Talk:Adult FriendFinder

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on ! February 2008. The result of the discussion was Keep.

The original article is very favorable to AFF -- maybe it was written by them? Someone should keep an eye on this article to make sure they don't delete the criticism.

I agree with your general sentiment, although I thought some of the links you added were of questionable value so I removed them. In general though this article has had a problem with people adding referal links, which should be watched closely for. Alex Krupp 01:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is"

Need I say more?


Yes, I have no idea what this is in reference to. Anti Anti Anti 01:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

He's probably referencing to free sex. Women these days don't need these kind of websites, they can easily get sex anywhere.--85.144.133.46 23:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


FWIW, "women can easily get sex anywhere" is sexist and insulting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.41.156 (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
And true :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.208.172 (talk) 05:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I dispute the neutrality of this article

IMO phrases like "there are many fake profiles" and "the ratio of men to women is very high" greatly understate the extent of the problems with AFF's alleged service. If the site was free or ad-supported, it would not be a big deal. But the system is designed so that users are lured into upgrading to a paid account in order to respond to messages from interested "women". Only then does it become obvious that 100% of the messages are fakes. (Not an exaggeration -- I used their service for an entire month, and 11/11 of the messages I received were scams.) AFF has an obvious business interest in tolerating this situation (while insisting that they don't), and this is as close to being a scam as possible without being overtly illegal. In particular, critical content keeps dissappearing from this wikipedia article, and there is only one party who stands to benefit from the false impression that AFF has "some problems" but is otherwise legitimate. That party is AFF itself.

I agree with everything you say and have seen the same thing myself firsthand. The problem is that the situation is very hard to quantify and Wikipedia has a policy against original research. We need to find a way that we can emphasize these criticisms without being libelous. The problem is that as far as I know no one has ever done any scientific research on fake dating profiles. Alex Krupp 20:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


$5 says my posting mysteriously disappears.

Ain't happened yet. You owe wikipedia $5. Go donate.
For the record, there are bot accounts created, and the people in the CS department disable them whenever they find them. There are usually a few fake accounts for testing purposes but they are deliberately kept unobtrusive (and usually have names rlike /^fftest.*/). Bot accounts come from outside sources, much like the infamous glut of Myspace whores. Some of the technology for screening against bots could be improved, but due to constantly working on existing portions of the site it's virtually impossible to get any development time for stuff like this.
Please keep in mind Wikipedia policy when stating 'facts' in the criticism page which are not only unverified but, in actuality, not true. Speculation and accusations from annoyed customers are better handled by calling the CS department.
Also, FFI's/Various, Inc's business interest in tolerating scam emails is mitigated by the fact that there are a number of ways for standard members to communicate with gold and silver members *when said paid members instantiate the communication*. In other words, a standard member is limited to winking at other members, but a paid member can communicate with anyone they start talking to, and if they get the 'standard contacts' package they can even get unsolicited emails from standard members.
You both seem to be looking for ways to do some sort of 'expose' on how corrupt the company is--in all honesty, a few minutes ago, standing outside the offices, I suggested we make build some sort of LWP script to find the affiliate referral codes added into the AFF wikipedia page's AFF link and, when found, freeze those accounts and send them a nasty email about their TOS violation (as well as some sort of 'watch my blog' page where people could list their blog URLs and get those watched for jerks pulling this crap, too). The suggestion was not met with disdain, but with 'That's a good idea... I just don't know if we'd have the development time.'

....................edit.............................................................

I’m not a statistician or a scientist. I’m just a carpenter. However i suspect that a statistical analysis of census data for a given state or region and male/female member ratios (over time) might indicate some trends (contrary to real life, supply will equal demand).

However a more common sense question might be, why would these incredibly attractive women post profiles, in the first place.

If they want to meet men for casual sex they would only need to go grocery shopping, or any other public place, there are plenty of options. If they wanted to be discovered by talent scouts there are better ways, i'm sure. As private dancers/escorts AFF might be an option, but is this their real picture, one would well ask. Again you might well ask yourself ,are there really women out there that look like this that want to date me. In my case the answer is yes, but i met them by chance, i certainly did not meet them online.

-Mick

I agree, AFF is bogus.--85.144.133.46 23:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


== AFF is Perfectly Legit ==

Hi there, I have to jump in here; I think there is confusion on this topic. AFF is most assuredly not a “bogus” site/group, I have been a member for many years, and met lots of people through this site in the different cities and states I’ve lived in and visited. And, I’m not a “pro”, nor a lesbian, and I would have no difficulty getting regular ‘dates’ if I wanted.

