alanohio

On 6/18/2016 at 11:51 AM, sereno said:

ohio.  You need to go see an eye doctor.  Check the clothing and previous uses of the backpack.  Sorry to burst your exhaustive "polling" but the girl on the photo is not nor has ever been Taboo.  It is Zoya.

Odd how you can pull that one out of your ass LOL. I was there live. As I said, Zoya was in the living room doorway - and I watched Taboo get ready to go out.

Today I turn in my keys.

Being totally honest here, this board is no longer fun. We seem to have crossed a threshold where insults and name-calling have become the norm, and respect is a lost art. This has become nothing more than an extension of the BS we hear every day in politics, and I simply don't need it.

I wish you all well, but even more so, i wish you the courtesy to think first - talk later. You might be surprised how well that works.

On ‎2016‎-‎05‎-‎27 at 10:52 PM, TripX said:

What would Kami think seeing this in her own bed?

What's the big deal? Did Kristy go ballistic when Kami screwed cokeboy, or the guy in Thailand? These are young, single, experimental girls - and they happen to be best friends. And besides, a lot of girls "cuddle and play" (it's safer than playing with a boy!).

11 hours ago, Hope85 said:

I just love how aggressive she gets :D

Even if you've been banned, you can get a new account - but it takes a little knowledge of how to to it. If Harley wanted in, he could do it. I think he gets tempted now and then, but usually comes to the conclusion "the hell with it". Right Harley?

Something else I want to try and explain... this post isn't "at" anyone in particular, but to "everyone" in general.

Let's take apart the current inhabitant of the Barcelona Apartment...

Elisa; Young, beautiful, a knockout, and blond - AND she knows it. She likes having fun, she likes walking around naked, she likes masturbating in front of the cameras, and I'll bet money she LOVES sex. Oh, and she also enjoy drinking - regularly.

Rita; Brunette, beautiful, reserved, and very classy. She respects herself, she drinks socially. She probably likes sex as well, but in dark rooms or with the shades pulled. Some would call her a goddess, and do.

Vika; Pretty girl, but she knows "beautiful" isn't going to be her label while Elisa and Rita are there. She wishes her boobs were bigger, and could use a blast of self confidence. She's also compassionate, maybe to a fault. She loves sex but wants it with her boyfriend.

So, here you have 3 girls totally different living in the same apartment. Different subjects will pair these girls differently. You will probably see Vika and Rita being friendly more often because they are both a bit out of step with Elisa's openness to sex. There is NOTHING that suggests ANY of these girls would normally be interested in a girl-girl relationship !!!

So, things like strip poker, sharing a bath, or getting naked together is ALWAYS going to look forced and a bit unconfortable - because they are doing it for us. They would never do these things under normal circumstances.

Is this starting to make a little sense?

1 minute ago, ze81 said:

In part agree..so thats means for exempl Rita only delivery minimum part of the contract and entertainment?Because mostly she only..Thakes bath,mostly back to cam(hope thats not in contract)and shegets dressed(even if lots of time she hides for it).Again i say..i say the poker it was fake..because it was combined..the same with the bath..and you just need to see one of the girls behaver during both things to see that she dont feeled confortable doing it..

But your using the word "fake" too freely.

Rita is a classy girl - probably too classy to be on RLC. She's beautiful, but obviously is doing as little as possible to justify her staying in the apartment. She simply isn't the kind of girl to strip off her clothes and fuck in the middle of the floor. If there's someone to blame for that, it's RLC - NOT Rita. We can't assume every girl that walks in the door is a stripper and escort. If that were true, you would have something more like VV or WM247. THOSE are people who sign the contracts to have open sex. RLC, by their name "Real Life Cam" is trying to get something a little different - something that shows people living day to day INCLUDING sex but not DEPENDING on it.

When RIta, Elisa, and Vika sit down to play strip poker, they are doing it for us. They are doing it to try and fulfill what's expected of them. If Elisa's BF showed up and they had sex all over the apartment, this doesn't show that Elisa is doing her job and Rita isn't - it shows that Elisa is a more open girl than Rita is - something we should expect to learn about every girl that walks through that door.

I've said it before, if your looking for open and unbridled sex, there are thousands of porn site that will give you that and more. RLC is trying to give you something closer to "reality".

25 minutes ago, ze81 said:

Easy to explane..and of course all based on rlc..the strip poker..the act by itself it was 100%..the spontaneous,wish of all three girls to be togheter,and get naked its all 100% fake..if you fallow Rita and vicka from day one you will totaly understand What i mean.The bubble bath..here we go again..in all this time all this girls togheter they never Did nothing remotly sexy togheter..the Rita showers are usualy back to cam most of time..so another little fake teatre by both girls..Vicka being friendly...she brought an dude to rlc demanded with selfish that the girls to cover because of the guest..that stayed long days..in that time she almost ignore the girls and act totaly selfish and with some bad acts..specialy to Elisa.So i dont see(based on her acts on rlc)that vicka its an Nice girl..hope i express my point.

