@bobadevotee I’ll not too familiar with MySpace but if it’s not hard to implement, let’s hopefully get it added to the site
Yeah pple should have to submit their id, address, and information and other method. Then me and jova can watch them. lol
@bobadevotee the site is never going to do any of the things you suggest or might hope for. The reason is very simple: to do so would be complete madness. It would expose the site to a weight of legal liabilities it could not possibly bear.
The attitude of the site is this. CC offers a service to independent professionals. If professionals want to purchase that service, they can. Your phone company doesn't vet people before they are allowed to call you, and neither will CC.
People who make duplicate accounts are usually re-banned very quickly. I know of several cases when the new accounts were completely blank and never interacted with anybody in any way, and the site still discovered them and re-banned them. In the end of the day there is nothing that can be done to prevent bad actors from creating a new account: it's simply a matter of technical expertise.
CC, as a business, is very small. It's just two people. For the first eight or ten years of its existance it had no income and was paid for by the founders. For the next couple of years or so it was loss-making. Its ethos remains one of enthusiast cuddling: the whole professional and money thing is, in conceptual terms, a sideline. Even though in practical terms it's a big deal.
The underlying principle of the site is that everybody is welcome: anybody can need a cuddle, and everybody should have a chance to find one. Requiring financial information, for example, immediately excludes people who don't have access to such things. It would require a radical change in the moral stance and purpose of the site to make a change like that, aside from the legal and business issues. And almost nobody needs a cuddle more than than the people who write the horrible messages. Every ban, necessary and even desirable as it may be, is heartbreaking.
(I don't have any position in or connection with the site, but I have studied it closely. Much of what I've written above has previously been posted on the forum by the founders.)
Seperately, I am persistently mystified at the resiliance and patience of the women on this site. Their determination to give the bad actors the benefit of the doubt is extraordinary.
@bobadevotee I was using the example of Wyzant since that is who you used, not taking it too literally. And both Craigslist and Facebook marketplace do have paid advertising that does require taking your information - my point still stands that they are advertising services, like CC, and not employers, like Wyzant.
I don't think you quite understand what is actually involved in getting meaningful blocks in place to stop banned members from being able to return. It's not a simple one time fix but a continuous on going effort that requires either CC staff to constantly oversee or them to outsource, which costs money. In addition to that, in them doing so they are taking on added liability should something go wrong with a member that has been "verified". If a pro is assaulted by a client that slips through the cracks or cons their way through the system, CC could then be legally liable - a prospect NO company in their right mind is going to take on without proper precautions in place, which is additional expenses and probably necessitate transitioning pros to contractors rather than clients.
CC admin have repeatedly stated that they want this site to remain open and accessible for members to join as anonymously as possible because it's a big hindrance for many in the community. They have stated they have no intentions of adding road blocks to the joining process that would make members feel like their privacy is at risk. Since this site caters to both enthusiasts and pros, and not just pros, I don't see that changing any time soon.
It would be a good idea to back read the dozen or so threads on this topic and the site suggestions thread to get a better understanding of the full picture. I truly do understand how frustrating and dangerous the open system can be, but that's the nature of sites like these until we as a society start to make major changes and education on Internet safety and consent in general improves.
🤦🏽♀️ unsolicited advice much
There’s many roads to a solution that won’t compromise the integrity or open access system of a site. It’s just a matter of finding one that works.
The liability clauses & fear mongering mentioned above are a bit of an over-reach considering pro’s can easily assault a client as well and a client still wouldn’t be able to hold the site “liable” for having engaged with said registered “pro.” If client info were retained, legal jargon and TOS contracts could easily absolve the site of liability as it relates to both parties irrespective of the information taken. Every online company that verifies and compiles user information isn’t suddenly pledging their allegiance to a safety-risk paradigm.
The underlying issue is maintaining open access which is integral to growth. Up there with safety it’s a balancing act but again, one with viable alt solutions when hashed out.
@Runawaycuddles - I wasn't lumping him in with the rest of the community. I'm not sure why people took it that way. I meant that I hear about behavior like that way more on this site than any dating site.
