I received an email from Seeking this morning referring me, and all users, to their new Profile Approval Guidelines with very strict rules about what photos and text are allowed on the site. It is very restrictive. No blurred photos for your primary pic, no mention of sugar dating, etc. We all need to read it, and discuss the implications. Of course, not all of it is new, and we know they have only enforced many of the restrictions unevenly. For example, guys would get in trouble for mentioning a "sugar arrangement" while the girls can seemingly talk about the allowance they expect with little to no consequences. That may be coming to an end. Looking forward to your thoughts.
https://www.seeking.com/community-guidelines?xtor=-[DIGI-1730%20-%20Seeking%20-%20Approval%20Guidelines%20Notification%20-%20GM-AF%20(1)]--[www_seeking_com_community_guideline]-&bxid=[OTEwMDg1OTE5MzAxS0]--&spMailingID=24637671&spUserID=OTEwMDg1OTE5MzAxS0&spJobID=3021263930&spReportId=MzAyMTI2MzkzMAS2
-- Modified on 2/25/2025 10:45:32 AM
Thanks for sharing. I have yet to receive this email.
I suggest that all of us read the user guides using the link provided by Papa Sweet. It indeed appears much more restrictive than I recall.
A few items of note:
There is now a prohibition against primary pics where the subject is not wearing a shirt. This applies to men as well as women. There are a lot of guys posting shirtless pics (based on my observations using my "research" account).
There are now specific requirements that users must report certain potentially illegal activity to Seeking admin. This is significant as you could now lose your account for failing to act, which seems new to me.
The new specs for profile pics are tighter than ever. Please read them now.
The new profile text/content specs are also tighter than ever. Pay close attention to prohibited terms or phrases. Violating these requirements could equal instant ban.
The new "acceptable" phrase is: "romantic relationships." You cannot use the term "arrangement" in any way that implies compensation of any kind. Terms like FWB, mutually-beneficial, hinting at help with bills or expenses or costs, etc., are out.
They have revoked the implied (COVID-motivated) permission for POTs to offer online-only arrangements. In addition, offering or even mentioning an OF account will be prohibited as it constitutes using Seeking for "commercial" purposes.
Final warning about this page:
There is a link to "Download the Seeking App" which leads you to QR codes for Android and iPhone users. Note that the QR code for iPhone leads to a web-browser log in, while the Android code leads to the app in the Android app store. I have been using my iPhone to access Seeking using a Web Browser link I placed on my phone's desktop and placed in a group folder. It works well.
THERE IS NO SEEKING APP for iPhone. BUT: If you search the Apple App Store for "Seeking" you will see a listing for a "Seeking Arrangements" app that uses the old "SA" logo. This is FAKE SCAMMER app.
Life is good
The Cat 
The way I'm reading it they are not strictly banning the term 'arrangement' but 'arrangements involving companionship, dating, or intimacy in exchange for money, gifts, financial support, mentorship, or other valuable benefits.'
We'll see how they enforce this with both new and existing accounts.
I don't see anything on 'mutually beneficial' which is another code for these arrangements. Again, we shall seewhat happens
I doubt if most of us have any real difficulties with the photo restrictions, and honestly, i find them quite a refreshing improvement.
However, the Community Guidelines could be a real issue depending how you interpret them.
However, I don't see and prohibitions against on-line relationships, other than I believe they were generally frowned upon previously, and there is no mention of whether using terms such as NSA or FWB would not be allowed since they can convey meanings other than just financial.
But if you take some of the verbiage literally, when the guidelines referred to "use of services" to further blah, blah... and the examples of prostitution, etc., the suggestion is made that even "off platform" communications would have to observe these rules. Seems a girl could copy your texts discussing 'how much money you are offering for her to suck your dick' and then send it to Seeking with the complaint that you used the Seeking 'service' to immediately further your unsavory behavior LOL. Hopefully, it won't go that far.
Two thoughts on your post:
1. If I was asking one of my "corporate" attorneys from my old Fortune 100 employers, he or she would tell me to always interpret these rules as broadly as possible to ensure the greatest likelihood of staying in compliance. You just don't want to find yourself trying to defend something that could be considered in the "grey area."
