Concept:
When members 'enjoy' a model, they can send the model a micro-payment (like $1) via FreeOnes. Models, or their agents, publication houses, would have to opt-in for obvious liability reasons.
There could be a general "charity" pool for when a model has not opted-in. In the latter case, FreeOnes would present a redirection stating a model had not opted-in, and 100% proceeds would go to charity, mitigating the liability. If the system proved popular enough, I am sure most models, active and possibly even inactive, would opt-in, if allowed by or via their agents, publishers, etc... they hold contracts with.
In fact, they would likely engage FreeOnes in a referral program, so the micropayments are issued directly to the starlet and her contract and copyright holders for negotiated royalties. It would then become a mainstream concept.
Why? That sounds ...
Stupid?! I know! Right?! So why did I go there?
Over the years, on this board and others, I've engaged so many people who talk about the alleged "immorality" of paying for porn they enjoy, whether or not they should 'respect' models and, in the most basic form of the attitude, they do not see how the livelihoods of adult or even non-nude models should be funded, whether in part or whole, from exploting their bodies. A lot of various people, heavily men, still question this today, and probably more so in the age of automation, the Internet and the like. We no longer have to go anywhere, have to pay for anything for samples and many other, common consumer-provider interactions. And piracy is even making the issue bigger these days.
Many of these conversations have led me to the following realizations, putting the female consumer aside for the moment as I am just a heterosexual man, and cannot answer for a female fan.
While some men can be mature, and recognize the obviousness of the truth in these matters, many cannot. Some have claimed, and even directly to OCSMs on this board sometimes, that women are artifical, and only on this board to seek revenue. That's really an oversimplification of a not-so-complex reality. Women need to eat, have a house over their heads, etc... and there is a demand-supply reality going on, removing the alleged 'morality' argument. I honestly wished people would focus on "consent" instead of "morals," but that's another argument. But for this argument's sake, let's go to the "moral" aspect, namely "honesty."
Everyone wants everyone else to be honest and forward. So let's take that all-too-common, male argument I see at times here on FreeOnes, "Are you just friendly to me because you're here to use me for money?" Let's also not beat-around-the-bush and throw the counter an OCSM could perfectly make, "Are you just looking for more something more personal the next time you jack off to me?" We all want women to be genunine, right? Of course. But I cringe when I see men having these attitudes when they are already built on artificial non-realities of male-driven desire, before the female is even involved. All the meanwhile, the OCSM has to be a perfect princess, taking the shit that some men dish out, and not finally saying, "hey, please don't go there." Because all it takes is for them to do it once, and no matter how nice they are about it, it could mean a 90% dive in revenue.
We've also seen a new craze in the age of the webcam girl. No longer does a starlet need to sign with a production house and be marketed. She can sign with a more minimal provider, and provide her own end equipment. She can engage her fanbase more directly, with minimal access and/or referral royalties. She can even share her Amazon gift less and solicity other forms of gifts, payment and compensation. So, correspondingly, there is an increase in men complaining about materialist women, women who take advantage of men, etc... often with the associated complaints that "they're not even getting anything for their money, unlike a video sale, a prositute (where legal, of course), etc... But they have to eat too, and their work does suck up their time.
en say they want honest and forward women who are genuinely interested in them. Do they really expect camgirls to say, "You have no chance with me, but I still need you -- and men like you -- lusting so you pay for my sessions? Join my web site? Buy me things from my Amazon gift list?" If we're going to expect women to thing such, then we might as well also volunteer, "You are so erotic I beat myself off every time I see you." No, we're cordial adults. But men go there any way, only looking at half of the equation, as usual, and not recogizing its starts with their demand.
So ... maybe we're going about this all wrong.
It is the age of the Internet. In the 1970s, early engineers predicted a sales model on the Internet where "micropayments" would result in people who use systems, software and services built on them would be paid in small amounts on a consistent, semi-realtime basis -- weekly, daily, hourly, even by the second. We have already seen this with advertising in the web space per-click. In the technology world, we've moved to renting systems, even applications and data stores, by the fraction of a hour. But why can it not extend to other services as well, even if more discrete snaps and not real-time? And why not for one of the world's oldest professions ... at least since the invention of the photograph and model, not the original one. Pornography, often illegal piracy of it, was one of the first uses of the Internet, via UseNet and other protocols and servers.
But still, Wifey of Wifey's World became popular via UseNet, as did many others. Danni Ashe took herself to the web as she found popularity among simliar shares. I do not try to evaluate what people do for a living. Everyone is entitled to their livelihood. Models are popular for many reasons, but let's not candy coat it here for FreeOnes ... a lot of us men do enjoy FreeOnes for "personal time" as much as interaction with other people, including about models and with OCSMs themselves. Maybe it's time we thought of a different way to fund our favorite models and starlets. Sounds almost impossible, logistics-wise ... except we already have FreeOnes. We already have an index and respected site for content proviers and the models alike to interface with fans.