@Mike403 I think the point @Runawaycuddles was making is the assumption that anyone indulging in any sort of abberant behavior is mentally unstable which is not the case and places a stigma on those with mental illness. And I agree with her. Sometimes people doing evil things are just evil.
@Mike403 what @BoomerSpooner said. People like to blame bad behavior of any kind on mental illness which feeds into entirely incorrect and unjust stigma that people like me with mental illness are forced to deal with every day because society is too lazy to just call a a spade a spade and deal with the fact some people are just dicks🤦🏼
@Runawaycuddles - I'm sorry. I sometimes talk without thinking. I was going to remove my comment but it looks like a mod already did that.
@bobadevotee - I'm so sorry for the crap you've had to tolerate, not just from this one poster, but throughout your life. Reading the things you've talked about having to endure at the hands of men without morals hurts my heart and it infuriates me that people can treat other people like that.
As to the subject being discussed...I agree with @CuddleDuncan that the site will probably never implement a system that requires users to provide financial info or jump through verification hoops. However, there are definitely ways that more safety could be put into place to protect ladies and some wouldn't even be that hard to implement.
For example, one simple addition that I'd love to see (and would even help implement as a software developer) would be an AI-driven content moderator that reads all private messages between the time they're sent and the time they're delivered. So in the case of the loser who sent you that vulgar message, in an ideal world, here's what would have happened: The message got sent. Before it was ever delivered to your inbox, it was read by an AI content moderator. The AI moderator would have flagged the message as violating CC's terms of service. It would have then blocked the message, automatically blocked that user's ability to send you any more messages, and temporarily suspended the person's account pending a live moderator reading the message to verify that the AI correctly flagged it, and then the live moderator would ban the user from the site, all without you ever having been subjected to it in the first place.
@Mike403 I understand that was not your intention.
A member reached out about the person in question and I banned the account.
Firstly sorry you've to deal with such verbal abuse, nobody deserves that.
Though I also want to say something about "I’ve been on lots of dating sites, social media, etc, and this is the only website where I get consistently negative and appalling messages like this."
While this doesn't in anyway justify it, I think the difference is probably that on one platform you're charging, which some men lose their mind over and of course that's an issue with them. Though if you're not charging on other platforms such as on dating ones, then it can in some ways explain why you don't get those kinds of messages there.
Although I too have gotten some really rude messages on dating platforms too, which was a time that I felt uninterested in giggity, giggity, though I still was hoping to find a relationship on dating sites with someone who felt the same. Though I'd get guys coming into my inbox arguing with me about it and telling me things like I'm being unrealistic and whatever other rude things they said. So all that to say if on a platform you've something not really recognized or accepted, then it is likely to garner such aggression. Although again, it is in no way our fault.
Some of them coming here also doesn't mean they know the first thing about what the platform is really about or care about learning. They probably read "cuddle" and think it's euphemism for something else, because either that's how they use it or because to them virtually every intimate touch needs to involve or be open to going elsewhere. And going elsewhere is in no way what this site is about. So now you add everything up and put a price on it, and they probably think you're doing something else and go off on you. Plus they have an agenda of trying to find someone to do inappropriate stuff with here and when they see you're not with it, they take that anger on you too. Which is utterly unacceptable.
@bobadevotee
"I clearly told him the reason I didn’t want to is because he sent me a booking proposal without even saying “hi”, much less reading my profile and following my REQUIRED guidelines for any client I take."
Yeah, really toxic people hate to be told they are wrong or might have gotten something wrong. Instead of acting like a normal adult human and doing better, they lose it and go off on people.
Hi bobadevotte, I understand your frustration with the type of guy you described....I can't speak for those.. Just remember tho just because most guys act that way not every guy will be. It's a common thing ladies are hesitant to talk to anyone because of the ones that are gross .. Have a good day
@bobadevotee "if CC can take my info, they can take client info. Plain and simple. You don’t need to restructure the working relationship to do that."
I think the point is what CC is doing with your info and what you're expecting/wanting them to do with the clients' info. From the looks of it, CC is only taking yours out of necessity and to ensure they are paid. Nothing more, nothing less. Whereas when safety is brought into the equation as to why they should take such info, then it becomes something else that's resource, and time intensive. Furthermore, like others mentioned it can open them, CC, up to legal issues that they are in no way equipped to deal with or have the funds for it to do so.
