registred members can't find me on the homepage

[little_poetry]

Hi @punker barbie
My name is Kiki, I'm a model on a Chaturbate, room name is little_poetry. For last 2 days I have the same problem as Hotfallingdevil (i've seen her thread once i visited this site). I'm not listed on a home page, only guests can see my room on a top of homepage. Registred users finding me on 30+ pages even tho I have 3-5k viewers. This is a huge problem for me I dont know why it happened, CB support doesn't answering me so I decided to state my problem here. I hope someone here can help me, because its really frustraiting knowing that you got shadow banned, but dont know the reason..


With love, Kiki

 

[cbhours]

So the API is giving you the same view as being logged out?

Yes

 

[GoldenBanana]

#2 worries me if it's happening. To the comment from @Iluvablow69 above, I can't see thecherie's satisfaction score, but the site ranking of a model I follow seems to have dropped and she has a satisfaction score above 95% so it very likely could be happening to others. It would be good to document other cases if there are any.

Definitely seems to be happening to others. I see a few models I follow online currently that have satisfaction scores just under 96% and are on page 32. Listed right after them, there's at least a dozen other models with hundreds of viewers (the rest of the page is mostly single digits). Every model I checked with the higher viewer counts either had a hidden satisfaction score or a score just under 96%.

 

[smoker919]

Definitely seems to be happening to others. I see a few models I follow online currently that have satisfaction scores just under 96% and are on page 32. Listed right after them, there's at least a dozen other models with hundreds of viewers (the rest of the page is mostly single digits). Every model I checked with the higher viewer counts either had a hidden satisfaction score or a score just under 96%.

Remember to calculate the percent based on the numbers because the visible percent is rounded up, e.g., 94.2% is shown as 95%.

 

[GoldenBanana]

Remember to calculate the percent based on the numbers because the visible percent is rounded up, e.g., 94.2% is shown as 95%.

Indeed, I made sure to look at the total number of votes instead of just the % score. At the time, all the models I checked had true scores that were above 95%, but below 96%. For example, one of the models had 337 thumbs up and 15 thumbs down, so a 95.7% overall score. She had over 2,000 viewers, but was showing up on page 32.

 

[smoker919]

Indeed, I made sure to look at the total number of votes instead of just the % score. At the time, all the models I checked had true scores that were above 95%, but below 96%. For example, one of the models had 337 thumbs up and 15 thumbs down, so a 95.7% overall score. She had over 2,000 viewers, but was showing up on page 32.

I'll check what page the model I mentioned is on when she streams next, but her rating is 95.75%.

If CB has moved the goal posts again then it's bad for everyone.

 

[Squinkle]

So I did a little detective work. Here's what I found. The error seems to occur when a model's room is displayed in certain positions while a user is logged into an account. So positions 2, 6, 10, 14 (the list goes on) are adaptable. If the room is followed, then the page is refreshed, the model disappears from the homepage and is ejected to page 30+.

This isn't happening to certain models. It's happening to all models who sit in certain positions (regardless of their viewer count). They are displaying ONLY unfollowed models in those tiles.

It seems like an attempt to increase user engagement. This is intentional.

 

[bamdicted]

So I did a little detective work. Here's what I found. The error seems to occur when a model's room is displayed in certain positions while a user is logged into an account. So positions 2, 6, 10, 14 (the list goes on) are adaptable. If the room is followed, then the page is refreshed, the model disappears from the homepage and is ejected to page 30+.

This isn't happening to certain models. It's happening to all models who sit in certain positions (regardless of their viewer count). They are displaying ONLY unfollowed models in those tiles.

It seems like an attempt to increase user engagement. This is intentional.

This is how front page Female looks for me now, I noticed last year that positions 11, 13, 15, 17, 19. But now there seems to be more 'affected' places. @cbhours @smoker919

 

[cbhours]

So I did a little detective work. Here's what I found. The error seems to occur when a model's room is displayed in certain positions while a user is logged into an account. So positions 2, 6, 10, 14 (the list goes on) are adaptable. If the room is followed, then the page is refreshed, the model disappears from the homepage and is ejected to page 30+.

This isn't happening to certain models. It's happening to all models who sit in certain positions (regardless of their viewer count). They are displaying ONLY unfollowed models in those tiles.

