Is even meaningful to talk about Members as a collective?

[Delroy]

I've been thinking about this subject considering comments made by a banned user who's name is a measurement, the thread about bruises and a thread I was in about eating. Sometimes we speak about members interests if they are a homogenise lump. However there thousands (if not more) members on a site at any point of time. Thousands of people each with differing tastes, interests and kinks. My experience has always been that one thing people are the most diverse about is their sexual interests.

Perhaps it is a better thing to consider "How many paying members are interested in X?" and "How many other models do I have to share/compete with for those members?".

 

[THE MOLLIE MARIE]

I am not sure I understand the actual question. Is it meaningful to talk about members as a collective when? Sometimes, totally! The same way it is meaningful to talk about performers as a collective, or any other group. Hopefully we realize when we do this that the group is not actually homogenous, but we can speak to majorities.

But, I like what you asked at the end,

"How many paying members are interested in X?" and "How many other models do I have to share/compete with for those members?".

These are good starting points. I think the better question is, "How will I connect so well with members who visit me that they are interested in whatever I want them to be into, because I am the one doing it?" That's the galaxy brain hustle. There is no inter-performer competition.

 

[MarieElise]

Perhaps it is a better thing to consider "How many paying members are interested in X?"

When I refer to a "demographic" here that's what I'm talking about. There are different groups of paying members. One general group, lots of sub-groups.

 

[Smoothie]

I think it depends a lot on the topic.

Generalities work in some circumstances. “Members come and go” is a true statement and good to keep in mind, for example, even if there are always exceptions.

I get what you’re saying, I think. Even if you narrow “members” down with specifics (members that buy private shows, members that tip, members that enjoy a certain type of model or show), you’re still talking about a group of individuals with their own personalized tastes.

I think all true information is valuable, from the very general to the very specific. So I guess if lumping “members” together in a discussion makes the point more false than it is true, then the generality might not work.

 

[admjgg]

They aren't lumping members into one big group. When a model addresses a question to members on the forum, they're generally looking for a broad view of opinions from members. It helps to get as many opinions as possible when it comes to problems or situations that can affect model's livelihoods.

Sometimes asking questions can lead to answers to questions they weren't even aware they should ask. Like in that bruising thread, when someone mentioned that it could be against TOS.

So no, while I don't think members should be bunched together, I don't think asking questions to members does that. Just like members are a large, diverse group, so are the answers they'll give any given to question they're asked. In the end this business has 2 sides and it can help to see the other side every now and then. Everyone has preferences and opinions and you'll never see them all if you don't ask for them.

 

[THE MOLLIE MARIE]

Oh. From the way others have read your post, and from reading the others you mentioned, I now have a better understanding of your ask. To be clear, I don't think it's wise to base your performance and included kinks/fetishes you cater to SOLELY on how many members you *think* are interested and how many performers you *think* are doing that thing. The way you do something is going to be unique by nature, and may inspire spending in someone who wouldn't spend on someone else performing the same act necessarily. So focusing solely on the numbers won't give you a realistic view of how things will play out, because you are removing the most important factor: the individual. Better to do what you want and attract the audience who appreciates you for it.

And I guess that is kind of what I said in my first post. The most successful performers are fostering a connection with (and often between) their viewers. That's the feeling that keeps people coming back again and again. And what that looks like will be different for everyone because we are all different. So to that end, I think we quickly find that generalizations only go so far.

 

[englishmuffins]

I think about a of couple things when it comes to grouping or generalizing members and thinking about them as a collective.

1. I think here on the forum we often lump members into a generalized group to help give threads a broad sense of an answer or a general direction of an answer. Especially since most questions that are posted on here are open for discussion and interpretation, so likely an array of answers will come from members and models. That exchange between models and members i think is incredibly valuable.

However the more specific a question is, the more direct a answer will be from models and members who meet or understand the specificity of the question.

2. When it comes camming, I kind of having a different point of view. I think the boundaries a model has or things a model won’t do, will help solidify a group of members. For example, I am not a submissive model, so I naturally deter members who are looking to dominate. From there, the diversity of that group carries out in subgroups. That’s my observation of streamate members at least.

Perhaps it is a better thing to consider "How many paying members are interested in X?" and "How many other models do I have to share/compete with for those members?".

I don’t particularly like to think of how my skill set or fetish appeal competes with other models. I find it best to focus on myself and think of ways how I can better my skills.

I do like thinking about how many members will pay for “x” activity. When I first started camming I would find myself in a rut where I said yes to everything and nobody would come back. So I started thinking more critically about my strengths and weaknesses and put myself back into the shoes of the type of member I am trying to attract and how will this happen. That’s where I think my boundaries helped bring about a “collective” of members in my chat and a more consistent flow of money into my room.

I am quite communicative with my chat, so when I have an idea that I want to try in my room, I will ask my regulars for their honest feedback as well as new members to the room to garner a sense of how successful will this be. I will think critically about it, work through the pros and cons, but then it is up to me to make sure I execute the activity such that it still remains attractive in the future. I hate the idea of going gun-ho on an idea with out considering a member perspective and my idea failing miserable.