... I had to take time to think this through.
Here are my thoughts:
1. I did a wide search (1,000 miles and no filters) for "onlyfans" in profiles and got 22 hits. Most of them mentioned they had an OF account, one gave her OF account name, and one specified she did NOT have OF. The newest profile was 2 months old, the oldest was 5 years old. So,
2. It appears that mentioning OF is not a TOS violation in a profile.
3. Having and offering an OF account is not illegal and is not prostitution. It is, by it's nature, LEGAL sex work if the content is explicit. So I see offering OF as a platform to sell content, not an explicit (or implicit) P4P agreement.
4. There is a side discussion on the idea of a POT SB using her profile to promote her legal business. I think of strippers with profiles that name their club and invite SD's to meet her there. Is it a good strategy? What if she was a barista at Starbucks and asked SD's to come in for a latte? Legal - I think so. TOS violation - Not sure. Effective strategy to get more business - doubtful. Effective strategy to convert a POT SD into an arrangement - also doubtful.
5. Messages: We have all speculated, and with good reason - that SA monitors message content. This is probably a mix of automated message parsing for key words and phrases, and queuing flagged posts for human review.
6. So if that speculation is correct, it seems reasonable that SA could easily scan for the term "onlyfans" in every message. If they do, then the message PaPa Sweet received likely did not violate TOS even with the OF mention.
My conclusions:
- Probably not a TOS violation as posted.
- Could be a TOS violation if combined with any additional text about P4P, or advance cash requests, or requests for banking & other PII (Personally Identifiable Information).
- Probably not a successful strategy to get an arrangement with one or more SD's.
- Unknown if it is a violation of her OF TOS.
Life is good
The Cat