It seems like an attempt to increase user engagement. This is intentional.

That wasn't like that 2-3 days ago but yes good catch it does seem like it's happening that way now but I only tested it for a bit.

A way to increase the number of accounts users follow early? Hmm it's possible but why in those specific slots that's weird.

 

[pbonACF]

This is how front page Female looks for me now, I noticed last year that positions 11, 13, 15, 17, 19. But now there seems to be more 'affected' places. @cbhours @smoker919

View attachment 103609

Fascinating.

Also fascinating is that at this moment I see 116 rooms on page 1, and 90 rooms on pages 2 and 3. It's always been 99 on all but the last page in the past.

A quick-as-I-can recheck showed 118 rooms on page 1 with 18 having less than 100 visitors in their room. Coincidence?

edit:

Ok, that was with a perpetually gray account.
When I logged in with a purple account I see 97 rooms on page 1 with only 2 having less than 100 visitors.

Now if CB was trying to relieve the burden of gray users born by the most popular rooms, I might code something like this to direct gray attention to more rooms.

Does anyone see the same kind of thing?

 

[smoker919]

I'll check what page the model I mentioned is on when she streams next, but her rating is 95.75%.

If CB has moved the goal posts again then it's bad for everyone.

She has over 300 viewers and a satisfaction rating of 95.75% and is on page 28. WTF?!?

 

[smoker919]

She has over 300 viewers and a satisfaction rating of 95.75% and is on page 28. WTF?!?

I looked around page 28/29 and there are a number of models there with 3-figure viewerships and satisfaction ratings between 95 and 96%. Something is really off.

 

[Iluvablow69]

Well, the most recent reply I had on this conversation was:

"Thanks for your email. The reason why you may notice this this difference between when you are logged out and logged in is because we often initially release, or split test, features to a random subset of sessions to ensure their sustainability and performance. We appreciate your feedback on this feature. Please let us know if you have additional questions for us."

However, it does not explain how someone can go from page 38 when you follow them to page 1 when you unfollow them haha
As I am still the same user...obviously haha
Unless the test was to move followed rooms to the end so more unfollowed rooms stay high in the list...however, this is not the case as other rooms I follow are still on page 1.

Confusing

Hopefully one day there will be an explanation or at least a fix.

I feel bad for all of the models who are effect. It will not matter what they do, they will be rank extremely low for logged in real users.
A satisfaction score of less than 96% - if we pretend for a second this is the reason - is very easy to get for most models.
Even 20 thumbs up and a single 1 thumbs down is enough to fall below 96% - it would be very harsh haha
Particularly as it's only 25 tokens to leave a rating. People can easily abuse this more than they already do.

 

[Iluvablow69]

So....having been a bit of a saddo over the last 2 days and looking at more than 10,000 live profiles, it seems the ranking does indeed go 100%-96% (this is rounded 96%. so 95.1% still works), then it ranks all of the rounded 95%, then all of the rounded 94%..etc,

Therefore, if I was a model, I would turn this off, turn it for someone you trust to send you a like, then turn it off again.
It has now become a pointless feature to leave open.

 

[cbhours]

So....having been a bit of a saddo over the last 2 days and looking at more than 10,000 live profiles, it seems the ranking does indeed go 100%-96% (this is rounded 96%. so 95.1% still works), then it ranks all of the rounded 95%, then all of the rounded 94%..etc,

Therefore, if I was a model, I would turn this off, turn it for someone you trust to send you a like, then turn it off again.
It has now become a pointless feature to leave open.

Turning it off does not disable voting

 

[Iluvablow69]

Turning it off does not disable voting

It does not disable the score, but it disables the ability to vote another thumbs down...right?

 

[smoker919]

It does not disable the score, but it disables the ability to vote another thumbs down...right?

No. It just hides the numbers; it doesn't disable the ability to give thumbs up or thumbs down.

 

[bamdicted]

It does not disable the score, but it disables the ability to vote another thumbs down...right?

In reality it might make some users suspect the model has something to 'hide', at least it does for me, though it doesn't really matter to me what the models score is.

 

[Vixxen81]

In reality it might make some users suspect the model has something to 'hide', at least it does for me, though it doesn't really matter to me what the models score is.

