NoVA SugarBabies

[Shinshi]

When I created my profile and when I make changes to it, I get a message saying that the changes will be reviewed before being posted (or something like that). I don't know if there is an automated check or manual review, but I'm really surprised that all of those "online only" profiles were allowed. This may be overstatement, but it seems that there used to be occasional scammers and fakes. Now it seems that legit SBs are in the minority--and an increasing percentage of them have GPS. I think the site is still the best around, but I would have given it an A- or B+ about 5 years ago, but maybe a C- at best today.

Regarding the last SB link, the details say she is 38 and African American. The photos show a 28 year old Caucasian. WTF?!

For sure man, I suspect all male users are indeed manually checked. But female users? Highly doubtful! Otherwise, there wouldn't be such an overwhelming majority of scams compared to legits. I get what Newbie1961 said earlier about Seeking trying to have as many registered profiles as possible while attempting to ward off feds / cops. But there's a reason that ratio between the real and fake has gotten so out of whack. It stems from their mods opting for quantity over quality. "Numbers" of users instead of real people. And while platonic is permitted on the site, there's a difference between that and online-only. But Seeking's mods can't even be bothered to check reports against a SB in a timely manner while not hesitating to flag accounts like mine on multiple occasions (objecting to my terminology in "About Me" and "Seeking" sections despite others having the same goddamn wording).

It's not the app or likely any systems problem that is causing SBs locations to read Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, etc. The site had been flooded by foreign women; some of them are in dire need, some want a boyfriend or a plane ticket, and some want to rip us off.

Another fair point. Even though we can filter messages into a separate "Filtered Out" folder, there ought to be a way to automatically hide / block / mask users from accessing others' profiles if beyond a certain mileage. Tinder is also guilty of this, allowing premium users to mask their location.

Also, I'm sure some of these foreign girls are legit. But they have to have enough common sense to know that no average joe is going to fly her a thousand miles to him for some fun, put a ring on her finger, and bam happy ending's all-around. Just insanity. Seeking is still the better SB site out there, but it sure has taken a massive hit in quality.

[RazorFish1801]

I think you posted that you saw her. Appreciate some feedback here or you can pm me. Chatting with her.

She's terrific. Sexier than pictures. A real pleasure.

[AksWorld]

Yea. Sorry LOL.

Haha and I thought those numbers were secret ciphers that you use for giving reviews 😁 😉

BTW it seems we need to put space between emojis otherwise it only shows first one correctly not others .

[Jbunk]

Yea. Sorry LOL.

Are those numbers for emojis?

[AksWorld]

🧐 what are those numbers LOL?

Are those numbers for emojis?

[DickLongwood]

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the app either. I only use it for two things: 1) Checking messages, and 2) Hiding / blocking profiles who aren't even in the DMV or are suspected scammers.

Too many "SBs" claiming to be near me when their last log-in location is Venezuela, or Peru, or Colombia, etc. With all the "favorites" I receive from there, maybe I ought to move down to South America and live like a god or something, haha!

It's not the app or likely any systems problem that is causing SBs locations to read Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, etc. The site had been flooded by foreign women; some of them are in dire need, some want a boyfriend or a plane ticket, and some want to rip us off.

[DickLongwood]

Kudos for this valuable tip! So the following SA profiles have all pushed for an online-only arrangement (see my screenshots) and not even remotely attempting to be coy about it:

Bbabe3 (https://www.seeking.com/member/31d2c...d-ab5e2ac2362c).

Kelly403 (https://www.seeking.com/member/ee84b...d-4e4ca1c9a9b0).

Matcha4 (https://www.seeking.com/member/22267...6-a5934ed26fdc).

Mariahj3 (https://www.seeking.com/member/449a5...6-4c01bbc9cb3f).

What's really disappointing, however, is that those profiles are all still up as of this afternoon. I did as BigFrog suggested and shared my private photos, took screenshots, then reported the users in question. At this point, Seeking automatically blocks them from being viewed but are indeed still populating the list of those with access to your private pictures. Two days have come and gone, and they're still around. So the way I see it, there's three possibilities: Seeking's content admins are either 1) Tired of my reporting and passively telling me to fuck off, 2) Preferring to give these girls the benefit of a doubt owing to the pandemic making it supposedly "risky" to meet in-person, or 3) Require multiple user reports in order to take down another user.

