One of your performers arrested for bestiality

[Aerie]

Hello! Recently it has come to light that a performer on your platform was arrested for bestiality that was recorded on video. I am writing an article regarding the performer (not using her name here as I'm not sure it's appropriate on this messaging forum) but I wanted to let you know I did send a DM to your Twitter account (from my account which is @aerie_sm) further detailing the information the article will be about as well as the performer in question. People have also speculated that the video came from a live feed that was on your website, so I am looking to clear the air of rumors surrounding where the video originated from.

If it'd be easier to comment on this via email, what would be the best way to contact you? My email is aerie@webcamstartup.com if it'd be easier for you to respond there.

Obviously bestiality has no place in our community and I am specifically looking for a statement on: if her recent ban was a result of this, and if she will be allowed back on the platform if it was in relation to it.

Thanks for reading and hoping to hear back!
@punker barbie

 

[Mila_]

I don’t think CB owes you or the site you represent any explanations especially considering your site’s shady reputation among models... nobody trusts webcamstartup.

 

[AudriTwo]

I don’t think CB owes you or the site you represent any explanations especially considering your site’s shady reputation among models... nobody trusts webcamstartup.

I actually suggested Aerie come here and ask because her and I are cool. So I trust her. I think it's worth to get a response to clear up rumors that could be extremely damaging to CB and models on it. I was looking at the bigger picture. Just a little PR is all.

 

[Aerie]

I don’t think CB owes you or the site you represent any explanations especially considering your site’s shady reputation among models... nobody trusts webcamstartup.

I was recently brought onto the site as a partner due to my partners awareness that his lack of experience as a model and his way of handling model communications was not up to par with what is expected within our industry. While I can't speak on the past situation with my partner or his communications here, I can say that since personally contributing to the site myself I've made every effort to communicate honest and helpful news and blogs, as well as adding a live chat which I manage to further assist models. I'm sorry that our website has made a bad impression in the past, and while I'm aware that won't be an easy reputation flaw to repair, I hope you'll see this is an effort to spread honest and helpful news.

This was simply an effort on my part to get the full story rather than reporting hearsay, and I wanted to approach every site that is potentially involved and give them a chance to speak for themselves rather than rattling off rumors from social media.

If @AmberCutie would like me to not post things in affiliation with Webcam Startup or cease activity within her blog I entirely understand

 

[Mila_]

I was recently brought onto the site as a partner due to my partners awareness that his lack of experience as a model and his way of handling model communications was not up to par with what is expected within our industry. While I can't speak on the past situation with my partner or his communications here, I can say that since personally contributing to the site myself I've made every effort to communicate honest and helpful news and blogs, as well as adding a live chat which I manage to further assist models. I'm sorry that our website has made a bad impression in the past, and while I'm aware that won't be an easy reputation flaw to repair, I hope you'll see this is an effort to spread honest and helpful news

What you are doing is unethical. It isn't ethical to write an article about what a private citizen does in their private sphere. I know this might be difficult to grasp since everything is so driven by clicks which is ultimately your aim with this sensationalist post, but whatever she did with a dog it was done in a private show with a customer in a 1 and 1 setting. Whomever found out about this to call her out on it found it by looking up her name on capping sites where the private show was posted. That is the difference between writing a piece on something like... say... Olivia's Hitler show which was conducted in public chat before thousands of viewers and writing a piece on a girl who did something in a private show that nobody else was supposed to see.

Aside from this Chaturbate DID ban her. There are violations of ToS and laws every day on camsites and they are not liable for the content their users post or share in their platform. All they need to do is act with due speed to eliminate that content from their site and they have by banning the model in question. We will never know if this was done because of the bestiality private show or if it was just one fluke of their automatic ban system (even a broken watch points at the right time twice per day) but it does not matter, the fact is she is banned from the site. If Chaturbate knew about the bestiality thing, it was still going on, and they wouldn't ban her, then you would have grounds to ask for explanations from CB staffers.

What you are doing is not only unethical, it is quite ugly coming from another model. Now whenever someone looks up her username on google they will land straight on your shady site to read all the juicy gossip that will give you 1000 clicks but will probably ruin her life if she gets outed to her family and friends some day. Everyone makes mistakes and it is not our job to expose them, if you want to call yourself a friend of the models and not just one more site like [site name banned*3] that feeds off gossip that ruins models reputations.

