Carla & Yanai General Chat 2020 #3 July

[ze81]

1 minute ago, Daleys said:

It's not disrespect RLC has no control over the guests and having it in replay means real life. 

I respect your opinion,but there are rules for good reason.Justvto give you an exemple,other site some guest dude covered cams,we talkd about it and the site talked to residents and that guest leaved after few hours.This houses are rlc proprity and when rules are broken should be consequences.But honestly i thing next time they wont cover anything.

[ze81]

26 minutes ago, philo said:

I know that for some, covering the cameras may seem insignificant. From the position of corporate policy, however, breaking the rules intentionally, and doing it more than once without any consequences, is a sign of poor institutional health. It is suggestive of a decline in the standards of the organizations. If I intentionally and repeatedly violated rules in my industry, I would be in serious trouble. But then, not all organizations care much about their own rules when it comes to an infraction by a friend or relative or a star employee. 

We all diferent,some are fine this type of situationsand acept others the contrary,we all have pretty valid reasons.I agree with you,Never agree with cams be covered(unless is something very serious).Dont thing any of the sides are silly or with invalid reasons,think some think one way and others other way regard this subject.

[tito216]

7 minutes ago, ze81 said:

Espero que no. Los invitados o no las cámaras no son de ellos y en realidad hay muchos clientes que pagan mucho dinero para ver la transmisión de las cámaras. Esperemos lo mejor, otros invitados hicieron lo mismo y luego, después de canjear cosas y hacer cosas en bien vista, creo que veremos lo mismo que fueron.

Yo tambien espero lo mismo, pero tengo mis dudas, son muchos años siguiendo RLC y ya me lo espero todo.😉😉😉

[Daleys]

7 minutes ago, ze81 said:

I respect your opinion,but there are rules for good reason.Justvto give you an exemple,other site some guest dude covered cams,we talkd about it and the site talked to residents and that guest leaved after few hours.This houses are rlc proprity and when rules are broken should be consequences.But honestly i thing next time they wont cover anything.

You're right they won't cover the cams the next because there won't be a next time going by everyone here and this so called strict rules. I actually like them and disappointed they covered the cams but i do hope they come again and don't cover the cams.

[ze81]

1 minute ago, tito216 said:

Yo tambien espero lo mismo, pero tengo mis dudas, son muchos años siguiendo RLC y ya me lo espero todo.😉😉😉

Gess this is the price for having guests and new ones with regularity.I dont agree with the cams coverd but..i want to see guests and have fun watching them,so as long as this guests(and others)only do it one time then is minimal aceptable.She looks nice and love those pierced nipples,lets wait and see.Its good to have them on cams as long we can see them🤣.

[ze81]

3 minutes ago, Daleys said:

You're right they won't cover the cams the next because there won't be a next time going by everyone here and this so called strict rules. I actually like them and disappointed they covered the cams but i do hope they come again and don't cover the cams.

They dont seem shy,think we could see a similar case to cute guest and james.Think covering cams one time is aceptable.Lets wait and see if we gona have lucky or not.In any case is better to have guests than not having guests.As long as major rules arent broken to much.Now is up to Sly and her.

[philo]

As I said, I don't know what standards the current RLC owners are operating by. My observations was about how camera covering in the past used to be a serious infraction. As has been stated, many apartments in the past were sanctioned for this violation. I disagree that guest should have a different standard. All guests used to be vetted by RLC and that included a review of the rules...especially about covering cameras. I also understand that guests used to have to sign an agreement giving consent to be on camera. (This came about as a result of a legal challenge to RLC following a three way sex romp with Nina and Kia and a girl they brought home). I thought that problem had been solved but it seems to be reoccurring under the current RLC owners.  I have to say I am surprised, however, to see some who rationalize that it should be ok for guests to violate rules. 

[moos54]

25 minutes ago, ze81 said:

Do you ever tought working for rlc?Think could work😅.Personaly dont find silly at all complain about someone breaking the site rules(in this case covering the cams),to be honest what i find silly is rlc to post the moment in replay like is something cool..would say more than silly is desresptifull towards clients.Its for this type of acts and others site is going down so fast to an point they now have 19 free cams.

I just give my point of view

I prefer to have an apartment full of life with the visit of guests who sometimes can be uncomfortable with the cameras and who prefer to hide them, rather than an apartment where nothing happens, Leora and Malia or Kylie and Rus are the perfect examples

You who like to compare with VHTV, do you think that it is the best thing to do than to fine the participants for the actions of guests and ask them not to bring them back? how many participants decided to leave this project because of this? how many have decided not to bring  guests anymore so as not to receive a fine?

By doing this, it is the premium members who are losing

[Daleys]

il y a 5 minutes, philo a dit :

As I said, I don't know what standards the current RLC owners are operating by. My observations was about how camera covering in the past used to be a serious infraction. As has been stated, many apartments in the past were sanctioned for this violation. I disagree that guest should have a different standard. All guests used to be vetted by RLC and that included a review of the rules...especially about covering cameras. I also understand that guests used to have to sign an agreement giving consent to be on camera. (This came about as a result of a legal challenge to RLC following a three way sex romp with Nina and Kia and a girl they brought home). I thought that problem had been solved but it seems to be reoccurring under the current RLC owners.  I have to say I am surprised, however, to see some who rationalize that it should be ok for guests to violate rules. 

Its because this is the only real life apt left and if the guests are sanctioned then Carla and Yanai won't invite guests again. This is the apt that I subscribe for not the fake all day 24/7 naked girls and the stupid shows.

[philo]

I can recall that Venessa lost her second apartment because of the conduct of her guests. If Carla's apartment continues to violate the camera rules without any repercussion, it will confirm my suspicion that Carla has some kind special RLC connections. She is already amongst the few who have been given two different apartments with two different partners. That is rare. I can only imagine how may couples are lined up waiting for an RLC apartment who are willing to enforce the rules with their guests.

[ze81]

Just now, moos54 said:

I just give my point of view

I prefer to have an apartment full of life with the visit of guests who sometimes can be uncomfortable with the cameras and who prefer to hide them, rather than an apartment where nothing happens, Leora and Malia or Kylie and Rus are the perfect examples

You who like to compare with VHTV, do you think that it is the best thing to do than to fine the participants for the actions of guests and ask them not to bring them back? how many participants decided to leave this project because of this? how many have decided not to bring  guests anymore so as not to receive a fine?

By doing this, it is the premium members who are losing

Think a middle term would be the ideal,this sites rules were created for good reason,but dont agree that at first time an guest or resident covers cams they should be fined or put out,but the same resident,guest doing it two,three times then yes..they should be fined.I also enjoy watching guests,regular people like this ones,as long as they only cover cam one time.We all diferent and many times see,feel things diferent way.You,me,we all have our own views of stuff.In this case no doubths is better to have guests than to have "dead" houses like those you said and also Eliska&Pepik.

[ze81]

3 minutes ago, philo said:

I can recall that Venessa lost her second apartment because of the conduct of her guests. If Carla's apartment continues to violate the camera rules without any repercussion, it will confirm my suspicion that Carla has some kind special RLC connections. She is already amongst the few who have been given two different apartments with two different partners. That is rare. I can only imagine how may couples are lined up waiting for an RLC apartment who are willing to enforce the rules with their guests.

This house is one of the few good ones left,think covering cams one time per guests is aceptable.i dont imagine many couples lined up to join site watching the past year and seing the last two new couples residents😅.