Last edited by on 3rd Dec 2011 - 3:03pm; edited 1 time in total
Meet Swingers
Entertainment
Latest Members
Fun and Games
Information
Shopping
Site Stats
- Members:
- 1,389,800
- Online Now:
- 2,079
- Msgs Sent:
- 157,443,077
- Photo Ads:
- 745,630
- User Pics:
- 579,536
- Video Chat:
- 171
Last edited by on 3rd Dec 2011 - 3:03pm; edited 1 time in total
I don't accept the argument made elsewhere that the justification for only members with extras is correct to account for the extra bandwidth.
There are very few members in my experience who are regularly in chat at the same time on separate accounts and the member limits of 100 in a room at a time have not altered by this policy so the potential bandwidth takeup is essentially the same. More often than not, with a few exceptions as I have said, couples tend to be sat (or fucking on cam, as the case may be) within close proximity to each other anyway.
If there were significant numbers, I doubt that the powers that be would be making an offer of reimbursement of fees anyway
It is the Extra's members who will take up any extra bandwidth here as they are the ones who can load up more than two cams (and their own) and they already pay for that privilege. The bandwidth issue is more likely to be their own against their ISP allocation or local conditions, not the SH servers.
My point is that it is sensible to have the feature opened up to all class of (couple account) member. It will mean that the actual chatter present (M F or both) is more readily identified, although in my case my reputation precedes me anyway
There are very few members in my experience who are regularly in chat at the same time on separate accounts and the member limits of 100 in a room at a time have not altered by this policy so the potential bandwidth takeup is essentially the same. More often than not, with a few exceptions as I have said, couples tend to be sat (or fucking on cam, as the case may be) within close proximity to each other anyway.
If there were significant numbers, I doubt that the powers that be would be making an offer of reimbursement of fees anyway
It is the Extra's members who will take up any extra bandwidth here as they are the ones who can load up more than two cams (and their own) and they already pay for that privilege. The bandwidth issue is more likely to be their own against their ISP allocation or local conditions, not the SH servers.
My point is that it is sensible to have the feature opened up to all class of (couple account) member. It will mean that the actual chatter present (M F or both) is more readily identified, although in my case my reputation precedes me anyway
And given that hardly anyone seems to be using it to be in the same room at the same time*, it would make sense to open it up to people who would use it for it's intended purpose?
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
And given that hardly anyone seems to be using it to be in the same room at the same time*, it would make sense to open it up to people who would use it for it's intended purpose?
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
Jewlnmart wrote:
And given that hardly anyone seems to be using it to be in the same room at the same time*, it would make sense to open it up to people who would use it for it's intended purpose?
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
And given that hardly anyone seems to be using it to be in the same room at the same time*, it would make sense to open it up to people who would use it for it's intended purpose?
* Based on looking at various rooms at various times including beach bar and pool.
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
Funlovers2009 wrote:
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen you and Lee in the same room on separate accounts at the same time and other than a few others, I wouldn't say it is "lots" to be honest and even so, despite two accounts, Lee has taken your chair in front of the cooker in Swingers Northern Kitchen on more than one occasion.
I see where you are coming from on this as you have long complained about the need for dual accounts which is expensive and I support your view with all credit to you for successfully championing your cause, but you must surely see it also from our point of view that limiting it to Extra's accounts for the reasons given is counter-productive and a nonsense.
Shouldn't it be classed as additional functionality that will benefit some users, but be of no use to others. In other words, it's great for those with a couple's account but what do people with single accounts get out of it? 
If that's the case then I surely it's a valid reason for adding it to the chargeable package for those who want to take advantage of it?
And let's face it, there are already enough complaints about paying members having to subsidise other users.
If that's the case then I surely it's a valid reason for adding it to the chargeable package for those who want to take advantage of it?
And let's face it, there are already enough complaints about paying members having to subsidise other users.
Cubes wrote:
And let's face it, there are already enough complaints about paying members having to subsidise other users.
And let's face it, there are already enough complaints about paying members having to subsidise other users.
That one is easily solved....make everyone pay. It's unlikely anyone would be able to makeany legal action over what appears to be a gentlemans agreement. A bit like charging people extra to use the couples chat feature, they'll either stump up the cash or fuck off. As for what single members would get. How about giving them the option of having the videos back to the size they used to be before it was decided to make them microscopic unless you have extras.
GnV wrote:
I've seen you and Lee in the same room on separate accounts at the same time and other than a few others, I wouldn't say it is "lots" to be honest and even so, despite two accounts, Lee has taken your chair in front of the cooker in Swingers Northern Kitchen on more than one occasion.
I see where you are coming from on this as you have long complained about the need for dual accounts which is expensive and I support your view with all credit to you for successfully championing your cause, but you must surely see it also from our point of view that limiting it to Extra's accounts for the reasons given is counter-productive and a nonsense.