 

[Aerie]

What you are doing is unethical. It isn't ethical to write an article about what a private citizen does in their private sphere. I know this might be difficult to grasp since everything is so driven by clicks which is ultimately your aim with this sensationalist post, but whatever she did with a dog it was done in a private show with a customer in a 1 and 1 setting. Whomever found out about this to call her out on it found it by looking up her name on capping sites where the private show was posted. That is the difference between writing a piece on something like... say... Olivia's Hitler show which was conducted in public chat before thousands of viewers and writing a piece on a girl who did something in a private show that nobody else was supposed to see.

Aside from this Chaturbate DID ban her. There are violations of ToS and laws every day on camsites and they are not liable for the content their users post or share in their platform. All they need to do is act with due speed to eliminate that content from their site and they have by banning the model in question. We will never know if this was done because of the bestiality private show or if it was just one fluke of their automatic ban system (even a broken watch points at the right time twice per day) but it does not matter, the fact is she is banned from the site. If Chaturbate knew about the bestiality thing, it was still going on, and they wouldn't ban her, then you would have grounds to ask for explanations from CB staffers.

What you are doing is not only unethical, it is quite ugly coming from another model. Now whenever someone looks up her username on google they will land straight on your shady site to read all the juicy gossip that will give you 1000 clicks but will probably ruin her life if she gets outed to her family and friends some day. Everyone makes mistakes and it is not our job to expose them, if you want to call yourself a friend of the models and not just one more site like [site name banned*3] that feeds off gossip that ruins models reputations.

It happened within our community and this is something that represents everyone who partakes in internet pornography. There is no way to know if it happened in a one on one show or a public show which is why I am asking for commentary from the site itself.
I also personally believe someone who would force their dog into doing sex acts which is illegal and immoral is someone who has no place within the community. There is a huge difference between making a mistake and what she did, but that is my personal belief. I have freedom to write what I feel is important, and I feel like something like this is important. I asked every involved party for commentary. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
There are witch hunts for models who do far less than what this model did, my biggest aim with my follow up is the inequality of punishments that are given to performers by camming and clip sites.

I think that we are very clearly in disagreement about the severity of this issue - so I won't be commenting back after this since I believe I provided ample explanation for my request for commentary, which Chaturbate also is not obligated to respond to. I respect your feedback.

 

[Mila_]

It happened within our community and this is something that represents everyone who partakes in internet pornography. There is no way to know if it happened in a one on one show or a public show which is why I am asking for commentary from the site itself.
I also personally believe someone who would force their dog into doing sex acts which is illegal and immoral is someone who has no place within the community. There is a huge difference between making a mistake and what she did, but that is my personal belief. I have freedom to write what I feel is important, and I feel like something like this is important. I asked every involved party for commentary. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
There are witch hunts for models who do far less than what this model did, my biggest aim with my follow up is the inequality of punishments that are given to performers by camming and clip sites.

I think that we are very clearly in disagreement about the severity of this issue - so I won't be commenting back after this since I believe I provided ample explanation for my request for commentary, which Chaturbate also is not obligated to respond to. I respect your feedback.

The model says it happened in a private show and she was coerced into it through blackmailing. I have no reason to believe it was performed in public chat as it would have gotten her banned on the spot. And you know this. I am glad you mentioned the phrase "witch hunt" and punishing which is in essence what you are doing with your post. This isn't what the community needs. There are already tons of stigma associated with this job to add more fuel to the fire. I might not like what she did with her dog in a private show, but it is not my place to call her out on it, pass judgement or worse yet, say she does not have a space in my industry. Who am I to say who has or has not a space in the industry? Who are you to judge her intentions and whether or not this was a mistake? Some humility does wonders.

Asking all parties for commentary is not absolution for writing an unethical post. This might give your article a veneer of objectivity but objectivity and ethics within journalism are not the same thing.

 

[AudriTwo]

Someone sexually abusing their animal is extremely unethical then asking a site to follow up on rumors of a model raping their dog so we have the facts and not spreading misinformation. Just my opinion.