Not so fast...  These girls (or guys) are under contract to RLC (free rent and maybe bonuses) to ENTERTAIN their subscribers. That entertainment is taking a bath, getting dressed, maybe walking around naked, having sex, masterbating, and anything else that might be interesting to the subscribers. HOWEVER, as they each do thses things within the personalities they are, we call it "fake". Tell me, how can you DEMAND your monies worth - that they show you skin, that they have sex, that they walk around naked - and THEN say it's fake???

OF COURSE IT"S FAKE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have an apartment and people getting PAID to do nasty things... and every f___g time they do it, someone here is calling it fake. WHAT IS REAL????

What is real is when you have a secret camera in an apartment and record things that the tenants are not aware of. THAT IS REAL.

Get over yourselves guys and enjoy the adult entertainment your paying for.

I'm going to stick myself out on a limb here...

I want a definition of "fake". The word is thrown around here so much the overall impression is that nothing is real. I want to know what it is these girls do that is "fake".

• The strip poker game is "fake"... sure seems to me they took off their clothes.
• The bubble bath is "fake"... the bubbles seemed real to me, and the girls were naked.
• Vika being friendly is "fake"... looked to me like they were enjoying each others company.

Just pointing out that the overuse of the word "fake"  raises the question of what's "real".

2 minutes ago, albacore said:

Maybe I would agree that we need to be decent and more polite in how we discuss topics here and maybe referring to the tenets, and I would be good with that.  Respect is earned and not a right or mandated.  Politeness is something we should expect.

This was my  intent, and what I feel is sometimes lacking. I have gone overboard too at times - it's just that we need to keep the above in mind before we let things get out of hand.

For a board like this to be successful, and fun, there must be some level of respect for both the RLC participants and the people posting here. To be honest, the lack of that respect is what is currently driving the American political process.

If we don't insist on a little respect for each other and the apartment tenants, the quality of the conversation here will eventually become very trollish - leaving the trolls to occupy a majority of the posts.

When I originally joined here, we disagreed - but we always ended our conversations with some sort of understanding. In truth, I don't see much of that anymore.

Think it over. The tenants deserve respect as do all of us.

2 hours ago, snaky said:

 

 

 

IS THAT THE ONLY TOPIC YOUR INTELLIGENCE LEVEL ALLOWS YOU TO DISCUSS? STOP TALKING ABOUT HER DRINKING ALREADY! HOW COME NOBODY TALKS ABOUT VIKA DEVOURING MOUNTS OF ORANGES EVERY DAY?!

Agreed, we've established she drinks a lot. Many of us could have probably put her to shame in past years as well. Let it go.

6 minutes ago, corboblanc said:

ce que je désirais avant tout, c'est pouvoir discuter sur ce forum, même avec des gens qui ont un avis opposé!!! j'ai été très doux dans mes premiers posts sur les filles, mais malgré cela, les extrémistes de la liberté absolue me sont tombés dessus, me parlant de prostitution, de ma morale ancienne etc...je n'ai en aucun cas dans mon premier post, accusé les filles de quoi que ce soit!!! je n'ai jamais non plus dit que j'étais choqué de quoi que ce soit, mais certain ont parlés à ma place!!! les gardiens de la déchéance m'ont mis les flammes sous les chaussures, et une fois en feu, je suis beaucoup moins modéré!!!! c'est quand même incroyable de ne pas pouvoir se poser gentiment des questions ici, sans manquer de respect à personne, sans accuser personne, simplement en exposant des faits, des idées ou des avis, sans que la même poignée de trou du cul vous accuse de parler mal des filles, ou d'être un arriéré de la morale, parce qu'une fille qui fait la pute nous choque, alors que c'est "légal"!!! comment être choqué par ce qui est légal? impossible?!!! en Allemagne sous Hitler on tuait les handicapés!!! mais comment être choqué puisque c'était parfaitement légal!!! je n'ai jamais imposé ma morale à personne, en tout cas pas ici!!! je dis: "tiens, comment fait-elle pour voyager autant", et on me réponds; "pourquoi tu dis qu'elle fait la pute"!!! quel désespoir....

what I wanted, above all, is to discuss on this forum, even with people who have the opposite view !!! I was very gentle in my first posts on girls, but despite this, the extremists of absolute freedom jumped on me, talking to me about prostitution, my old morality etc ... I have never in my first post, accused the girls of anything !!! I have also never said I was shocked at anything, but some have spoken for me !!! Guards forfeiture me put the flames under shoes, and once on fire, I'm much less moderate !!!! this is unbelievable not to be able to gently ask questions here, without lacking respect to anyone, without accusing anyone, just stating the facts, ideas or opinions without the same handful of asshole you accused of speaking ill of the girls, or to be a backlog of morality, because a girl who is the whore shocks us, then that is "legal" !!! how to be shocked by what is legal? impossible?!!! Germany under Hitler were killed disabled !!! but how to be shocked because it was perfectly legal !!! I never forced my body to anyone, at least not here !!! I say, "well, how does it to travel much," and answer me; "Why do you say it makes the bitch" !!! what despair ....

