AI temporarily suspend an account based on a possible infraction but let a human make the final determination to send the user to Banned Camp.
@Lovelight - That's a good idea to also allow it to read user profiles. It could flag messages for review if it thinks the user is saying things that violate the TOS. That could potentially get a lot of the bad actors off the site faster.
In terms of workflow, my proposal would be something like this (obviously with the understanding that trial and error as to exact implementation may be needed):
User Profiles: When a user creates/updates a profile, it would immediately save and be available, but on save this would trigger an AI to scan it for red flags (sexual content, non-pros asking for money, or other TOS violations). If the AI thinks it's found violations, it would change the profile status to "Under Review" and send a message to a moderator who would take appropriate action (asking the user to make changes, ban a bad actor, etc.)
Private Messages: When a user sends a private message (to answer your question, I'm think all messages not just between pros and clients), as far as they know, it's delivered like normal. But behind the scenes, it goes from their outbox to a queue. An AI quickly checks the message for flags. Since it can do it within seconds, it won't have any negative impact from a time perspective. If the AI throws no flags, it moves from the queue to the recipient's inbox. If there are flags, it stays in the queue and a moderator is notified so they can manually check the message. (Alternatively, if there flags where the AI is confident that the message violates the TOS the user account could be temporarily suspended pending review, though I'd be okay with or without the auto suspension feature.)
Forum Posts: Users would be able to post like usual where their messages show up as soon as they're written. But like profiles, AI would scan each new post and if it sees red flags, it would trigger a flag similar to the way a user can click "Flag". If the AI is very confident of a flagrant violation, it could both flag it and temporarily prevent the message from being visible pending review. That way, we're not holding up messages and frustrating users but also quickly suppressing any obviously problematic ones.
I'm trying to remember when I first signed up whether there's already a probationary period where you can't just sign up and immediately start contacting people. If not, that's not a bad idea - I've been a number of sites do this to slow down trolls.
Inbox me his name I'll teach him some manners
@PrettyLuv - My comment was not meant as “love it or leave it” but rather “if it is important and someone thinks it would work, then seriously give it a try”.
Where I used to work I had a sign in my office which read “Without data, you are just another person with an opinion.” We can continue to debate how easy it would be to implement verification, how many users would be willing to provide personal data and how effective the verification system would be at protecting women. But regardless of what anyone thinks (myself included) it is still just an opinion until someone actually tries it.
I personally don’t think a new website with verification would work but I have been wrong before and I may be wrong on this too. My suspicion is that many pros would open accounts on the new platform but few clients would follow them to the new platform.
I genuinely value your posts and opinions but I respectfully disagree about women being the backbone of this site. I don’t think men are the backbone either, I think it is the mix of both.
I was seriously trying to be “solution oriented” in my post and encouraging someone passionate about the topic to give it a shot and see what happens. Otherwise, we will all probably continue to debate this topic for years to come without any progress.
This is insane to debate. We don’t own this website, the rules and decisions are not ours to decide. The owner decides, this isn’t public property. There’s no “rights” here, it’s private property. Paying a usage fee isn’t ownership. Membership isn’t ownership. It’s private property and we are guests. We either abide or leave. Anyone who has better ideas is free to implement on a site they own. Seek legal counsel.
@JohnR1972 Thanks for clarifying.
@Jova114 I think he got banned. *hew
Ohh yeah!
Zomg, I think I may actually have a weird idea. What if they scrape the site from time to time for IPs. That way it comes up as a list and they don’t have to hunt. That would catch all the reincarnated predators, forum doubles and trolls. Well, not all but it would make jobs easier.
Edit: I don’t know if it’s been said or in place. Somebody probably already thought of it.
@cocoabomb While I understand the point about legal ownership and control residing with the site's proprietor, I think it's important to consider the concept of stakeholder involvement. Just like NFL players may not own the league, they are crucial stakeholders whose safety and well-being directly influence the success and integrity of the NFL. Therefore, they have been actively involved in discussions around player safety, rule changes, and other conditions that directly affect them.
Similarly, professional cuddlers, and even regular users, aren't just "guests" on this platform. They are integral stakeholders. They contribute to the site's vibrancy, appeal, and its revenue. Therefore, it stands to reason that they should have some say in its operation, especially on matters directly affecting their safety and physical/emotional well-being. Just like NFL players advocate for safer playing conditions, users of this platform have every right to advocate for safer online conditions, even if they aren't the legal owners of the platform. Offering constructive criticism to improve safety measures is not just the right of stakeholders, it benefits the platform as a whole by making it more secure, reliable, and more attractive to new and existing users. It's a win-win for everyone involved.