 

[Mila_]

Someone sexually abusing their animal is extremely unethical then asking a site to follow up on rumors of a model raping their dog so we have the facts and not spreading misinformation. Just my opinion.

I respect your opinion, Audry, but here is why I disagree with you. What happens in a private show between a model and a client, as immoral as it may be is the concern of 4 parties only: the site, the model, the client and the authorities. It is not the concern of the community at large as long as the site responds to it and actions are taken. The camsite banned her, the authorities were informed of it and she got in legal trouble for it. Where and how does this concern us? It doesn't unless we want to gossip but then present the article as what it is.. a gossip article made to entertain regardless of the consequences for the model involved

 

[AudriTwo]

I respect your opinion, Audry, but here is why I disagree with you. What happens in a private show between a model and a client, as immoral as it may be is the concern of 4 parties only: the site, the model, the client and the authorities. It is not the concern of the community at large as long as the site responds to it and actions are taken. The camsite banned her, the authorities were informed of it and she got in legal trouble for it. Where and how does this concern us? It doesn't unless we want to gossip but then present the article as what it is.. a gossip article made to entertain regardless of the consequences for the model involved

I disagree, and it comes across like you are trying to protect both abusers if it was a private show. i know you e not, but by trying to push it under the rug comes across that way. There is video evidence out there if you look for it. But there is so many mixed information. get the facts together so gossip or lies are spread.She was charged, so it is now public knowledge. You can go print off the actual files. So it's now the public's business too.

I don't think it's gossip. This is a crime and a horrendous crime. This wasn't a mistake.

 

[Mila_]

I disagree, and it comes across like you are trying to protect both abusers if it was a private show. i know you e not, but by trying to push it under the rug comes across that way. There is video evidence out there if you look for it. But there is so many mixed information. get the facts together so gossip or lies are spread.She was charged, so it is now public knowledge. You can go print off the actual files. So it's now the public's business too.

I don't think it's gossip. This is a crime and a horrendous crime. This wasn't a mistake.

Calm your tits, from what I have read the dog licked peanut butter off her snatch. Dogs don't understand context, to a dog he was just licking peanut butter, he doesn't care the recipient the peanut butter is in. He can lick peanut butter off a plate, off a hand, off the floor, off a snatch, makes no difference to the dog cause dogs do not have the capacity to reason, he was not harmed by the activity. This doesn't make it any less repulsive or any more legal, but the words "bestiality", "rape" and "horrendous crime" can lead someone to think she actually harmed her dog by doing something like penetrating it or making the dog penetrate her. This is not what happened to my understanding and there IS a difference.

I am not trying to protect anyone as I don't even know who the model is and could not care less. I am trying to protect our collective rights to privacy. Camgirls are not public performers in the traditional sense of the word. She did not do this show in Times Square, she did it in a private show on a camsite. If you see no problem with websites who claim to represent in some way the sentiment of models unleashing a lynching based on leaked pirated content and hearsay, demanding explanations from the service provider, then surrounding the entire article with affiliate links to profit from it, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[AudriTwo]

Calm your tits, from what I have read the dog licked peanut butter off her snatch. Dogs don't understand context, to a dog he was just licking peanut butter, he doesn't care the recipient the peanut butter is in. He can lick peanut butter off a plate, off a hand, off the floor, off a snatch, makes no difference to the dog cause dogs do not have the capacity to reason, he was not harmed by the activity. This doesn't make it any less repulsive or any more legal, but the words "bestiality", "rape" and "horrendous crime" can lead someone to think she actually harmed her dog by doing something like penetrating it or making the dog penetrate her. This is not what happened to my understanding and there IS a difference.

