B4 - General Topic 2025 #63 (December)

[Captain Kangaroo]

12 minutes ago, Xarvaz said:

It doesn't matter what you call someone, to find someone you just need a picture and within 10 minutes you'll have that person, It's an illusion to think that a made-up name protects someone but since it's the forum rules I'll just stick to the fake name.. What I find annoying are people who act like forum dads but are not admins 

When Everyone in the Project starts calling her SWEATLANA BETTIE BARNEY WILMA DAPHNE JESSICA or something else then I will too. If I wanted to know anything about her I would follow her IG like the rest of the Stalkers on here do. And I agree with your last statement 100

[Captain Kangaroo]

33 minutes ago, Brit Guy said:

Who said Christina is her real name? I quite clearly stated the cleaning lady is 'known as' Christina on the other forum. Doesn't mention anything about a real name at all.

The B4 cat is known as Sofie on the other forum but Zucchini on here ...and if that's its 'real' name then perhaps we shouldn't be using it 😆

Exactly !!!!!

[Alladino]

2 minutes ago, Brit Guy said:

They are 'just' human beings yes, I agree. What they are NOT though is objects for viewers sexual gratification who also seem to feel they are entitled to see nudity and sexual activity most of the time. The FACT is this is the participants choice ...NOT the viewers and being pressured by them in to doing something they may not want to because they have complete freedom to make this choice. I rest my case, thank you 👏👏👏 

 

That's the deal. I'm a voyeur and I pay to see what I wouldn't otherwise see. It is about the "private life of other people". If a girl doesn't stick to this deal, I naturally have a reason to be disappointed and call it out for what it is.

Ultimately, I'm aiming for a win-win situation here. RLC and the girls get money, and I get a voyeur-like experience. None of the sides are doing any charity here and yet you can still remain respectful towards each other. 

Anyway, B4 currently has a comparatively good cast. A lot of attractive and sympatic girls, no issue with nudity in front of the camera, and with 1 or 2 exceptions (im still not sure about one girl) no issue with beeing sexual activ in front of the camera either. For me, this is one of the few apartments that really works well at the moment on RLC. Not perfect, but good. 

 

 

[thereala78]

25 minutes ago, Alladino said:

That's the deal. I'm a voyeur and I pay to see what I wouldn't otherwise see. It is about the "private life of other people". If a girl doesn't stick to this deal, I naturally have a reason to be disappointed and call it out for what it is.

Ultimately, I'm aiming for a win-win situation here. RLC and the girls get money, and I get a voyeur-like experience. None of the sides are doing any charity here and yet you can still remain respectful towards each other. 

Anyway, B4 currently has a comparatively good cast. A lot of attractive and sympatic girls, no issue with nudity in front of the camera, and with 1 or 2 exceptions (im still not sure about one girl) no issue with beeing sexual activ in front of the camera either. For me, this is one of the few apartments that really works well at the moment on RLC. Not perfect, but good. 

I fully agree with that... respect and B4 current situation 🙂 

[Brit Guy]

38 minutes ago, Alladino said:

 

That's the deal. I'm a voyeur and I pay to see what I wouldn't otherwise see. It is about the "private life of other people". If a girl doesn't stick to this deal, I naturally have a reason to be disappointed and call it out for what it is.

Ultimately, I'm aiming for a win-win situation here. RLC and the girls get money, and I get a voyeur-like experience. None of the sides are doing any charity here and yet you can still remain respectful towards each other. 

Anyway, B4 currently has a comparatively good cast. A lot of attractive and sympatic girls, no issue with nudity in front of the camera, and with 1 or 2 exceptions (im still not sure about one girl) no issue with beeing sexual activ in front of the camera either. For me, this is one of the few apartments that really works well at the moment on RLC. Not perfect, but good. 

 

 

And which deal is that then as nobody has ever seen a contract between RLC and the participants in what they are obliged legally to do. Your voyeur-like experience is paying for access to the apartments, and what goes on in them is up to the resident/s, not the viewers. I think viewers like yourself are clearly feeling hard done by in believing RLC offers endless sexual content when it clearly does not, so some here turn to pressuring the participants into events they may not want to participate in. Also, as far as I know how I feel about RLC and what the participants do is not a bad thing so why people think they are entitled to nudity and sexual content is beyond me as I especially not desperate to see EVERY participant in the nude or participating in sexual content. As you stated they are only human and that they are not objects of/for sexual gratification for the viewers. 