@stormydaycuddle - It's definitely possible to track user's IPs and to block users based on their IP address. There are ways around it (VPNs, logging in using ones phone one time and one's home internet another, etc.) but there are plenty of sites who use that kind of strategy. It's just a matter of CC deciding whether saying they're recording people's IPs would scare some people off or not. But otherwise, it's certainly doable from a technical perspective.
@KingsportCuddle Yeah, I think that could work well. Though I think the inbox wait period would need to be adjusted, every message waiting ~30 seconds I think can add up. So I'm not really sure how I feel about that, though I'm open to trying and seeing how it goes. Maybe it can be delivered as normal and scanned simultaneously? Or after a 'probation' period users can go without it, unless there's a violation found thereafter then it is back to it or whatever other action needed. All in all it sounds helpful.
@KingsportCuddle Stakeholder isn’t a shareholder, the site owner owes its users nothing, not even a voice, like these threads. This site is a privilege. This is a privately owned site. Being on this site is a privilege. There’s no “rights” here for anyone but the owner. The owner is able to shut down it at any time. The owner decides the rules. I didn’t say to leave, I suggested starting their own site. That’s their right. Create competition. Create the safe site they want. Let them take on the immense legal responsibility. Let them fund it. That’s their right. It’s a win-win.
@Lovelight - Absolutely, I think with some initial adjusting, monitoring, and fine tuning, it has potential.
@cocoabomb putting aside the terminology being used there, I think the main point many are trying to make is to give feedback and letting the site owner(s) have the final say on it. There's even a forum post dedicated to feedback on ways the site can improve, so firstly it's safe to assume that the owner wants and cares about constructive user feedback.
He doesn't owe us anything, though it doesn't mean he's not open to considering and interested in hearing what we've to say. "Don't like it, leave." kind of approach doesn't allow for improving a platform and making it better for everyone. If more people, especially women, feel safer to be here it can help everyone and if more pros feel safer to stay longer it can help the site better generare income which it can use for more improvements or whatever it needs. Along with potentially at least buying everyone helping to run it a cup of coffee. Some of us appreciate what @Mark and whoever else on his team have made possible for us. We want to see it improve and be better. I don't know about you, though I'm in no rush and have little to no interest to packup and create a competition for it. Because I want this to succeed and reach it's full potential provided he's on board with it, which it appears to me he is.
A few years ago there actually was a post titled "Suggestions and ways this website can be improved" which garnered quite a bit of discussion* and feedback. I remember Mark being quite receptive and willing to hear what we all had to say there.
Though if there's delay with certain improvements or there are certain things he's not doing or taking on, it's not my place to judge as to why that is, and I respect that he has the final say on how his platform is run.
Eeek. Bleak and blunt but I do understand it. @cocoabomb Bedtime. Night all. 🤗
Sleep well @stormydaycuddle 🤗
@stormydaycuddle - I don’t know the details but I am pretty sure IP addresses are used for catching 2nd accounts and banned members attempting to open new accounts. That is one of the reasons why the site blocks VPNs, because they hide real IP addresses.
Reported and reviewed. Removing second paragraph just to avoid providing info on how one could potentially return to the site after being banned. [CharlieBear]
VPNs can be changed on a whim. So either way it’s hard. @JohnR1972 that’s the nature of them.
@bobadevotee Im sorry this happened to you… there are ways to prevent this. Even if it’s just having the system screen messages or making a form for people to message you. I’m thankful for the clients that follow the rules and have basic human decency. That’s why their lives aren’t completely in shambles like the creeps.
@KingsportCuddle I really love your idea. I hope you post it in the feedback forum. I think it’s excellent and another plus side to it is how women would no longer have to be the ones blamed or targeted or retaliated against for not responding to a derogatory comment. The AI bot would auto take care of it for her. So the person can redirect their anger to a bot instead.
@JohnR1972 you’re right, men and women are the backbone of the site. I meant it more in the sense of who would be the ones leaving in that scenario which would largely be women, in which case the men left would likely wane in response.
@Jova114 he deleted his account. And probably made another one to go harass women with. It’s pretty easy to evade bans here, unfortunately.