2. Seeking can and does read, evaluate, and authenticate all messages sent within the site. However, Seeking has no valid method to authenticate screen caps or copy/paste text between uses off the site. The user who submits these can use any one of hundreds of programs to fake whatever messages they want. My assumption is that Seeking does not want to be an inadvertent facilitator of slander, nor do they want to empower a scammer. They probably fear getting sued for empowering a scammer almost as much as they fear getting investigated (again) by Law Enforcement for facilitating prostitution or sex trafficking.
Posted By: Euro-Guy
Re: The "Community Guideline" are the real meat of this email
I doubt if most of us have any real difficulties with the photo restrictions, and honestly, i find them quite a refreshing improvement.
However, the Community Guidelines could be a real issue depending how you interpret them.
However, I don't see and prohibitions against on-line relationships, other than I believe they were generally frowned upon previously, and there is no mention of whether using terms such as NSA or FWB would not be allowed since they can convey meanings other than just financial.
But if you take some of the verbiage literally, when the guidelines referred to "use of services" to further blah, blah... and the examples of prostitution, etc., the suggestion is made that even "off platform" communications would have to observe these rules. Seems a girl could copy your texts discussing 'how much money you are offering for her to suck your dick' and then send it to Seeking with the complaint that you used the Seeking 'service' to immediately further your unsavory behavior LOL. Hopefully, it won't go that far.
Life is good
The Cat
Let's just say I've been on both sides of the "off-platform" communications (texting) end of things and despite the points you mentioned about authentication, that do indeed accept screen shots - although I can't say how much weight they attribute to them. I suspect it may have to do with how credible they deem the source and essentially how it's presented to them.
One, I sent about getting get ripped off by a girl who came to my house and after getting her ppm immediately drove off., They claimed she would be banned, and although I noticed her profile was gone the next day, might be they received other complaints about her. The other, I may have had one glass of wine too much and texted a number of explicit sexual acts she might preform, for which I was punished by being required to watch a Seeking video about such things.
It doesn't take much effort browsing the ladies' profiles to find many which are in blatant violation of these Guidelines. I wonder if they will be required to change or not? What I can't figure out is why these newer more stringent rules are being adopted. I mean, it's us guys who pay big bucks to use Seeking, not the girls. If they chase enough of us off the site, aren't they shooting themselves in the foot? Also, many of the restrictions go way beyond what could constitute a legal problem for them, even despite the fact that Sesta/Fosta does not seem to be enforced. There is nothing illegal about adults explicitly offering adults sexual activity. As long as no compensation is implied.
Yeah it doesn't make good financial sense to screw with us guys like he is doing. Everyone knows we are there for pussy and bc of our 'advanced' age are going to have to pay for it! Gotta be the bimbo new wife of his causing this seemingly ill fated direction.
But, I do wonder why someone else hasn't setup a competing site unless there's more than meets the eye.
How many of us are never going to use the site again because of this?
Be honest.......
Or are we just going to find work arounds to get what we want.
You are looking to date a wonderful woman. Someone with a great personality and a lot of fun to spend time with.
Then immediately take the conversation to text message off the app
As Dr. McCoy would say: It's dead Jim!
Passed 2/25/2025, Seeking Arrangements
Deeply regretted, after a lingering, painful illness. Will be missed by many faithful friends.
No fucking way am I plastering my face for all to see
I did go through with the face verification and for the checkmark which i thought was all they needed
I show my face in private pics but it choose who sees it after a bunch of back and forth messages
I guess I better keep my current SB rotation going as far as I can keep it going, lol
The policy states, copied and pasted from the website -
Acceptable photos include:
- Bottom nose to chin photos.
- Partially blurred or masked photos.
- Clothed photos of your body without your face.
- Photos featuring luxury items (houses, cars, yachts) if you are also in the photo.
- Photos of your body where all private areas are fully covered.
Thanks — this means if I blur out my face as I do know , it should still work. Then I have no issues
It's not clear what they mean. They specifically allow blurred images. BUT, then they say:
Primary Photo Guidelines:
Must feature your unobstructed face (no masks, extreme shadows, or far-distance shots).
That would seem to rule out blurred photos.
Ok agree this makes it more confusing
maybe when I activate my account again for the next 3 month subscription, I will see what all constraints they place on my profile. I plan to blur my face
I came across this one while browsing today. She says this in her What I am Seeking section:
"Fun mutually beneficial connection with financial help"
This would seem to be a clear violation of their Guidelines, and it is by no means the most blatant one you can find. For now, it certainly does not seem as though Seeking admin is enforcing their Guidelines, at least on the women.