What is not really discussed in the article nor in this discussion thread is that AFF is a SWINGER site, and that is a big point to miss. This article should be linked to the Wikipedia Swinging article and other sources on that topic to best explain the subculture it serves. While it may be used as a dating service or a meet-n-greet by some, or by folks who want to 'look', the advertised target audience is for those in the Swinger lifestyle. For this reason, a newcomer who establishes a new account and blasts out emails to 50 women or couples may get frustrated when they get no response and assume it is a scam. Honestly, it does seem to take a bit of time for a single guy to break into the swinger lifestyle at first until their reputation is established. Not just at AFF; many Swinger Parties we have attended don’t let single guys in unless they’re specially invited. Perhaps because there typically seem to be more men than women who are interested in adopting this lifestyle. This does not mean single men can't jump in, only that it may take them a little longer to get established.

Mick, your comments about attractive women not having a reason to post their profiles on this site since they have plenty of other options illustrates what I believe many people do not understand. Imagine this. I’m an educated and professional woman. I’m also somebody’s mother, daughter, neighbor, coworker and friend. If you were in my shoes, would you go up to a person in a supermarket and ask if they want to get busy? No. Bad for my reputation would be an understatement, not to mention just bad manners. And, like many other Swingers, I wouldn’t want any “strings”, nor to confuse my potential partner. I would prefer to meet potential partners who share my ideas about the lifestyle, and to know that ahead of time. So instead, my hubby and I look through AFF profiles for others who are of similar mind, exchange emails briefly through AFF’s safe email system (no need to give personal information at first), weed out the “cheaters”, fakes and weirdoes , (one has to be willing to sift through those, as with any “personals”), make sure we all agree on boundaries, and then meet up for recreational sex.

Swinging. That is what this site is primarily for, and from my experience and that of some other Swingers I know, it may not be perfect but it works pretty well. Make sense?

Sealass (talk) 05:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] jocpoc

Several other "Friend finders", such as Private's jocpoc are in fact the same as AFF.

What does this line mean? I can't find any reference anywhere to a "jocpoc" dating service. -- Calion | Talk 19:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


...........edit.....................

If the gender ratios, which everyone agrees are correct, are in your favor..why not take a chance? The term "joc-poc" is not well defined, but, indiscriminate gay men (and other msm) might well consider their options.

This is just one uninformed opinion.

-Mick

...........edit.....................

I would strongly advise anyone considering paying for membership to reconsider. Many of the profiles on the site are out of date with people having not visited for months. I started to get more and more suspicous about how many of the profiles were real people and started comparing different profiles. Certain sentences and phrases started to appear in many profiles. In fact many of the profiles contain the same information but in a different order. Phrases such as 'I'm a god fearing women' appear a lot, and you have to ask realistically how many 'god fearing' women would be advertising themselves on a website for sex?! Of the 5 emails I received in my month as a member 4 of the profiles were supposedly suspended by AFF for misuse and the other one was asking me to send money to an address. Its my firm belief that AFF are mis-selling their site and make hugely exagerated claims about the number of active members etc. In effect they are committing fraud. I'm sure AFF will remove this post rather than substantiating their figures as any ethical company would do.


[edit] I have tried to NPOV the article...

And thus removed the tag, however none of the claims; most popular site/ten million members/use of spam/spyware/ratio m:f etc are cited. Does the article feel more NPOV now? - Glen T C 07:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article has been scamming our readers!

  1. I have removed "There are many other websites, such as Private's Jocpoc that operate using a similar model." - I cannot find ANY connection between a site called jocpoc and Private - in fact, this looks to be a scam pulled by AFF themselves. Take a look here and click on "jocpoc" - where does it take you? AFF site made to look like it's a Private site! Is almost worth mentioning under the "scams" section!
  2. the original external link to their site had a commission pay per click revenue code attached (I have removed) so whomever placed it was getting kickbacks from this article!
  3. Re: "In December, 2005 Alexa ranked the Adult Friend Finder website as the 43rd most visited website on the internet based on the previous three month's usage." I think given the above that a citation be required before including, I'm fed up, this article is a scam!