Tell you what Corbo, I don't want to continue this uncomfortable discussion either, and it does appear we are all not so sure anymore who said what or what comment we got pissed about.

Let's agree to let this one go, and if the issue comes up again, lets try and clarify what one means before we jump off the handle. Language is part of the problem - I know I struggle sometimes to understand the true meaning when various phrases are different between us. I also think, like I said before, America's tendency to pre-label any girl in this profession as "trash" tends to put us on the defensive with the girls. Had a post said that "escorting" is one possibility of how they make money, I don't think I would have reacted like I did because it was raised as a possibility - not a fact. I am sure some of the girls in these apartments lead lives we would not want our daughters to lead - but I'm also sure all these girls have different limits of what they would do to survive. We should accept those ideas without being judgemental about them.

I'm not sure what you want from us Corbo (& friends).

If your expecting us to agree with you, that's simply not going to happen.

If you want us to know that you think the girls are prostitutes, whores, and cover it by being Escorts, then fine; we understand you feel that way.

Now can we just drop this discussion?

I do think part of the problem is cultural. America, like it or not, is very Victorian. "Prostitution" has a very bad connotation here. It is degrading. Any girl that takes part in sex-for-money is considered "trash". All girls who take money for sex are in this category in America - whether they are high class Escorts, or drug dealers.

I suspect that many of the readers here are American or English, and conversations that throw the word "prostitute" around freely will result in these girls being viewed in a very bad way. I don't want to see that because of some old Victorian attitudes.

Most of these girls are trying to make a living and start a career, or looking for a husband, in any way they can. Some have more limits than others, but they all are trying to survive with the tools they have.

I just don't want to pre-label them.

On 5/23/2016 at 2:07 PM, n4n0 said:

Looks like Kira can add a little "rough fun" to things now and then :)

1 minute ago, corboblanc said:

la plupart des filles qui se prostituent par le biai de l'escorte girl, n'ont pas de contrat de travail!!!! elles vont chercher les hommes dans les endroits VIP, et il n'y a pas besoin de papier officiel pour que le mec comprenne ce qu'il doit faire pour coucher avec!!! cela est pareil dans tous les endroits du monde!!! il n'y a donc aucune preuve que la fille se prostitue, sauf de la prendre en flagrant délit au moment ou l'homme lui tend de l'argent!!! RLC n'a donc rien a voir avec cela. si une fille sort en boite, part avec un mec, et reviens le matin, personne ne saura si elle a été payée ou pas!!! beaucoup ici, prennent toutes les filles pour des anges, libre à vous!!! dans votre monde, il suffit d'être photographiée devant une Mercedes, au salon de l'auto une fois par an, pour voyager dans les destinations de rêve du monde entier, et dormir jusqu'à 15 heure?!!! vous rêvez dans une utopie messieurs!!!

most girls who prostitute by the mean of the escort girl, have no employment contract !!!! they will look men in the VIP areas, and there is no need of official paper for the guy understands what he must do to bed !!! it is the same in all parts of the world !!! so there is no evidence that the girl is a prostitute, except to take in the act when the man hands her money !!! RLC has nothing to do with it. if a girl comes in a box, share with a guy, and come back in the morning, nobody will know whether it was paid or not !!! many here are all the girls for angels, feel free to !!! in your world, you only have to be photographed in front of a Mercedes at Auto Show once a year to travel to dream destinations around the world, and sleep up to 15 hour? !!! you dream in a utopia gentlemen !!!

That is exactly my point!

Any girl that leaves for the evening (or night for that matter) can be doing anything from a job, to meeting with friends, to clubbing, to sleeping with a guy (money or no money involved). My point is, as soon as we use the word "prostitute" here on the board, all the other possibilities are forgotten, and the discussion here turns to issues that only have to do with them selling their bodies. If one or more of these girls actually IS visiting with friends or going to a job, that is all forgotten - she is simply a "prostitute" to CC readers. I've said this over and over - "what they do outside of the apartment isn't our business, and should stay so". An accusation of prostitution, regardless of what evidence you have ("being an escort") diminishes the girls and this site, and all who add to the discussion.

Why can't we simply enjoy what the girls do for their free rent without insulting their lot in life?

1 minute ago, Beldonn1 said:

You can read before answering BS, that the main difference between conspirating people and me. I can read !

The point is, the French and Spanish translations (Google) made it very clear of what was being assumed. If the google translations are at fault, then I suggest the posters be more careful - it's all we have to figure out what your talking about.