As far as you and others saying you want to help donate, which I think is amazing, I don't think even that will begin to scratch the surface given that this is a very small niche. At that it's one that is deeply misunderstood and not respected by quite a bit of the male population as it stands. I say the male population, because it's been established already that men outnumber women on this platform and there quite a bit of men who to varying degrees, in my opinion, don't respect boundaries. Which in turn either pushes a lot of women away at one point or another, or turns them into becoming paid cuddlers. It's a cycle that I think will take and require a lot on an ongoing basis to decrease. With the quality supply and demand not being high and consistent enough either, I don't think this platform is equipped to handle all that. Also I do know that some require an identification of some sort prior to meeting and it seems that on your profile you require it, which is good and a way some use to help them feel safer. It is also ran by volunteer moderators.
So on this site like many others we are largely responsible for our own safety.
@KingsportCuddle
"For example, one simple addition that I'd love to see (and would even help implement as a software developer) would be an AI-driven content moderator that reads all private messages between the time they're sent and the time they're delivered. So in the case of the loser who sent you that vulgar message, in an ideal world, here's what would have happened: The message got sent. Before it was ever delivered to your inbox, it was read by an AI content moderator. The AI moderator would have flagged the message as violating CC's terms of service. It would have then blocked the message, automatically blocked that user's ability to send you any more messages, and temporarily suspended the person's account pending a live moderator reading the message to verify that the AI correctly flagged it, and then the live moderator would ban the user from the site, all without you ever having been subjected to it in the first place."
Editing to* respond to @KingsportCuddle , sorry I got distracted and posted without responding to your comment.
I think that seems like a good idea, especially if used on the forum instead. So that * it frees up moderators to focus more on other more urgent tasks. Although it may also be faulty and that might require dealing with. I've seen people complaining about FB putting them through similar issues and falsely flagging their posts and such using AI*. *Which is a concern I have with it, though if the cons outweigh the pros, I can see it potentially being beneficial. *
Also* with using it in messaging, I think there may be privacy concerns and implications with it to have an AI monitoring people's messages, especially if things with it go haywire. Though, I'll tag @Mark to see if this might pique his interest and if he wants to share what he thinks about it.
@Lovelight - Absolutely, thanks for sharing your thoughts! I think it would be a good thing for both private messages and forums though the implementation might have to be different:
If I send a private message to someone, I'm not expecting the recipient to read it the instant I send it. So there's a natural built-in buffer period where the writer's content could be reviewed without any feeling of disruption whatsoever. However, with a forum, when I post something, I would naturally assume it would appear automatically without delay, plus there are dozens of live members who act as filters when something inappropriate is written. That said, I could see it being useful in both cases.
You definitely bring up a valid point when it comes to privacy implications/concerns. But I would content that when I signed up for CuddleComfort, that I'm agreeing that they have the right to monitor my messages on their platform in any reasonable way they see fit especially as it pertains to protecting the community as a whole. I'm sure that verbiage could be added to the terms and conditions and/or privacy policy that would sufficiently protect CC from backlash from disgruntled users who don't like the idea of AI scanning their messages. Besides, human moderators have the right to scan any message that's been flagged at any time.
Another valid point is the possibility of AI getting it wrong. That's why I personally think if such a system were put in place, the AI shouldn't have the power to ban anyone - only to block messages from being delivered and to flag human moderators who would then verify that the AI got it right or wrong. While I did initially suggest that the AI could place the user in a pending suspended state, I'm now thinking it should only have the power to block message it deems harmful and to flag humans to review the decisions it makes. Or if we wanted to make things easier on volunteer moderators, maybe we give the AI the ability to suspend accounts depending on the AI's level of confidence that a rule has been violated. In the case of the example @bobadevotee shared, an AI would be smart enough to instantly tell that the vulgar message she got was in clear violation of the TOS.
But however the exact details got implemented (even if version 1 of the filter were imperfect and needed to be iteratively improved), I think any effort to make girls feel safer on here and to shield them from sexually aggressive people and private messages is time well spent.