- Glen T C 13:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Glen, good edits. The Alexa thing is actually true though. In fact I think it used to be even higher, like the 25th most popular site on Alexa. Anyway you can see my comments above about the systemic problems with fixing this article. Alex Krupp 19:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep it's rating 47th right now... no wonder too if they own their "competition" :) - Glen T C 20:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I just removed another referralID from the adultfriendfinder.com links on the article page. If regular readers of this article could keep an eye out for this type of abuse, we can get it reverted quickly. --Versageek 19:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ads on the web with wrong cities

Hi, do you know these ads of adult friendfinder appearing on many websites? They claim the girls are from your city but the just take names from profiles and mix them with cities near you!!! I discovered this when I clicked on a ad with a girl which should be from my hometown but on the a.f.f. site loading she wasn't listed. I searched her nick on the web and found her a.f.f. profile which included her real hometown! Thousands of miles away on another continent! --194.95.33.142 09:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have information on how they "localize" your hometown just by using your IP address or whatever they're using?

It's even funnier, just keep refreshing the ad. The names will always be different, but after a while, you'll see the photos start to repeat, with different names under them. ;) I'm not saying AFF is a total scam, but their ads and other methods to get you to pay for a premium account are mostly a scam. 213.224.83.4 19:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It's always funny to see a fan of the Steelers living at a industrial zone near Amsterdam Airport. --80.127.21.134 08:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


I can say that the claim that 100% of the messages are fake is not true. I have met several very attractive (IMO) women on the site. I also have female friends to whom I have recommended the site. I have met women, real women after having been messaged by them. All of this is not to say that I have never recieved a fake message or seen a fake profile. I have seen dozens of profiles that had well known porno stars pictures attached to it claiming that she was the way the woman in question looked. But I have to wonder if all of that is AFF's fault. One woman I met told me that she used to use a porno picture as the picture on her profile and that she had only recently changed it to just a normal (non nude) face picture of herself. And before anyone makes the claim, I don't work for AFF, but I am a gold member and I think it's worth it. It has been for me. Just attempting to restore a little objectivity to the discussion about the site. Pihanki 00:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


Always keep in mind that ANY advertisement, personal or commercial or political, may be a fraud, may be substantial or some combination of both. You have to use your critical faculties. You'll never find substance without taking a risk, whether it be a car or a stock or a person. We keep hearing of successful matches, including out own. Granted, this is only anecdotal evidence. Paid services are far less likely to be suspect because they are likely to maintain staff to provide some degree of monitoring.

I agree. Critical and rational analysis is what is required here, not diatribes from men who are angry because the woman who looked like Jessica Simpson on AFF turned out to be a fake. I think a big part of my success on the site has been due to my abilty to spot fakes and eliminate them from consideration. But that also requires critical analysis.Pihanki 00:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

as a couple we have been  aff goldmembers for 2 yrs, it does work but caution is suggested .
with  busy profesional lifes  the service saves time and effort , you simply search  , e-mail and meet  
like any dating  game ,the  good  looking  , rich or great personalitys get more  responses. but a well put together  profile, current  pictures and a few visits to the chat room will pay dividends.

I was a paying member for a month, about 4 years ago, and since then I have been maintaining a free account. During those four years, I met probably 200-250 local AFF users (met, not had sex with!). Local users arrange meet-and-greets on a regular (sometimes weekly) schedule, and sometimes they have bigger parties. I have never seen any attempts in the chat to get people to purchase paid accounts. Yes, as on most dating services, the male-to-female ratio is not even, but if you act nice and polite, it is not hard to meet people. Sure, you can hook up at the local bar as well, but here everyone know what the idea is. It is more accepted to say what you are looking for, instead of spending a bunch of money on a girl, buying her drinks, just to hear "I am not here to meet anyone". Over the four years, I would guess I met up with about 20-30 women on AFF. A couple of them I dated for some period of time, some were just for sex. As Pihanki points out above, use common sense. Yes, there are scammers on there, but comparing to the personal ads on say craigslist.org, AFF is much better. On CL, 100% of my responses were "go to my website and register for free, and you can see pictures of me, watch me on cam and perhaps we can meet". There you have a scam, if anything. And no, I am not affiliated with AFF in any way. Not even paying them money.:-) 216.111.97.126 23:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added criticism of suspect advertising methods

Although I wasn't logged in. I'll be watching to see if the notes disappear in an unwarranted manner. Centrepull 23:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


Why I deleted the criticism.

Hi, I am new user of this wiki things. I deleted the criticism as someone delete my creation of internet discrimination. The criticism has no difference to ripoff report, do you guys really have any true statistics? I have true statistics to prove how many people have been hurted by internet discrimination. Yes, I do this for attention of you guys on internet discrimination.

