AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
Library camgirl busted
- Thread starter ashtyn_rain
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
PRISM said:
Creeps.
Edit: I CHANGE MY ANSWER, JERRY'S THING WAS BETTER
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Well, I suppose he might be a Jehovah's Witness Insurance Salesman....
Oh, wait, that'd work out the same.
Oh, wait, that'd work out the same.
JerryBoBerry said:
DAMMIT!! I read the thread too late. I wanted to say that SO bad! :icon-cry: :lol:
Kudos sir!
This could have been such an interesting thread, I would have loved to dive into the difference in cultural backgrounds for this issue to be bigger in the states than for instance europe. can we go back?
Fay_Galore said:
I say we stop feeding him and actually talk about this.
Cultural backgrounds yes probably are different but I think it's also laws being put in place more so there than here. And even respect and reserve over peoples lives.
For instance the paparazzi stalk and chase down Princess Di and she dies in a car crash. Immediately people there talk about laws on the pats to keep others safe. Here? A celeb gets in a car crash cause of the pats and people talk about what they may have been on while driving, who they were with, what they were wearing, and basically anything but how to get some more laws passed to protect people from pats/stalkers.
Now is that culture or our news stories that have become increasingly dumbed down over the years. A great story is often not fully told and instead happy feel good stories are told, scary fear mongering stories, and then the weather every 7 minutes. Real stories are glossed over or told from a giant bias sided channel. Is that our culture or the people who own the channels now dictating stories?
The royals ask for privacy at certain times or for pictures not to be printed and it's respected. The ones who dont and print the stuff anyway are sued and always lose. Here... well Whitney Houstons daughter is in a coma and the family asks for privacy from the first get go and are ignored. Every channel discusses it, rumors are told, stories ran on who found her and even their arrest background, and anything else they can dig up. No one is sued because the papers win those cases here. It's hard to differentiate between our culture here now being a reality TV celebrity obsessed generation, or if what is truly being asked for (respect, privacy, dignity in our news) is being ignored and not talked about.
Prism has repeatedly stated that he doesn't find it creepy (and doesn't know why we would be bothered by) him simply asking about our security measures/precautions. Had they only been asked ONCE, his questions would have been simply peaked from curiosity, but since they've been asked in almost every wording possible, numerous times, it raises our hackles. I'm going to attempt to make an analogy that will clarify why this makes us apprehensive.
Scenario: You are the parent of a 7-year-old boy. Your neighbor, Roger, frequently waves to you while mowing the grass, you chat while getting the mail, you watch his dog when he's out of town. Just good old-fashioned neighborly conduct. Then one day, you and Roger are standing at the fenceline chatting. Roger sees your son playing in the backyard. He gets a concerned look and asks, "Hey, so I noticed you've been having Jeremy walk to the bus stop alone every day. Do you think that's really safe?"
^That is a concerned, well-meant question. However, if after explaining that you watch from the window the whole time until the bus is gone (with him on it), Roger continues the questions and starts to give you weird vibes, you might think his questions are NOT based purely on the safety and wellfare of the child. For example...
"Well, Iris, he's, what, around 7 now? There's a lot of creepers out there. I've heard that they like to follow young boys, only to watch them playing after school, to watch them get on and off the bus, just waiting for a chance to nab them."
Still, valid points. But if he continued with, "And they might invite the boy over for icecream. And casually show them a sex-dungeon in their basement filled with video games and action figures. And they might have stolen the boy's underwear from the clothesline to sniff every night. I'm just saying, I'd be more careful if I were you."
You'd be weirded out, but still jovially explain that you are pretty confident in your keeping-my-son-safe skills. The conversation could turn from super weird to flat-out creepy-as-hell in an instant if Roger ends the conversation like this. "Well, I've gotta run to the store. Gonna get some frozen yogurt. Hey, what flavor is Jeremy's favorite?"