[Mauri]

2 minuti fa, Brit Guy ha detto:

E quale accordo è che allora nessuno ha mai visto un contratto tra RLC e i partecipanti in ciò che sono legalmente obbligati a fare. La tua esperienza da voyeur è pagare per l'accesso agli appartamenti, e ciò che accade in essi dipende dai residenti, non dagli spettatori. Penso che gli spettatori come te si sentano chiaramente a fatica nel credere che RLC offra contenuti sessuali infiniti quando chiaramente non lo fa, quindi alcuni qui si rivolgono a fare pressione sui partecipanti in eventi a cui potrebbero non voler partecipare. Inoltre, per quanto ne so come mi sento riguardo a RLC e quello che fanno i partecipanti non è una brutta cosa, quindi il motivo per cui le persone pensano di avere diritto alla nudità e ai contenuti sessuali è al di là di me perché non sono particolarmente disperato di vedere OGNI partecipante nudo o partecipare a contenuti sessuali. Come hai affermato, sono solo umani e non sono oggetti di/per la gratificazione sessuale per gli spettatori.

Esatto, anche perche’ il voyeur non riguarda solo vedere il sesso, anche guardare un ragazza seduta sul water e’ voyeur, una doccia… il vedo non vedo… una ragazza che si masturba sotto le coperte e’ voyeur, anche perche’ deve eccitare il fatto che lo stia facendo. Fare show espliciti non e’ voyeur. Questo molte persone non lo capiscono.

[thereala78]

5 minutes ago, Mauri said:

Exactly, also because voyeurism isn't just about watching sex. Even watching a girl sitting on the toilet is voyeuristic, a shower... see-through... a girl masturbating under the covers is voyeuristic, also because it has to be arousing to be doing so. Putting on explicit shows isn't voyeuristic. Many people don't understand this.

No it's called porn... but it is not a porn site! 🤣

[Maxbell]

1 minute ago, thereala78 said:

No it's called porn... but it is not a porn site! 🤣

RLC is to - a porn site the way
A prostitute is to saying, - “looking for some action? *wink wink*”
Both have plausible deniability  

Now I will just quietly back out of this conversation. 😁
 

[thereala78]

1 minute ago, Maxbell said:

RLC is to - a porn site the way
A prostitute is to saying, - “looking for some action? *wink wink*”
Both have plausible deniability  

Now I will just quietly back out of this conversation. 😁
 

me too! 😛 

[Maxbell]

I really like the stories, and obviously the sex,  but the same person doing it the same way gets boring fast. But that’s is normal, and it’s continuous stories and what makes people tic the way they do, that I find most compelling. 

[Brit Guy]

1 hour ago, Mauri said:

Exactly, also because voyeur is not only about seeing sex, even watching a girl sitting on the toilet is voyeur, a shower... I see it I don't see... A girl who masturbates under the covers is a voyeur, also because she has to excite the fact that she is doing it. Doing explicit shows is not voyeur. Many people don't understand this.

People don't seem to understand either that when participants go off cam to engage in sexual activity it is likely because they are getting paid a lot of money which lands strait into their own personal bank accounts whilst cutting the middle-man (RLC) out. There is no evidence to suggest RLC project members participate in nudity or sexual content ...it merely 'warns' us as viewers there might be nudity and events of a sexual nature so again it is not an entitlement but merely a warning about a possible occurrence. 

Meanwhile I enjoy watching RLC as a whole and the 3 Xlife apartments and this includes L&T on RLC who do very little but as I'm not entitled to anything else so I happily accept that and deal with it.  
 

[Alladino]

1 hour ago, Brit Guy said:

And which deal is that then as nobody has ever seen a contract between RLC and the participants in what they are obliged legally to do. Your voyeur-like experience is paying for access to the apartments, and what goes on in them is up to the resident/s, not the viewers. I think viewers like yourself are clearly feeling hard done by in believing RLC offers endless sexual content when it clearly does not, so some here turn to pressuring the participants into events they may not want to participate in. Also, as far as I know how I feel about RLC and what the participants do is not a bad thing so why people think they are entitled to nudity and sexual content is beyond me as I especially not desperate to see EVERY participant in the nude or participating in sexual content. As you stated they are only human and that they are not objects of/for sexual gratification for the viewers. 

 

I really have no idea how you came up with such nonsense. You are inferring things here that I did not say, and you are simplifying things to such an extent that they no longer apply to the situation. You've really gotten yourself worked up about this, perhaps it would be better if you first thought a little about what I have written.

Anyway, I would nevertheless like to respond to one aspect of your comment, because I suspect that this could be the root for your misunderstanding of the situation. I stated that the residents are humans, but i also know that sexuality is part of being a human. To see this part of other peoples private life is probably the main reason why most people pay for RLC. That is the deal. You can pretend that's not the case, but ultimately you're just lying to yourself. 

One more thing, I think that anyone who moves into an apartment full of cameras, especially when it usually includes two cameras in the shower and three cameras in the bedroom, understands this idea. When a girl decides to hide from the cameras but still wants to enjoy the benefits, I find that disappointing. In my opinion, RLC should then take action and end the collaboration. In my opinion, this is fair and quite easy to understand.