Yes, I have a problem of even talking about prostitution on this sight because it's terribly insulting to the girls. Nothing like that should be brought up at all unless there is proof to start with. Every time we do this, we tarnish the girls reputations for no reason, and emphasize our ignorance of facts. As someone here has said, it's totally unlikely that these girls would be broadcast by RLC if this was going on. On the other hand, what these girls do outside of the apartment is none of our business.

Are you guys being serious here???

A girl walks in with a handful of money, and the immediate assumption is that she's a prostitute? I can't believe what I'm reading.

I'll be honest here. THIS is proof positive of what you guys think of these girls. They have money? They must be trash.

This is almost enough to make me call it quits on this board.

1 hour ago, albacore said:

Obviously.  And I would believe that the vast majority of RLC subscribers are not reposting their content out on the web somewhere.  My point was that I believe that some of the pic's that were here for us to see were copied to other sites which then got those who posted them here banned.  It seemed that RLC left this site alone - and still may by the way - but we can't tell anymore as no one will risk posting here when someone could take those pics and post them to another site.  All of this seemed to change when they enhanced their watermark.

I don't think RLC leaves anyone alone. It's simply find an ID and ban the user, no matter where they find it. Each of the subscribers takes a risk posting a pic or video. Whether RLC finds it on the original posting site or somewhere else, the subscriber is responsible for that first post. Once you post a pic, anyone that see's it can report it elsewhere, and usually does. The ONLY way to keep yourself safe is find a way that destroys the watermark.

1 hour ago, kitek said:

How can you claim all of this just because you saw they had money? 

Reading this makes me sick.

People will always make assumptions - and usually the worst ones. The same things happen with conspiracy theorists. You provide a valuable service to us Kitek in translating the girls discussions, and it is greatly appreciated.

RLC's only method of response is the watermark. It cost them money to demand any site to take down posted media. At the previously mentioned cost of $200 per item, that would be counterproductive to their profits. Their plan is simple; find a picture or video with a watermark and ban the person it's connected to. As long as they are getting more subscribers than they are banning, the plan is profit-friendly.

It's hard for me to get my head around us guys talking details about tampons and periods... We must be REALLY bored LOL.

16 minutes ago, slider_69 said:

 All your arguments seem valid; however, what if Kami and Kristy have a different or unique type of contract, since they are so popular ?  I believe it is fair to assume that these 2 girls get a good salary, in addition to their free vacations ( often referred to as job assignments ). Famous models, as these girls would like to be,  do not show themselves taking baths, masturbating, and playing with each other on the internet !  These are 2 girls hoping to become famous but they assume that will probably never happen.................so they  WORK for RLC in order to make a living and possibly meet someone to marry . ( Now don't get all bent out of shape, this is just my opinion...LOL ) . 

Nah, I only get bent out of shape by people who like to throw around insults.

I agree the scenario you posed "could" be possible. If RLC were to publish their contracts tomorrow and that's the way K&K's contract read, I would only be mildly surprised. I only wanted to point out that the simplest explanations are usually the right ones. Sherlock Holmes said that LOL.

2 minutes ago, albacore said:

Their (the girls or tenets) obligation is to RLC not to us.  RLC is the one has an obligation to (us) the paying subscribers.  Don't confuse those obligations.  It makes a difference thinking about it that way. They (the tenets) need to satisfy whatever requirement RLC has specified and we don't know what that is.  Some here assume that they are not doing this. However if that were true they would most likely be gone.  As far as we know they are a cash cow to RLC whether they are there all the time or not. We really have no idea. 

People will complain that they should now get rid of the apartment as it will be empty for a little while again.  However those same people well be praising things when they return and do something that they now like.  I think RLC probably knows this.  It is just us that don't know what is behind the scenes and so we speculate to the negative.  

Now I am not a defender of RLC and I think they should do things a little differently as well.  It would be good if RLC was more forthcoming (maybe in its FAQ) about the terms of their contracts and expectations but I suspect it varies depending on the apartment and it's profitability.  But the girls work for RLC who pays them.  We pay RLC and RLC is the one who needs to deliver.  However I think they think they are delivering based on "their" business model not ours.  They as all businesses are driven by profits.  I would have to assume their profits are pretty good if they continue to do what they do.   Some here say they are in a downward spiral or there business model is dying or they have no idea what they are doing - but I really think that is just sour grapes.  Every day that I come here the site is up and apartments are here and they seem to be adding them over time.  It says something.

 

 

I'll only take issue with one point - indirectly - If we assume the current measure of how much "skin" is shown is, in fact, RLC's "expectation", then that suggests heavily that they do not require much from their tenants. Some apartments show a lot, some show little, and all the apartments are still there. If anything, that would suggest they require little other than letting them know what might end a contract = if they show nothing.