I think what's more harmful than anything is how long they remain there. Like yeah, it's great that the positive votes stay for 90 days, but a model shouldn't be made to see a single thumbs down for 90 days just because some dude had a stick up their ass about being entitled to PM with a model because he's a Supporter account and tipped her $1.25...like that's absolute insanity to me.

 

[Squinkle]

... a model shouldn't be made to see a single thumbs down for 90 days just because some dude had a stick up their ass about being entitled to PM with a model because he's a Supporter account and tipped her $1.25...like that's absolute insanity to me.

It seriously is annoying. I had one guy give me a bad rating because he asked how much for a custom video and I told him I don't do customs,. The loser gave me a thumbs down.

 

[Vixxen81]

It seriously is annoying. I had one guy give me a bad rating because he asked how much for a custom video and I told him I don't do customs,. The loser gave me a thumbs down.

That sucks so bad. My last one left a comment of "Hateful evil bitch" because I wouldn't respond to his PM. Like this should not be allowed and we should be able to report abusive comments like that, but we can't.

 

[smoker919]

There are a number of things not to like about the current satisfaction score system:

• It's opaque. The rules for when satisfaction score affects site ranking aren't clear and are certainly broken at the moment (hence parts of this thread).
• It's open to abuse and weaponization by trolls, studios, jealous parties, and idiots.
• It creates constant anxiety for many models. I've seen models with hundreds of thumbs up and satisfaction scores very close to 100% just spiral mentally when they get a thumbs down.
• It overrides the boost models should be receiving during their promo weeks so some models don't even get a chance.
• It skews the in-site currency system by making 25 tokens seem like a lot when, as was pointed out, it's just $1.25.
• As was also pointed out, it's more often reflective of the pettiness and entitlement of users rather than the quality of a stream.

The fact that a single petty individual can tank a model's income with a handful of small tips just blows my mind. A system like this would be fine if the numbers were just for show. But because there are compounding harms that are too often incommensurate with the reason someone leaves a thumbs down it really should be re-evaluated.

 

[Iluvablow69]

100%!
Does @punker barbie ever take this feedback onboard?

I assume the vast majority of users do not even know what it is. A thumbs up or thumbs down means nothing to them.
However, both users and models who know the impact think it's dumb.

I actually like the idea of reducing the days. 90 days is too long anyway, even for thumbs up. But thumbs down should be shorter.
14 days for thumbs up and 7 days for thumbs down would be much more tolerable...not that it still makes it 'right'.
Someone mentioned once, approx 20,000 new accounts (obviously not always new models) start each month, around 60% of those never make month 2. Their thumbs up outlive their activity haha

Maybe it was introduced to prevent users from getting 'scammed', but that word is thrown around to loosely now too.
Whatever the initial intent was, it's now dumb.

 

[Vixxen81]

100%!
Does @punker barbie ever take this feedback onboard?

I assume the vast majority of users do not even know what it is. A thumbs up or thumbs down means nothing to them.
However, both users and models who know the impact think it's dumb.

I actually like the idea of reducing the days. 90 days is too long anyway, even for thumbs up. But thumbs down should be shorter.
14 days for thumbs up and 7 days for thumbs down would be much more tolerable...not that it still makes it 'right'.
Someone mentioned once, approx 20,000 new accounts (obviously not always new models) start each month, around 60% of those never make month 2. Their thumbs up outlive their activity haha

Maybe it was introduced to prevent users from getting 'scammed', but that word is thrown around to loosely now too.
Whatever the initial intent was, it's now dumb.

When it was first released, it was kind of shaded as a "if this person gets too many thumbs downs then they can't broadcast anymore", once it was in full swing that very quickly changed and it was just supposed to give people an idea of how a model responds to tips. Then the site EXPLODED with Covid and this system has outlived its usefulness. They're clearly trying to change it but it's making it worse.

I have only seen one scenario where feedback was taken onboard and that was when a user saw a bunch of content he paid for had been erased from his library. That took a minute to get fixed but it did. That doesn't mean others don't exist, I just haven't seen them personally.