@KingsportCuddle Although I gotta add to my 'forum AI moderation' comment, if it's used on the forum, then that might actually create a reverse, for a lack of a better word, "bystander effect". Meaning people might not report problematic posts or comments much because they think the AI will handle it and they might not know the limitations of said AI. Also I don't think that the moderators can and do spend all day reading the posts to catch problematic comments. So they rely mostly or solely on us reporting said issues. Then in that case, those comments may slip through the cracks or stay there for long, which may in turn either turn people away from the site or upset them, because they feel it isn't being dealt with. This might not be the case though and I may be wrong about it.
It appears that as I was writing this you responded to me. So I'll read your response to my previous comment and respond to you sometime.
Y’all, it doesn’t really open you to legal issues just to collect info the purposes of being able to enforce perma bans. Lots of forums, servers, etc do this. I’ve been in Discord servers that required identity verification, and any lawyer would laugh in someone’s face if they tried to hold a Discord server mod liable for anything I did. Shoot, I’ve even been in Facebook groups where mods wouldn’t approve you to join unless they verified your identity first. It’s a very common safety measure.
There’s also sites like Couchsurfing which for many years was 100% free and had identity verification. They only started charging recently. Point is, I could go on and on. There’s many examples, and I don’t see any court cases or liability happening with any of them. Lots of sites have a “verified user” option that doesn’t land them in hot water. If someone is trying to hire a pro, they’re going to be using money, so they can get verified with a credit card or something. It’s not an equity issue (just use an ID instead of a credit card if you don’t have one), it’s a “make sure this isn’t the dude that spammed hateful threatening messages just the other day” issue. On other sites with verified user options (not mandatory), I find more people will opt in anyways because being verified tends to make you more appealing to other users.
I as a pro could not get away with this because if I said some insane shit and got banned, or robbed a client and got banned, I couldn’t make a new account. I’d be found out the second my financial information and real name got checked. It’s unfair that clients can get away with doing these things and very unbalanced.
I see lots of excuses to hand wave away this chronic problem and no solutions. You can’t give some vague solution like “idk I guess when all of society gets better, this will stop”, you have to actually do something about it.
@KingsportCuddle excellent idea. I love your AI driven concept.
The subject of collecting the personal information of clients for verification purposes has been argued for and against in numerous previous threads. The solution to end the debate is really simple.
Whoever wants this feature is welcome to start their own cuddling website and implement whatever degree of verification they want - anything from requiring a state issued ID, credit card information, and/or biometric identification.
There have been numerous people asking for this feature who have explained how easy it would be to implement, and how it would not create any legal liability. I personally think they are wrong but that is just my opinion and I will readily admit they may be right and I may be wrong. So why hasn’t anyone done it? If a verification system is such a popular idea, people should flock to the new website.
Anyone who wants this feature bad enough can go to Fiverr.com and hire a website developer for a couple hundred dollars. In just a few days you can have your own cuddling site with whatever rules and verification system you want and be subject to whatever legal obligations come with it. I am not a lawyer so I don’t know what those obligations are but a lot of people here are adamant they are no big deal.
"If I send a private message to someone, I'm not expecting the recipient to read it the instant I send it. So there's a natural built-in buffer period where the writer's content could be reviewed without any feeling of disruption whatsoever. However, with a forum, when I post something, I would naturally assume it would appear automatically without delay, plus there are dozens of live members who act as filters when something inappropriate is written. That said, I could see it being useful in both cases."
I think it depends on how long the AI would take to "scan", not sure if the proper terminology, the messages. If it's say more than 10 minutes before it's delivered to the person, then that could create frustration and add up. Also another thing is how often would the AI do that and for how long. You brought up the moderators seeing messages anyway when reported, that's if and really only if they are reported. So there's some sense of privacy and feeling like you're really just talking to the person you're conversing with. Rather than a third party, the AI, constantly or for sometime monitoring your conversations. Some of us also especially enthusiasts like to have some conversations prior to trying to meet. Or we might just like talking with people and not necessarily looking to meet. So there's some expectation of the person being able to receive our messages instantly and the delay just being about how available they are to respond to us. However, if said and other issues can be avoided, I think this could be helpful, especially for pro cuddlers.