@MissPamelaV are there integrated forms in this site that users need to fill out before messaging me? Or is that an idea you’re suggesting CC implement. Might not be understanding you correctly
Women absolutely are the backbone of this site.
Most men looking for cuddles refuse to cuddle other men. If all women left tomorrow, this site would collapse.
If all men left tomorrow, there’s still plenty of women who would cuddle other women. We aren’t as picky about gender because it’s not an arousal thing for us. Cannot tell you how many men have admitted to me they want a female cuddler because they only will cuddle people they find sexually attractive.
In fact, an all women cuddling site sounds like utopia. Lower risk of being assaulted, as female on female assault is very rare. Just pure connections. Even when I’ve cuddled lesbians, they’re never threatening or as arousal focused as men. It’s just nice and innocent.
But I digress. Women are the backbone. Most men would leave this site if it was a male only cuddle space.
@bobadevotee I'm not going to get into arguing about who the backbone of the site is, it’s a pointless argument.
You are correct that if there were no women on here, most of the men will leave as well, as there would be another site where their needs would be better met.
However, I’m also quite sure that if this was a woman only site, many of the women will leave too. Most of the active women members are pros, and there just isn’t that much demand for paid cuddle sessions between women. There is some, but not so much to support the number of women pros we have. Without the possibility of getting a reliable paycheck, most pros will find other ways to make a living and give up this gig.
It requires both men and women for this site to work. Both are equally important.
The issue is that women have the impetus to leave due to the problems raised above where men don’t. So although it may be pointless to decide who’s of greater importance to the survival of the site, one is factually and more decidedly under greater direct threat than the other, especially in cases where ultimatums are planted with no solution yet reached.
Maybe a sidestep could be to have a discord channel or FB group and have it as invite only. Then folks can be disqualified or vetted stringently as desired.
@bobadevotee so sorry you get abuse directed at you. You deserve to be treated with respect, especially as a woman.
I haven't cuddled with anyone yet but get plenty of requests, most are from fellow men. (re-uploaded the pics with the usernames removed in accordance with forum rules)
Reported and reviewed. Removing images. If you re-add, please remove the avatars as well so there is nothing identifiable. Thank you. [CharlieBear]
All I'm going to say is due to having my driver's license info stolen when a website was hacked in the past, I would not stay if I was required to have a picture or that info stored on the site's servers. I'd be happy to show it individually to those I cuddle either in person or in some way that couldn't be copied. Someone was using a photocopy of an expired driver's license of mine to try to open up a bunch of credit cards, purchase a car and more. It lead to a call from a police department to me informing me of all these, a bunch of hard inquiries on my credit report (which only a few were removed for some reason), calls from various people, and me having to contact three credit bureaus to freeze my credit. I'm all for people being safe, and respectful, but I do not need cuddles so badly to the point that I would risk having that sensitive information stolen someday.
(Edit was just to remove a typo/extra word)
My PLP is a CSO and the level of audits, and security a company has to have to hold personal data long term is insane. Companies can’t keep your info on servers themselves a lot need 3rd party processing which doesn’t let the site itself have access to. It costs his company a ton to even hold non profit mailing list info through audits and security measures required by the government. So while it is a good idea I don’t think CC pulls enough in to afford it.
“The three points are number one it’s expensive to securely warehouse drivers licenses. As a result the site would take a ton of risk leaving them open to be sued into oblivion. Number two how do you go about validating it. Is it the same person? Who takes in the liability it takes to reference? If you pass it along to the cuddlers there’s even more privacy and liability in transferring it to a 3nd party in essence making the site a broker of private identity, so that’s sketch. The third is the barrier of entry which could kill the ecosystem.”
“All they can do is allow individuals to ask for ID”
Direct quote typed super fast because he talks fast forgive the typos and run on .
Edit: I think he actually made four points but I was scrambling to write it all. I got him into talking about his job so he’s still rattling off info but I figured I’d stop there for now.
@bobadevotee yes more suggestion to Cc site
@cocoabomb I agree 💯! Gotta love all the experts spending someone else’s money. Whether one thinks the site could be made safer or not is irrelevant unless you really want to monetize everything about CC. Pros would have to pay more, enthusiasts would have to pay more, and privacy would be sacrificed. If everyone was cool with that I am sure they would consider it, but I doubt that will happen. This is a two person company and as I understand it CC is not even their day job. So in lieu of that it really is about diligence and vetting.