Still, Roger could mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING by that. But because he prefaced such a simple question with all the other stuff, I'd (personally) make a hasty retreat, locking my kid inside the house with me. I'd never let him be alone near the neighbor, and probably start counting how many pairs of Jeremy's underwear I could find. Yes, THIS is paranoia. Over one question/scenario that would normally not make us think twice. But the reason that it does, is because of the questions prior. If you want to stop appearing "creepy," stop talking. You've already made us suspicious (regardless of your intentions), and the only way to rectify that is to simply leave this subject alone. Start responding in other threads about your favorite movies/music/video games/models. It will take a while for everyone to forget how your initial intro onto the forum was to continuously berate us over our safety inclinations. Just deal with it, and either use this forum for other reasons, or go to your other forums to talk about how crazy we camgirls are. Either way, don't be a Roger.
I REALLY hope noone on here is named Roger!
Scenario: You are the parent of a 7-year-old boy. Your neighbor, Roger, frequently waves to you while mowing the grass, you chat while getting the mail, you watch his dog when he's out of town. Just good old-fashioned neighborly conduct. Then one day, you and Roger are standing at the fenceline chatting. Roger sees your son playing in the backyard. He gets a concerned look and asks, "Hey, so I noticed you've been having Jeremy walk to the bus stop alone every day. Do you think that's really safe?"
^That is a concerned, well-meant question. However, if after explaining that you watch from the window the whole time until the bus is gone (with him on it), Roger continues the questions and starts to give you weird vibes, you might think his questions are NOT based purely on the safety and wellfare of the child. For example...
"Well, Iris, he's, what, around 7 now? There's a lot of creepers out there. I've heard that they like to follow young boys, only to watch them playing after school, to watch them get on and off the bus, just waiting for a chance to nab them."
Still, valid points. But if he continued with, "And they might invite the boy over for icecream. And casually show them a sex-dungeon in their basement filled with video games and action figures. And they might have stolen the boy's underwear from the clothesline to sniff every night. I'm just saying, I'd be more careful if I were you."
You'd be weirded out, but still jovially explain that you are pretty confident in your keeping-my-son-safe skills. The conversation could turn from super weird to flat-out creepy-as-hell in an instant if Roger ends the conversation like this. "Well, I've gotta run to the store. Gonna get some frozen yogurt. Hey, what flavor is Jeremy's favorite?"
Still, Roger could mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING by that. But because he prefaced such a simple question with all the other stuff, I'd (personally) make a hasty retreat, locking my kid inside the house with me. I'd never let him be alone near the neighbor, and probably start counting how many pairs of Jeremy's underwear I could find. Yes, THIS is paranoia. Over one question/scenario that would normally not make us think twice. But the reason that it does, is because of the questions prior. If you want to stop appearing "creepy," stop talking. You've already made us suspicious (regardless of your intentions), and the only way to rectify that is to simply leave this subject alone. Start responding in other threads about your favorite movies/music/video games/models. It will take a while for everyone to forget how your initial intro onto the forum was to continuously berate us over our safety inclinations. Just deal with it, and either use this forum for other reasons, or go to your other forums to talk about how crazy we camgirls are. Either way, don't be a Roger.
I REALLY hope noone on here is named Roger!
Too late to edit. Noticed he was banned. Oh well. Maybe future Rogers will still benefit?
I_Am_Iris said:
Ooh nice! I was wondering all night if that would be happening in the morning when amber caught up on the forum. :-D :dance:
noahthesquid said:
She's a model on here, and once she learned that MFC started cracking down, she's trying new things in chat. Noah, I find it hilarious that your FIRST AND ONLY post on here is to bring one girl's actions into the limelight. Are you just hoping that she'll get in trouble? Are you a model who's jealous that she got away with it and you didn't? Otherwise, I don't see what the big deal is. Unless a model is doing something legally/morally wrong (doing crack on cam/showing children/beastiality/etc), don't worry about it. Click next model if it bothers you.
noahthesquid said:
She will still be successful. Her library shows were only one small part of her camming. She has much more to offer.