I am not trying to protect anyone as I don't even know who the model is and could not care less. I am trying to protect our collective rights to privacy. Camgirls are not public performers in the traditional sense of the word. She did not do this show in Times Square, she did it in a private show on a camsite. If you see no problem with websites who claim to represent in some way the sentiment of models unleashing a lynching based on leaked pirated content and hearsay, demanding explanations from the service provider, then surrounding the entire article with affiliate links to profit from it, then I don't know what to tell you.

intent. even if dogs don't know what they are doing, that person does. THEY knew what they are doing, and that is abuse. that is considered abuse to a dog. so no, i will not calm my tits when someone is abusing animals on cam for money. i cannot believe you just down played animal abuse.

lynch mob? where? this isn't a lynch mob. it is just aeire asking a question and to make sure she has her ducks in a row and end any rumors. chaturbate can choose whether or not to respond. (I think they should, especially since she is trying to get back on the site)

 

[Mila_]

intent. even if dogs don't know what they are doing, that person does. THEY knew what they are doing, and that is abuse. that is considered abuse to a dog. so no, i will not calm my tits when someone is abusing animals on cam for money. i cannot believe you just down played animal abuse.

lynch mob? where? this isn't a lynch mob. it is just aeire asking a question and to make sure she has her ducks in a row and end any rumors. chaturbate can choose whether or not to respond. (I think they should, especially since she is trying to get back on the site)

Sure, intent is the problem which is why it is repulsive and illegal, we know and understand context, this doesn't change the fact that nobody was harmed by her actions, the dog was not harmed and the situation was already handled by the authorities and the service provider, I don't see what a public lynching of the model will bring other than affiliate profit for webcamstartup. And since we do understand context and we know how members can blackmail and coerce models into things they don't want to do like this model claims was done to her, we should know better than to judge.

 

[SMuser69]

I think the issue here is the Streisand effect. Nobody would probably know or care about this until you make an article about it. If CB took actions about it they don't have to answer to anyone what those actions are.

Are you prepared to damage the site just because they aren't telling YOU everything they did to take action? You're not making a journalist offer to CB here you're saying, 'answer me or I will write whatever I feel like', which show a lot of bias. You're trying to hide advocacy behind journalism which is a gross tactic. If you don't like how they handled the situation write an opinion, don't hide it behind 'news' or 'journalism'.

 

[AmberCutie]

If @AmberCutie would like me to not post things in affiliation with Webcam Startup or cease activity within her blog I entirely understand

While I'd appreciate if you refrain from posting links to their site and advertising for them, I am not opposed to threads like this popping up. It is a current controversial issue happening directly in our industry, and it's already being discussed on other public platforms, so a conversation about it here is OK too.

I will say if it ever becomes obvious that your only posts here are to collect or spread information for said unliked site, I would ask you to leave.

 

[dark_mermaid]

Nice journalism there

 

[AmberCutie]

Nice journalism there

Deleted?

 

[dark_mermaid]

Indeed, but it was definitely NOT deleted when I posted it. It was a tweet from Aerie_SM directed at the girl in question here saying "you raped a dog".

In fact all tweets on the account Aerie_SM were apparently just deleted (or is it, because I don't have a twitter account?). I didn't take a screenshot, didn't see the necessity to be honest.

 

[Mila_]

Indeed, but it was definitely NOT deleted when I posted it. It was a tweet from Aerie_SM directed at the girl in question here saying "you raped a dog".

In fact all tweets on the account Aerie_SM were apparently just deleted (or is it, because I don't have a twitter account?). I didn't take a screenshot, didn't see the necessity to be honest.

Yes, I saw that tweet by the OP as well and from what I could gather on twitter that tweet was the origin of this episode of Lynching Lucy. Which is why I said it was ugly and a witch hunt.

 

[dark_mermaid]

Yeah, there were several. I only posted the one here but looks like they're all deleted now.

 

[Tjeezers]

Whatever comes from that domain, it is always sensational focussed on hunting and pointing fingers. I have (unfortunately) a long history with Nathan, it contains death threats, abusive behavior, inflammatory postings on Facebook and many other forms of harassment from his side, no responses from me of that nature. As a bonus, I get to hear from time how they will blow up my studio and how they dance on my grave, and then some comment " Indies will win from the studios" is added. Every time this happens I tell him to stop, and weeks later after each event, he apologizes for his Bipolar behavior. It would not surprise me if he made up some fake nicks on his domain, and pretends to be a girl. Stalking on Twitter, sending me a post URL and then deleting it, that is typical him. Anyway, thats my 2 cents.