The Erotic Highway
...by 30 minutes. I also got the email this morning. (I've let my premium status lapse for now.)
.
I, too have mixed feelings. Clearly, it's a attempt to accommodate an active COVID-19 world. But is this good or bad? It depends on the intentions of the users and how/if the site manages the process and the "content" of any video chats.
.
Pros:
- Used as a verification tool, a short video chat could be very useful in preventing some/most catfishing and scams. If a live, pretty girl chats you up, you have a much better sense that she is legit or not.
- Used to get around social distancing and closures of suitable M&G locations, it's also helpful to enable a virtual M&G IF that is your style. However, there are many SD's here who do not use, and do not like, the meet now-fuck later model. So for them, this may be either neutral or slight negative if SB's insist on a video chat before agreeing to BCD.
.
Cons:
- Used as a replacement for physical meetings, especially if sugar is expected, this is a disaster. And many POT SB's are creating or updating profiles to state they ONLY want an online arrangement (for now?). That's just bad. Really bad.
- Used to provide "content" for an online only arrangement, this could be just messy (no pun intended). It seems that SA has been trying very hard (again, no pun) to cast the site and service as a DATING service and NOT an adult content, or escort site. If they allow SB's to effectively become adult webcam models, their efforts to stay "clean" will fail. So, how will they prevent SB's from offering nudity or explicit content during a video chat? Will they monitor each chat like they try to monitor text message content to filter out P4P or escort-ish language or explicit images? That's the big question: Will chats be monitored and what are the acceptable standards for chat content? Finally, if chats are used salaciously, how will the SB collect allowance? Will SA also enable a peer-to-peer payment system (like Cashapp)? That seems very doubtful for reasons I won't go into here (but trust me on this, as digital payments is my expertise), although I'd bet they would LOVE to get their hands on actual sugar payment data between SD's and SB's.
.
So, time will tell, as always. But for me, I'll avoid unless asked, and if a POT insists, I'll only agree to a 2-5 minute chat for verification needs and, as in typed messages, avoid ALL p4p and quid pro quo discussions.
.
Life is good.
.
The Cat
If you use the same caution in video chats that you do in text chats, you wont' have any (well at least fewer) additional risks with getting your messages recorded and used for bad purposes. The rules of communicating ON THE SITE still apply:
.
1. No p4p or quid pro quo chat. Don't offer pay her for sex, don't reply or agree to getting sex from her for pay.
2. No salacious behaviors - don't ask for nudity, end the chat if nudity is offered. Don't talk about sexual preferences, role play, etc. If you must go near there, use words like affection and cuddling.
3. Keep it PG, and keep it focused on DATING (not fucking) and making new friends. If she asks about sugar, be vague about "helping with her life". Then suggest you'd like to connect through (anything not SA) to set up next steps.
.
Just don't do or say anything you wouldn't type in the message box.
.
Yes, you can be recorded, by the POT (who could be UC LE) as well as by SA. But that's not much more risky since the POT (and SA) already have your pics, profile and text messages. A vid (as opposed to pics and text) of you chatting up a hottie may be good enough to convince your SO that you're cheating, but you've already accepted that risk, haven't you? And cheating on your wife is not illegal, in most states. But if you keep your video chat PG-friendly, IMO it's not much more useful to LE. I doubt you'll be convicted for flirting with a 20-ish hottie.
.
Life is good.
.
The Cat