Too late to edit. The one model I thought this new (or newly enforced) rule would impact most is OrientNatsu who only ever did public shows. But the last few days even she has adapted and begun camming from home. A relief for me, as I absolutely hated public shows and she is a lovely lady :-D
I wonder if this would affect delivery shows as well? Will MFC crack down on the "no men on cam" rule?
I wonder if this would affect delivery shows as well? Will MFC crack down on the "no men on cam" rule?
JimsX said:
What! No more outdoor shows for Natsu... :shock: :shock: :shock:
That's going to make it really tough for her. She's pretty much relied on them exclusively. There's only so much conversation can be had through google translate.WickedTouch said:
JerryBoBerry said:
Yes, I was thinking of her also. Her outdoor shows were exciting I certainly tipped for them, I just can't imagine spending much time/money watching her at home. But as I said earlier in the thread just because something makes a good show doesn't make it a good idea. I am happy they are cracking down, this will be good long term for the camming community even if it will be painful in the short-term for some models.
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Why is succumbing to puritanical attitudes a good thing? Certainly outdoor shows isn't for everyone, and some care needs to be taken but to crack down on it entirely is a bad idea.
SexySteph
Cam Model
- Mar 11, 2013
- 6,051
- 44,314
- 293
- 34
- Twitter Username
- @SexyStephMFC
- MFC Username
- SexySteph
- Streamate Username
- SexySteph
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://clips4sale.com/store/61365/stephaniexs
Nordling said:
I definitely think MFCs new rules shouldn't extend to like "privacy of your own back yard" or "middle of nowhere" kind of situations but I definitely think that they should be cracking down on public shows in general. At the very least banning the moment a random person shows up in the background.
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
I'd say I agree, if the person is recognizable...but blurry crowd images or someone in the distant background, or with their back turned? Meh.SexyStephXS said:
Nordling said:
Will there is a big thread discussing the problems with public shows. But I'll just state the obvious ones public nudity and especially public masturbation is pretty much illegal everywhere. You don't get a choice of which laws you obey in a society. Second, it is often not possible for cam models to prevent somebody from being recognizable, considering that most public shows are automatically capped and uploaded, and the more popular shows widely distributed on tube sites, there is a significant risk that a bystander could appear in porn video. Finally even if the person is un recognizable, I (and I am sure most folks) don't want to appear as a prop on your commercial video especially without compensation or consent.
There's a reason that library shows garnered 2-3 x the viewers of any other type of show on MFC; they offered something that you can't find anywhere else. To watch a girl finger herself live or on video at her home are pretty much the same, unless you like to socialize; whereas when she does it in public where she might get caught, the thrill is much greater if it's happening in real time. Pretty much the same reason why people prefer to watch sports live even if it's on TV -- to 'live in the moment' with the team and the players. I know my heart beat as fast or faster than that of most models when sudden footsteps started sounding out mid-climax. 
And the show where lilsecrett got caught was the best thing ever; I tip my hat to you if you read this lil, as I can no longer tip tokens.
With the moral brigade of the fun police having their brand of angry fix, there's one less great way to fill an empty afternoon, and the world's the poorer for it. It's always the same, 'think of the children!', yada yada yada. If children didn't exist, I wonder what reason they'd find to enforce their prejudice? Probably that bodily fluids will contaminate the place... Excuses are the one resource that we'll never run out of. Otoh I guess I shouldn't complain because it is the very prudes who do these crack-downs that make the stunts exciting in the first place. I just hope the heat dies down so the girls can get back to business (so to speak).
As for getting caught on video against your will, give me a break. Do you even know how many cameras there are out there in any major city center? Soon there will be bee-sized drones with cameras flying all over the place (if there aren't already), and none of them will stop mid-buzz to ask for your written consent before filming you in any and all activities. Let's face it people, privacy is a 20th-century concept. Wake up, smell the madness, inhale it, learn to enjoy it, amen.