"You definitely bring up a valid point when it comes to privacy implications/concerns. But I would content that when I signed up for CuddleComfort, that I'm agreeing that they have the right to monitor my messages on their platform in any reasonable way they see fit especially as it pertains to protecting the community as a whole. I'm sure that verbiage could be added to the terms and conditions and/or privacy policy that would sufficiently protect CC from backlash from disgruntled users who don't like the idea of AI scanning their messages. Besides, human moderators have the right to scan any message that's been flagged at any time."
Like I mentioned above, they only really get to see or only see when messages are reported. As opposed to indiscriminately scanning. Though I think it could work if it's update in the terms and conditions like you said. At the end of the day, it's really up to the site owner(s) how they wish to run it and as long as they have that in place, people can agree or disagree with it and move accordingly.
"Another valid point is the possibility of AI getting it wrong. That's why I personally think if such a system were put in place, the AI shouldn't have the power to ban anyone - only to block messages from being delivered and to flag human moderators who would then verify that the AI got it right or wrong. While I did initially suggest that the AI could place the user in a pending suspended state, I'm now thinking it should only have the power to block message it deems harmful and to flag humans to review the decisions it makes. Or if we wanted to make things easier on volunteer moderators, maybe we give the AI the ability to suspend accounts depending on the AI's level of confidence that a rule has been violated. In the case of the example @bobadevotee shared, an AI would be smart enough to instantly tell that the vulgar message she got was in clear violation of the TOS."
Agreed. Similarly I brought up using it on the forum may lead to people not reporting as often and not understanding the AI's limitations. Though on second thought, I think on the forum it could just or primarily be a tool available to the moderators to help them. So the public doesn't have to know and if it works like you suggested I can see it being helpful. It's just that previously when I read it, I pictured it being next to comments like a badge lol. Although I don't think it's necessary and to do so may lead to the issues I mentioned previously about people not reporting much if they know it's being used, it may still be helpful to mention it in the terms and conditions somehow.
"But however the exact details got implemented (even if version 1 of the filter were imperfect and needed to be iteratively improved), I think any effort to make girls feel safer on here and to shield them from sexually aggressive people and private messages is time well spent."
Definitely!
My thoughts are if I was part of several different websites and I was having a problem with one in particular I would just leave the site that I was having a problem with
I think with this ongoing logic , if I have issues with my elected officials , then I should get a visa and go to another country to live . If you are having issues w a dating app, just avoid communication and just go to another one.
That's what it sounds like. Regular users have every right to make demands and requests imo just like the admin have the right to decide whether or not to implement those requests.
"Y’all, it doesn’t really open you to legal issues just to collect info the purposes of being able to enforce perma bans."
Keyword being "really" meaning there's a possibility and the site I think is operating under "better safe than sorry" model in that regard.
"...They only started charging recently. Point is, I could go on and on. There’s many examples, and I don’t see any court cases or liability happening with any of them..."
Issues not happening doesn't mean it wouldn't or it can't. Some people, companies or platforms may do certain things and get away with it. Others may do the same and it catches up to them sooner or later. Those people may also have a team of lawyers or the necessary knowledge to navigate that. While others might not. The context is also important, like I'd mentioned before, this is a small niche that's widely misunderstood and quite a bit disrespected. If things go wrong and someone's privacy especially an enthusiast's gets out, then that could open up the site to issues. More than that, it may deter a lot of people who are well intentioned otherwise from joining the site if they are required to do so. Some people are from cultures that this is heavily looked down on, some may have jobs that they are more careful with their privacy and who they want to know them, others might be from abusive homes or something and need that sense of privacy. All those people have valid concerns and it may deter them from joining the site. However, there might be a way to implement your idea while also overcoming challenges like that. Perhaps for one it could be required of people who want to book people who require the level of 'protection/safety' measures you're seeking. Though doing that may also lead to other issues such as you getting much less supply and other pros getting to take on more. Although that night not really be an issue.
@Lovelight Depending on the system, AI scanning messages would be very quick. For example, I assume you're familiar with ChatGPT (as most people are by now). I have ChatGPT Plus and just sent it a message saying:
Let's test your content moderation skills. Below is a message one user sent to another earlier today as well as CuddleComfort's forum policy. Please tell me if the message violates the TOS, and if so, explain how. Thanks!