 

[Vixxen81]

Sorry for the DP

Another issue with this rating system is the built in 5 second delay for the viewer. Someone tips me and I get up and walk away without knowing they tipped me and they think I walked away AFTER they tipped me. That can result in a thumbs down too. I mean the whole system at this point is absolutely nothing more than a way to punish models for someone else's opinion. At least with Yelp reviews you can see where a person was being unreasonable or unrealistic in their expectations but all we have here is an arbitrary, anonymous system that harms models instead of helps them. I saw a cam on page 1 that had two thumbs up and like 400 viewers. They should be on page 4 or something like that.

What saddens me the most is how much they don't ask models. I'm sure they get a lot of emails and try to piecemeal together something that works for everyone but at what point does the product (models) become more important than the tippers? I think there would be a lot less decay and models leaving if we felt more supported in the long run when it comes to the things we need to run successful shows.

 

[smoker919]

Another issue with this rating system is the built in 5 second delay for the viewer. Someone tips me and I get up and walk away without knowing they tipped me and they think I walked away AFTER they tipped me. That can result in a thumbs down too.

I've suggested to models I know to have a rotating notice saying, "Everything you see on CB is 5-7 seconds delayed (or more), so please be patient if tips or requests take a few moments before I get to them", and also before a private show to ask viewers to wait for them but to count to 10 before accepting the private show request to make sure the message is actually heard.

 

[stormythunder]

Sorry for the DP

Another issue with this rating system is the built in 5 second delay for the viewer. Someone tips me and I get up and walk away without knowing they tipped me and they think I walked away AFTER they tipped me. That can result in a thumbs down too. I mean the whole system at this point is absolutely nothing more than a way to punish models for someone else's opinion. At least with Yelp reviews you can see where a person was being unreasonable or unrealistic in their expectations but all we have here is an arbitrary, anonymous system that harms models instead of helps them. I saw a cam on page 1 that had two thumbs up and like 400 viewers. They should be on page 4 or something like that.

What saddens me the most is how much they don't ask models. I'm sure they get a lot of emails and try to piecemeal together something that works for everyone but at what point does the product (models) become more important than the tippers? I think there would be a lot less decay and models leaving if we felt more supported in the long run when it comes to the things we need to run successful shows.

THIS. Thisthisthisthisthisthisthi-


And my delay is actually slightly longer closer to 8-10 seconds because of my PC capabilities

 

[pbonACF]

There are a number of things not to like about the current satisfaction score system:

• It's opaque. The rules for when satisfaction score affects site ranking aren't clear and are certainly broken at the moment (hence parts of this thread).
• It's open to abuse and weaponization by trolls, studios, jealous parties, and idiots.
• It creates constant anxiety for many models. I've seen models with hundreds of thumbs up and satisfaction scores very close to 100% just spiral mentally when they get a thumbs down.
• It overrides the boost models should be receiving during their promo weeks so some models don't even get a chance.
• It skews the in-site currency system by making 25 tokens seem like a lot when, as was pointed out, it's just $1.25.
• As was also pointed out, it's more often reflective of the pettiness and entitlement of users rather than the quality of a stream.

The fact that a single petty individual can tank a model's income with a handful of small tips just blows my mind. A system like this would be fine if the numbers were just for show. But because there are compounding harms that are too often incommensurate with the reason someone leaves a thumbs down it really should be re-evaluated.

Things to like about the current satisfaction score system:

• My favorite model always has a great rating

 

[bamdicted]

Things to like about the current satisfaction score system:

• My favorite model always has a great rating

Things not to like about the current satisfaction score system:

• It takes 25 to counter 1

It is the equivalent of Amazon telling vendors: Your product only scores 4,749 stars out of 5, we can't promote rubbish products like that.

 

[droopla]

A good improvement on the rating system would be thumb up very 24 hours , but thumb down every 7 days ( because why would you tip a model the next day if you gave her a thumb down).

And the new system about not appearing on the home page with bad rating, maybe not a popular opinion , but i like it.
There always used to be (mostly new) models with 1000+ viewers and when i went to that room i could see no reason at all why there would be so many.
It always gave the feeling something was manipulated (fake traffic ???)
These rooms now disappear really fast and more quality rooms stay on top.

 

[rockin_rod]

Models should be able to leave feedback for viewers too IMHO, for any sense of fairness in a ratings system it has to work both ways.