So maybe ... just maybe ... each time, or maybe through estimation every week ... we men could stop and recognize the 'enjoyment' we've had with select models, and try to pay for each and every enjoyment their work has provided. It could be $1 or $5 or even done on a 5-star or 10-scale. Whatever the male decides. FreeOnes could facilitate this and find a new avenue for referrals to the sites of starlets, their copyright or contract holders or the starlets themselves, depending on contracts or related liabilities. FreeOnes could even provide a "private counter" or other, simple, numeric tracking next to Member "favorites," than just being able the "favorite." The counter would be independent of the "payment," but the amount donated to the model would also appear next to her name too. Just a thought.
Because ...
Imagine if you will ... how much a model or starlet would be compensated if all men really did pony up each and every time they enjoyed her? Consider a new world where women didn't have to have market themselves as much, didn't have to sell people on the idea of joining their site, didn't have to share Amazon lists or be constantly accused of not being "genuine." One where there is a place to deposit funds to a model or starlet whenever she was satisfying to a viewer, something that was cheaper than a movie (much less than a diner and a movie), or even a cup of coffee these days.
That was the orginal promise of micropayments in the early days of the Internet. Given pornography has been a staple of the Internet, maybe we've been overlooking a revenue stream that should have been at the forefront years ago.
To look at it from another angle as a man ...
Did you ever consider when you 'enjoy' yourself, you're really getting a 'freebie' from the model(s) involved? Laugh all you want ... but it's true. We don't even have to travel down to the store and pay for magazines these days (not that model typically received royalties if we did), or subscribe to various sites before that first "awe" moment. There are so many samples that many of us enjoy, and often do, before any "transaction. There are so many legitimate ways to enjoy content that isn't even paid for, so any thought of a "transaction" is already post-enjoyment. The model, her publisher, her copyright holder, even after you have enjoyed her, has to try to still sell you on her website, or access to her content, or via camshows or other options, just to be funded by a small fraction of the men who have already enjoyed her.
Again ... just a different way of looking at the 'problem' of consumer-producer, one where FreeOnes is in the perfect position to try to help solve.
When members 'enjoy' a model, they can send the model a micro-payment (like $1) via FreeOnes. Models, or their agents, publication houses, would have to opt-in for obvious liability reasons.
There could be a general "charity" pool for when a model has not opted-in. In the latter case, FreeOnes would present a redirection stating a model had not opted-in, and 100% proceeds would go to charity, mitigating the liability. If the system proved popular enough, I am sure most models, active and possibly even inactive, would opt-in, if allowed by or via their agents, publishers, etc... they hold contracts with.
In fact, they would likely engage FreeOnes in a referral program, so the micropayments are issued directly to the starlet and her contract and copyright holders for negotiated royalties. It would then become a mainstream concept.
Why? That sounds ...
Stupid?! I know! Right?! So why did I go there?
Over the years, on this board and others, I've engaged so many people who talk about the alleged "immorality" of paying for porn they enjoy, whether or not they should 'respect' models and, in the most basic form of the attitude, they do not see how the livelihoods of adult or even non-nude models should be funded, whether in part or whole, from exploting their bodies. A lot of various people, heavily men, still question this today, and probably more so in the age of automation, the Internet and the like. We no longer have to go anywhere, have to pay for anything for samples and many other, common consumer-provider interactions. And piracy is even making the issue bigger these days.
Many of these conversations have led me to the following realizations, putting the female consumer aside for the moment as I am just a heterosexual man, and cannot answer for a female fan.
While some men can be mature, and recognize the obviousness of the truth in these matters, many cannot. Some have claimed, and even directly to OCSMs on this board sometimes, that women are artifical, and only on this board to seek revenue. That's really an oversimplification of a not-so-complex reality. Women need to eat, have a house over their heads, etc... and there is a demand-supply reality going on, removing the alleged 'morality' argument. I honestly wished people would focus on "consent" instead of "morals," but that's another argument. But for this argument's sake, let's go to the "moral" aspect, namely "honesty."
Everyone wants everyone else to be honest and forward. So let's take that all-too-common, male argument I see at times here on FreeOnes, "Are you just friendly to me because you're here to use me for money?" Let's also not beat-around-the-bush and throw the counter an OCSM could perfectly make, "Are you just looking for more something more personal the next time you jack off to me?" We all want women to be genunine, right? Of course. But I cringe when I see men having these attitudes when they are already built on artificial non-realities of male-driven desire, before the female is even involved. All the meanwhile, the OCSM has to be a perfect princess, taking the shit that some men dish out, and not finally saying, "hey, please don't go there." Because all it takes is for them to do it once, and no matter how nice they are about it, it could mean a 90% dive in revenue.