[Message...] [Policy...]
Within 30 seconds, here was ChatGPT's reply:
The message from User A to User B clearly violates the Terms of Service (TOS) outlined in the policy. The message can be considered an offense in multiple ways:
Personal Attacks: The message is explicitly rude, insulting, and constitutes a personal attack on User B. The language used is derogatory and demeaning.
Adult Content: The message includes sexually explicit language, which is against the policy that prohibits explicit adult content.
Language: The message contains offensive language, violating the rule that asks users to keep the use of offensive language to a minimum.
Based on these violations, the message should be removed according to the TOS, and appropriate actions should be taken against User A, as stipulated by the forum's policies.
AI and large language models have gotten very sophisticated within the past year. A system like this would likely catch 90% or more of offensive messages which would be a vast improvement over the current status quo. You're right that some thought would have to be put behind how it would work in forums and a possible "bystander effect". Some of it may come down to trial and error "let's see how well this works, meh, this works good but let's change this, okay now let's try that" kind of thing. But even an imperfect system that gets better after a few versions would give the community the feeling that CC takes protecting its members seriously and is proactively working to improve conditions for its pro cuddlers (and the entire community). Thanks again for your thoughtful remarks!
@KingsportCuddle I was thinking that as well. And also suggesting to take it a step farther. Why not automate the deletion of the account that posted the message?
"Depending on the system, AI scanning messages would be very quick. For example, I assume you're familiar with ChatGPT (as most people are by now). I have ChatGPT Plus and just sent it a message saying:..."
I'm somewhat familiar with it. That's awesome.
"Within 30 seconds, here was ChatGPT's reply:"
That ain't too bad, although like I'd mentioned my question or the question would then be how long to use it on each profile. Moreso, whether to use this just between pros and clients, or for enthusiasts to enthusiasts too. 30 second delay for say a few days ain't much. Though if it's an ongoing thing, I think it can lead to a compounding frustration or people being more in a rush to talk elsewhere or not feel as comfortable to just converse on the platform, because it say constantly adds 'approval/moderation' time that is beyond their control and given that we are used to instant messaging, it may not be well received or require some adjusting to. Plus busy lives when every minute might really count.
Perhaps one of the ways it can be implemented for one is on new accounts for a period of time that's figured out based of some human and/or AI based pattern recognition... as to when to discontinue said moderation on this accounts.
Plus it may also be helpful to connect it to profile descriptions too, to watch for potential problematic keywords. It wouldn't always catch it because people can kinda try to get clever and misspell things, though that too could potentially be tackled. Plus we, the members, can report them when we see them.
So I think it's like you said a matter of trial and error of figuring out how to best implement it.
"AI and large language models have gotten very sophisticated within the past year. A system like this would likely catch 90% or more of offensive messages which would be a vast improvement over the current status quo. You're right that some thought would have to be put behind how it would work in forums and a possible "bystander effect". Some of it may come down to trial and error "let's see how well this works, meh, this works good but let's change this, okay now let's try that" kind of thing. But even an imperfect system that gets better after a few versions would give the community the feeling that CC takes protecting its members seriously and is proactively working to improve conditions for its pro cuddlers (and the entire community). Thanks again for your thoughtful remarks!"
Indeed. I think it's worth trying.
. . .
"Perhaps one of the ways it can be implemented for one is on new accounts for a period of time that's figured out based of some human and/or AI based pattern recognition... as to when to discontinue said moderation on this accounts."
To add to my point above, I'd say a period of time of active participation. So someone can't just create an account, logo out and wait til the 'probation' period is over to start messaging.
@Minestrone101 - Any user can make any request of any business. But if I were to go to McDonalds (I don’t) and repeatedly ask for a pizza I am probably wasting my time. My suggestion above was not being sarcastic or trying to drive anyone away but rather trying to empower anyone who feels strongly enough about the topic to give it a try.
Making websites is cheap and easy today. Getting people to visit the website and to sign up for its services is a whole lot harder. If someone thinks this would really work it would be easy to test.