:headbang:
And the show where lilsecrett got caught was the best thing ever; I tip my hat to you if you read this lil, as I can no longer tip tokens.With the moral brigade of the fun police having their brand of angry fix, there's one less great way to fill an empty afternoon, and the world's the poorer for it. It's always the same, 'think of the children!', yada yada yada. If children didn't exist, I wonder what reason they'd find to enforce their prejudice? Probably that bodily fluids will contaminate the place... Excuses are the one resource that we'll never run out of. Otoh I guess I shouldn't complain because it is the very prudes who do these crack-downs that make the stunts exciting in the first place. I just hope the heat dies down so the girls can get back to business (so to speak).
As for getting caught on video against your will, give me a break. Do you even know how many cameras there are out there in any major city center? Soon there will be bee-sized drones with cameras flying all over the place (if there aren't already), and none of them will stop mid-buzz to ask for your written consent before filming you in any and all activities. Let's face it people, privacy is a 20th-century concept. Wake up, smell the madness, inhale it, learn to enjoy it, amen.
:headbang:
SomeRandomDude said:
Single-handedly you have just typed the most stupid statement ever on this entire forum.
Please don't breed.
SomeRandomDude said:There's a reason that library shows garnered 2-3 x the viewers of any other type of show on MFC; they offered something that you can't find anywhere else. To watch a girl finger herself live or on video at her home are pretty much the same, unless you like to socialize; whereas when she does it in public where she might get caught, the thrill is much greater if it's happening in real time. Pretty much the same reason why people prefer to watch sports live even if it's on TV -- to 'live in the moment' with the team and the players. I know my heart beat as fast or faster than that of most models when sudden footsteps started sounding out mid-climax.
With the moral brigade of the fun police having their brand of angry fix, there's one less great way to fill an empty afternoon, and the world's the poorer for it. It's always the same, 'think of the children!', yada yada yada. If children didn't exist, I wonder what reason they'd find to enforce their prejudice? Probably that bodily fluids will contaminate the place... Excuses are the one resource that we'll never run out of. Otoh I guess I shouldn't complain because it is the very prudes who do these crack-downs that make the stunts exciting in the first place. I just hope the heat dies down so the girls can get back to business (so to speak).
As for getting caught on video against your will, give me a break. Do you even know how many cameras there are out there in any major city center? Soon there will be bee-sized drones with cameras flying all over the place (if there aren't already), and none of them will stop mid-buzz to ask for your written consent before filming you in any and all activities. Let's face it people, privacy is a 20th-century concept. Wake up, smell the madness, inhale it, learn to enjoy it, amen.
:headbang:
She had a child on cam. You trying to justify that says more about you than the people who are against these kinds of shows.
I agree, but I would say thatNordling said:
. The reason I first visited MFC and bought tokens was SparkleLulu (never see her online nowadays, has she changed her camming hours or something? I'm guessing given the nature of her shows in the past she's quite sternly disapproved of too) and in recent months my token purchases have almost entirely gone to Marisol. Nice though it is, it's not what she shows of her body on cam that I'm there for, it's what can be seen in her face - I could happily watch her fully dressed just knowing she's edging and trying to keep it together while sat at her seat in a cafe. Also she has always given the impression she is massively into what she's doing, which is a huge part of the appeal of her public shows for me. But that particular delight seems to have been taken away in the current backlash.
penfold_43 said:I agree, but I would say thatNordling said:
She's been on but, less often lately due to her pregnancy. She was just on over the weekend with a dude in group.
Ah, I only tend to see shows that are early evening weekdays my time (which would be lunchtime - mid afternoon Eastern for Americans).
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
If they're unrecognizable, their desire to not be a prop is moot. So is capping and uploading to porn sites. If no unwilling party is recognizable, no foul.HiGirlsRHot said:
Just because a person is "unrecognizable" to you, that does not mean that someone who knows them personally couldn't identify them by some feature you're not focusing on. While a face might not be visible, there are clothing, build and, especially, body language to provide clues. Some of us are much more observant of and sensitive to things like that than others. Unless they've been pixilated or blurred out head to toe, it's impossible to be certain that someone couldn't spot them as someone whose name they know.Nordling said:
- Status
Similar threads
