General Forum

Disclaimer up front: I don't play the games here, so my comments are based solely on what I've observed.

Agreed that it may seem hypocritical on the surface for someone to complain about hosts winning individual prizes when members can also win by themselves. However, the clear argument is a "chicken and egg" debate. Should members have priority over hosts since it is the members who do the paying? Or, should hosts be on equal footing with members? In the end, it is CC who makes the most money out of the contests, but to be fair, they are a profit-making business.

In the past there have been complaints that some hosts actually decline a member's request to link puzzles so that they may attempt to win a solo prize. In my honest opinion, that is one flaw in the contest rules. A host should not have the ability to pick and choose her method of winning. Once a member makes a request for linkage, it should be automatic. After all, hosts don't have the counter-ability to go out looking for linkage with members. If a host wins solo after the completion of a video session, so be it; however, if she is between video sessions and a member can complete her puzzle, there should not be a "decline" option.

We members volutarily spend our money in video sessions with these fine hosts, but we are the ones who are spending the money. The hosts, through a business arrangement with CC (and studios), are service providers to us. They may be our friends or lovers, but at the end of the day it is still simply a business transaction that takes place.

It is up to the members of the site to decide for themselves whether they can live with the rules of these contests. If a member disagrees with such rules, they have the option to not play along. If they are willing to take the risk/challenge of the game, they also accept the risk of being declined by a host.

So, to conclude a long diatribe, is it hypocritical to complain? It depends on your point of view.

Have a wonderful day in fantasyland.

I disgaree that ahost should not be allowed to decline a match from a member. What if one member ha spent $000's in videos with one host on the agreement that they will share any prize that they may win. Why should another member be allowed to come along and "steal" that prize ?

you might be right altho i haven't read those complaining posts.
I think the problem is that it is almost impossible to join with a host doing the same puzzle until you have only 1 or 2 pieces left to get and then it is probably possible to complete the puzzle almost without realising it while your in a video.
my 2 cents

n/a

There is no comparison between the 2 scenarios. The member who wins individually, has expended greatly to achieve that win and their profit (if any) is correspondingly reduced. The winning host (alone or in combination) has the prize plus all the income from the video sessions. Which, of course, is just how it should be. But the OP's original criticism is redundant.

A host is 1) greedy and 2) stupid if she does not combine with a member that has spent a lot of money on her, be it during the contest or at other times.

First, if a guy has spent a lot of money on her, she should reward him by allowing him to get some of that money back. It is only fair. In the case that she has several guys that spent a lot of money on her, then I guess she needs to pick based on either how much or how often a guy visits.

Second, a guy that probably spends a lot on her is a regular and will probably use a lot of his prize to visit her more so she will get some of this money back. Plus, if she does not combine, he will get angry and maybe stop visiting her so she will lose more money in the long run unless she can justify her decision by honestly explaining that another regular asked first, another guy spent even more money, et cetera.

It is simply bad business not to combine with a regular. It is greedy and stupid. In the alternative, the host can at least offer free or discounted video in the future to reward loyalty. To be clear, however, if some guy a host never met or that spent say $100 wants to combine, I have no problem with a host saying no. I am talking about the big spenders, say $500 or more who usually are regular viewers. In such a situation, it would be foolish and unfair for a host to refuse to combine. Then again, some members are weak and will allow a host to continue to kick them where it counts and come back for more so maybe there are times when a host can decline a regular and still keep him as a regular customer. It all depends.

One last thing: I NEVER WANT TO HEAR ABOUT HOW HARD A HOST WORKS DURING A CONTEST! They are working "harder" because they think there is more money to be made. And this extra "hard work" does NOT excuse being greedy. Unlike the member that has SPENT his money, a host is RECEIVING money during a contest. There is NO comparison. Does she EARN her money? Of course, and I have no problem with that. BUT THE CONTESTS ARE ALL LUCK!!! SHE HASN'T EARNED HER PRIZE!! SHE GOT LUCKY!!! The only thing she did to "earn" her prize was supposedly be a good person and a good host so she got extra video to improve her chances, but she needs to continue to show she is a good person and a good host by sharing with those that supported her along the way.