Nothing can really be done if it's the first two scenarios, unfortunately. But if it is the latter (which I suspect to be the case), then I highly recommend that those of you with SA accounts to report these "SBs" as well. If they're not willing to meet until after the pandemic, then that's one thing. But if they flat-out say they only desire a cyber arrangement, then this runs contrary to Seeking's own guidelines and is re portable.

When I created my profile and when I make changes to it, I get a message saying that the changes will be reviewed before being posted (or something like that). I don't know if there is an automated check or manual review, but I'm really surprised that all of those "online only" profiles were allowed. This may be overstatement, but it seems that there used to be occasional scammers and fakes. Now it seems that legit SBs are in the minority--and an increasing percentage of them have GPS. I think the site is still the best around, but I would have given it an A- or B+ about 5 years ago, but maybe a C- at best today.

Regarding the last SB link, the details say she is 38 and African American. The photos show a 28 year old Caucasian. WTF?!

[PixelsAndGrids]

what are those numbers LOL?

My guess is GPS coordinates.

[AksWorld]

🙋127995;8205;9794;65039; The whole neighborhood I'm guessing LOL.

🧐 what are those numbers LOL?

[Newbie1961]

Posted in Richmond but just my thoughts.

They need as many young beautiful profiles on there so you and I will keep paying. They also don't mind because if FOSTA ever comes sniffing around they look more legit (no sex for sale here). There is a reason they even have a platonic tab you can add to what your seeking in your profile. They now permit online only wording in profiles it appears. It is worse than ever tho. I am wasting so much time sifting now I finally redid my search criteria to exclude platonic in my search menu. I know I will miss a few possibles, but if they added platonic my chances are usually slim to none with them anyway.

[Jbunk]

🙋127995;8205;9794;65039; The whole neighborhood I'm guessing LOL.

Has anyone met her? How is she anyway?

[AksWorld]

I think this is her (thanks Jbunk).

https://www.seeking.com/member/70201...f-f69034cf9475

Has anyone met her? How is she anyway?

[ShortMan22]

Has anyone ever used this site to book a massage?

This smells like a scam to me but wanted to check with you mongers first.

https://indulgencetouch.com

[Shinshi]

I posted this trick in the Baltimore section. If you've shared your private pics with someone and they block you (or you block them) then they remain in the list of "people I've shared my private pics with. " If they deactivate or get taken down, then they're removed from that list. You can use this to get a link to someone who has blocked you.

Kudos for this valuable tip! So the following SA profiles have all pushed for an online-only arrangement (see my screenshots) and not even remotely attempting to be coy about it:

Bbabe3 (https://www.seeking.com/member/31d2c...d-ab5e2ac2362c).

Kelly403 (https://www.seeking.com/member/ee84b...d-4e4ca1c9a9b0).

Matcha4 (https://www.seeking.com/member/22267...6-a5934ed26fdc).

Mariahj3 (https://www.seeking.com/member/449a5...6-4c01bbc9cb3f).

What's really disappointing, however, is that those profiles are all still up as of this afternoon. I did as BigFrog suggested and shared my private photos, took screenshots, then reported the users in question. At this point, Seeking automatically blocks them from being viewed but are indeed still populating the list of those with access to your private pictures. Two days have come and gone, and they're still around. So the way I see it, there's three possibilities: Seeking's content admins are either 1) Tired of my reporting and passively telling me to fuck off, 2) Preferring to give these girls the benefit of a doubt owing to the pandemic making it supposedly "risky" to meet in-person, or 3) Require multiple user reports in order to take down another user.

Nothing can really be done if it's the first two scenarios, unfortunately. But if it is the latter (which I suspect to be the case), then I highly recommend that those of you with SA accounts to report these "SBs" as well. If they're not willing to meet until after the pandemic, then that's one thing. But if they flat-out say they only desire a cyber arrangement, then this runs contrary to Seeking's own guidelines and is reportable.

[Dimples572]

For me the Apple app is completely unusable, I keep getting errors when I open it or open it from a notification. Anyone else having an issue with it?

Had no idea there was an app for it on Apple. Is it new?