We've also seen a new craze in the age of the webcam girl. No longer does a starlet need to sign with a production house and be marketed. She can sign with a more minimal provider, and provide her own end equipment. She can engage her fanbase more directly, with minimal access and/or referral royalties. She can even share her Amazon gift less and solicity other forms of gifts, payment and compensation. So, correspondingly, there is an increase in men complaining about materialist women, women who take advantage of men, etc... often with the associated complaints that "they're not even getting anything for their money, unlike a video sale, a prositute (where legal, of course), etc... But they have to eat too, and their work does suck up their time.
en say they want honest and forward women who are genuinely interested in them. Do they really expect camgirls to say, "You have no chance with me, but I still need you -- and men like you -- lusting so you pay for my sessions? Join my web site? Buy me things from my Amazon gift list?" If we're going to expect women to thing such, then we might as well also volunteer, "You are so erotic I beat myself off every time I see you." No, we're cordial adults. But men go there any way, only looking at half of the equation, as usual, and not recogizing its starts with their demand.
So ... maybe we're going about this all wrong.
It is the age of the Internet. In the 1970s, early engineers predicted a sales model on the Internet where "micropayments" would result in people who use systems, software and services built on them would be paid in small amounts on a consistent, semi-realtime basis -- weekly, daily, hourly, even by the second. We have already seen this with advertising in the web space per-click. In the technology world, we've moved to renting systems, even applications and data stores, by the fraction of a hour. But why can it not extend to other services as well, even if more discrete snaps and not real-time? And why not for one of the world's oldest professions ... at least since the invention of the photograph and model, not the original one. Pornography, often illegal piracy of it, was one of the first uses of the Internet, via UseNet and other protocols and servers.
But still, Wifey of Wifey's World became popular via UseNet, as did many others. Danni Ashe took herself to the web as she found popularity among simliar shares. I do not try to evaluate what people do for a living. Everyone is entitled to their livelihood. Models are popular for many reasons, but let's not candy coat it here for FreeOnes ... a lot of us men do enjoy FreeOnes for "personal time" as much as interaction with other people, including about models and with OCSMs themselves. Maybe it's time we thought of a different way to fund our favorite models and starlets. Sounds almost impossible, logistics-wise ... except we already have FreeOnes. We already have an index and respected site for content proviers and the models alike to interface with fans.
So maybe ... just maybe ... each time, or maybe through estimation every week ... we men could stop and recognize the 'enjoyment' we've had with select models, and try to pay for each and every enjoyment their work has provided. It could be $1 or $5 or even done on a 5-star or 10-scale. Whatever the male decides. FreeOnes could facilitate this and find a new avenue for referrals to the sites of starlets, their copyright or contract holders or the starlets themselves, depending on contracts or related liabilities. FreeOnes could even provide a "private counter" or other, simple, numeric tracking next to Member "favorites," than just being able the "favorite." The counter would be independent of the "payment," but the amount donated to the model would also appear next to her name too. Just a thought.
Because ...
Imagine if you will ... how much a model or starlet would be compensated if all men really did pony up each and every time they enjoyed her? Consider a new world where women didn't have to have market themselves as much, didn't have to sell people on the idea of joining their site, didn't have to share Amazon lists or be constantly accused of not being "genuine." One where there is a place to deposit funds to a model or starlet whenever she was satisfying to a viewer, something that was cheaper than a movie (much less than a diner and a movie), or even a cup of coffee these days.
That was the orginal promise of micropayments in the early days of the Internet. Given pornography has been a staple of the Internet, maybe we've been overlooking a revenue stream that should have been at the forefront years ago.
To look at it from another angle as a man ...
Did you ever consider when you 'enjoy' yourself, you're really getting a 'freebie' from the model(s) involved? Laugh all you want ... but it's true. We don't even have to travel down to the store and pay for magazines these days (not that model typically received royalties if we did), or subscribe to various sites before that first "awe" moment. There are so many samples that many of us enjoy, and often do, before any "transaction. There are so many legitimate ways to enjoy content that isn't even paid for, so any thought of a "transaction" is already post-enjoyment. The model, her publisher, her copyright holder, even after you have enjoyed her, has to try to still sell you on her website, or access to her content, or via camshows or other options, just to be funded by a small fraction of the men who have already enjoyed her.
Again ... just a different way of looking at the 'problem' of consumer-producer, one where FreeOnes is in the perfect position to try to help solve.
So I'll type again.