I should conclude with one additional thought: don't assume that a host that supposedly declined an invite to combine actually did so. Sometimes it is true, sometimes it is not. I know of one case where it is almost definitely true since I have very good info, and one where despite the rumors, I am pretty sure it is not true. But the bottom line is that unless you are either the host or the member, you never really know for sure. Of course, a member can print screen his ability to combine so then there would be some evidence, but still, maybe he wasn't a regular and this is why she said no.

Hmmmm....only about 459 more words than the subject actually deserves.

there are many members who spend a lot of money on hosts...how should she choose, the one that spent the most money or the one who was with her at the end? So whoever spends the most normally she should join with even if he did not participate as much?

And what about the money members spend normally, should she take that into consideration also?

See logically the most intelligent thing a host could do is win the puzzle individually that way she cant be accused of playing favorites by anyone.

You do the hours and work of "show this" and demands placed on them emotionally and physically. You are exactly who I was referring to in the post demanding, no compassion and treat the host like your own plaything not a human being. You must be quite the catch in real life.

(so who's stupid opinionated,demanding and a cheap bastard?)

i did get this piece 2 days ago:))i can give u it:P

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

or everyone is doing AxB? I have just 3 pieces missing, take a look maybe we could join? x

axb 10, ditto

n/a

:))))

hehe wish i could (kidding) i have #4 #6 #12 #19 left ...i guess we dont need to advertise our puzzles here .. guys can find us easily... congratulations for winners and wish everyone good luck..

n/a

n/a

4 & 10 and stil cant join with any hosts

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

pieces needed: 12,16, 19

n/a

Romanian hosts, go vote!!!!

n/a

I agree! For me, how about puzzles with only 4 pieces!

hheheehe- bravo A - finally we got youuuuuuuuuu! i bet its some nice girl that cough not just your body parts but lil more then that! In any case, nice of you to join us in this game! As i see it, this suppose to be fun and not competition! lets make it so next time if not now!
muahaaaaa

i miss 12 too:)... 19 i have... maybe we have luck today, kisses , Dana

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

I have three left too - but i checked and we can't match :(

n/a

Me either... Down to 2 pieces.

The number of posts is about what I expected. You made my point for me in your post. "I can only imagine ...." You can only imagine because in practice most hosts do not post. It is easy to identify which are the posts about pieces and is easy for you to avoid opening and reading them. You simply seem annoyed that for this short time the forum does not conform to some arbitrary aesthetic standard you have set.

No, what annoys me is that such posts are desperate cries for attention all in the name of money. You even have one former cover girl that charges $3,00/min open who apparently is so desperate to share a prize that she thinks repetitive posts are the way to go. I can only hope for her sake that she is not in some type financial or personal crisis, and that only the green-eyed monster is to blame.

I can give you a long list, as I am sure you can give me, of hosts that get very little video, especially during contests, that have not resorted to such tactics. Perhaps they should, assuming such posts actually work. But given that the majority of hosts refrain from transparent attempts at getting their name out there, I think the majority would seem to believe that such posts are inappropriate even if they are not quite as annoyed about it all as I am.

get a life ... the hosts make most of their money during this time frame and many of them put in long hours. If they post on the site, so be it. Its what forums are about.

As the gentleman below said, the titles of most of the posts tell you what they are about. Don't open them if it bothers you.

Member, I can understand your point but only to a limited extent. The contest overwhelms the forum so we lose our normal variety of interesting and informative discussion. :) However, the contests don't last long and nobody forces us to read threads that don't interest us. Perhaps it boils down to what people want to talk about and the majority wants to talk about puzzle pieces during the contests. There is nothing shameless or offensive about it. Majority rules.

C'est la Vie. Non?

hey im missing pcs 8 and 18 too...that really sucks

:-) I'm down to 2... 8 and 9

n/a

16, 17, 18?

n/a

n/a