Funlovers2009 wrote:
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen you and Lee in the same room on separate accounts at the same time and other than a few others, I wouldn't say it is "lots" to be honest and even so, despite two accounts, Lee has taken your chair in front of the cooker in Swingers Northern Kitchen on more than one occasion.
I see where you are coming from on this as you have long complained about the need for dual accounts which is expensive and I support your view with all credit to you for successfully championing your cause, but you must surely see it also from our point of view that limiting it to Extra's accounts for the reasons given is counter-productive and a nonsense.
There were/are a lot of couples who have 2 accounts so that they could both be in the same room at the same time.
There are other couples who both sit together at the keyboard because they didn't want to pay the extra to have an other account just for chat (understandable too). These couples now have the option to pay extra (but not as much extra as it would cost to have 2 accounts) and both chat in the same room.
Some couples dont both want to chat and so this would be of no benefit to them at all. Other couples live in different locations and so this would mean they can both log on and chat together on one account. People have different circumstances, some want the extra feature, some don't.
Everyone has a choice, you pay, you get the extra benefits; you don't pay, you don't get the benefits. Simples!!
Of course there are other couples who both have accounts which are not paid for because they joined before a certain date. (But we wont get into the whole should everyone pay debate again hey!)
At the end of the day, you're never going to please everyone! In my opinion, it is a good idea to have it as an extras feature but that is just my opinion of which I am entitled. It works for us!
Funlovers2009 wrote:
There were/are a lot of couples who have 2 accounts so that they could both be in the same room at the same time.
There are other couples who both sit together at the keyboard because they didn't want to pay the extra to have an other account just for chat (understandable too). These couples now have the option to pay extra (but not as much extra as it would cost to have 2 accounts) and both chat in the same room.
Some couples dont both want to chat and so this would be of no benefit to them at all. Other couples live in different locations and so this would mean they can both log on and chat together on one account. People have different circumstances, some want the extra feature, some don't.
Everyone has a choice, you pay, you get the extra benefits; you don't pay, you don't get the benefits. Simples!!
Of course there are other couples who both have accounts which are not paid for because they joined before a certain date. (But we wont get into the whole should everyone pay debate again hey!)
At the end of the day, you're never going to please everyone! In my opinion, it is a good idea to have it as an extras feature but that is just my opinion of which I am entitled. It works for us!
GnV wrote:
I've seen you and Lee in the same room on separate accounts at the same time and other than a few others, I wouldn't say it is "lots" to be honest and even so, despite two accounts, Lee has taken your chair in front of the cooker in Swingers Northern Kitchen on more than one occasion.
I see where you are coming from on this as you have long complained about the need for dual accounts which is expensive and I support your view with all credit to you for successfully championing your cause, but you must surely see it also from our point of view that limiting it to Extra's accounts for the reasons given is counter-productive and a nonsense.
Funlovers2009 wrote:
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen lots of couples using it in the same room at the same time ... us included!
I've seen you and Lee in the same room on separate accounts at the same time and other than a few others, I wouldn't say it is "lots" to be honest and even so, despite two accounts, Lee has taken your chair in front of the cooker in Swingers Northern Kitchen on more than one occasion.
I see where you are coming from on this as you have long complained about the need for dual accounts which is expensive and I support your view with all credit to you for successfully championing your cause, but you must surely see it also from our point of view that limiting it to Extra's accounts for the reasons given is counter-productive and a nonsense.
There were/are a lot of couples who have 2 accounts so that they could both be in the same room at the same time.
There are other couples who both sit together at the keyboard because they didn't want to pay the extra to have an other account just for chat (understandable too). These couples now have the option to pay extra (but not as much extra as it would cost to have 2 accounts) and both chat in the same room.
Some couples dont both want to chat and so this would be of no benefit to them at all. Other couples live in different locations and so this would mean they can both log on and chat together on one account. People have different circumstances, some want the extra feature, some don't.
Everyone has a choice, you pay, you get the extra benefits; you don't pay, you don't get the benefits. Simples!!
Of course there are other couples who both have accounts which are not paid for because they joined before a certain date. (But we wont get into the whole should everyone pay debate again hey!)
At the end of the day, you're never going to please everyone! In my opinion, it is a good idea to have it as an extras feature but that is just my opinion of which I am entitled. It works for us!
I'll take that as a no then
awwww didums
what's the point of having an extras account if you don't get any extras
its already been stated that the extras is cheaper than two accounts and not to speak of the time and money invested in this project
i think extras should get a little more and certainly get the benefits of paying extra for extras (if that makes sense )
its a little like saying i paid for a burger but that guy on the next table has a steak so i want one
what's the point of having an extras account if you don't get any extras
its already been stated that the extras is cheaper than two accounts and not to speak of the time and money invested in this project
i think extras should get a little more and certainly get the benefits of paying extra for extras (if that makes sense )
its a little like saying i paid for a burger but that guy on the next table has a steak so i want one