[edit] Criticism section removed

While I suspect that what was written in the Criticism section is partly or completely true, as it stands it was clearly original rsearch, since it had no sources to support it. A criticism section is appropriate and valuable for this article but only if it has proper citations for the claims made. Gwernol 06:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Guys, I really don't see a problem here... as in the case of any article vandalized too often, one could disable edits from unregistered/new users. That will keep at least some edit warriors away. As for 216.111.97.126 and Pihanki, I wouldn't take them too seriously... a website with such policies can go as far as paying employees to haunt even the last website where criticism about AFF is posted :D Yes, it takes countless gullible & desperate users to make AFF's existence possible, but IMHO they (AFF, not the users) should either all go to jail or be forced to advertise what they really offer... or was it the other way around? Obviously, there is a larger interest to keep thins the way they are ;) 81.96.125.240 (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I am/was 216.111.97.126, and I am not (nor have I ever been) employed by AFF. As I said, I been a member since about 2003, and only paid for one month. It is true that there are bots in the chat rooms, most of them are obviously not related to AFF, but are regular cam whores trolling business, usually by trying to get guys to connect to a bot on MSN Messenger or (less frequently) Yahoo Messenger. When it comes to email, I been getting my fair share of scams or obvious fake profiles, but I have also been approached by several real women through mail. Not many, that is true, since few women pay for memberships. The guys contact them instead. The best way to meet people is in the chat rooms. Just don't come in and act like an idiot, I seen too many 20-something guys come in and ask the first girl they see if she want to get laid, then get all pissy for getting turned down. As I said, I met probably in the range of 300 people from the site at different parties/meet-and-greets, and hooked up with about 30 over the years. I talked to several more on the phone. All dating sites, AFF as well as PlentyOfFish, HotOrNot, Match and Yahoo Personals have fake profiles and cam whores on the sites. I don't think they are employed by the sites, but just using the infrastructure to troll for customers. Yes, AFF is using IP location software to make the ads look like the girls are local. I don't like it, makes it look cheap, but honestly, I seen other sites doing the same. I have a feeling that most of the people calling it a scam have gone on the site, created aprofile, blasted out email for a few weeks and not been getting any responses. It takes time to build a good profile, some trial and error might be needed. In addition, a good way to get exposure is to visit the chats, which is free. I have spent the enormous amount of $19.99 on AFF in 5 years. $4/year is not bad, and that is about $0.75 per girl I scored with from there. :-) None of them were "pros", by the way. :-) Some I took out for dinner, so perhaps $35 for a date, but most just came to my place or invited me to their place. 216.111.97.126 (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I reinstated the 'wrong names' and 'racially surprising galleries for certain locations' criticisms, on a number of grounds:

  • It is not original research, but simple observation
  • It is true
  • It is not libellous as Gwernol has claimed in hidden text on the edit page
  • It is important to retain as useful and relevant information for the reader

For similar reasons, I also restated this hidden statement:

This is aimed at inflating membership numbers on the main site as well as the mirror sites to induce more people to subscribe to the service.

as:

You can also log into these sites using your Adultfriendfinder login and password. This means that you are also a member of these sites, a situation that means that Adultfriendfinder may count your membership separately for each of these websites, thus boosting claimed membership numbers.

Centrepull (talk) 00:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

It is original research, though. It would be verifiable if you could cite some news article on the subject, but if you personally have concluded that the names are "racially surprising" (presumably based on your expert knowledge of racial naming patterns), that's original research. The same could be said of about 75% of this article, really, both the "pro" and the "anti" sections. --Delirium (talk) 18:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Simple observation viz: If one logs onto AFF, or sees one of their ads while browsing the net from an obscure part of Western Nigeria, it is a common observation that there are a very surprising number of 'blondencute' members within a small radius of your location. This is readily verifiable (with some knowledge) by anyone with the ability to spoof an IP address from a small town in Western Nigeria, and it can be verified by anyone who lives in, or visits such locations - such as myself. Apomu, in Osun State would count as pretty obscure. More seriously, I'm not sure why simply being reported in any newspaper counts as verification (newspapers are generally accurate?!?), when simple observation by any and everyone interested is not. I live in the UK, and the supposed local AFF membernames here are fake, again by simple observation. We don't have frats here, so 'fratgirl' is not a likely genuine nickname.

Finally, I would respectfully draw the reader's attention to the fact that this article has been stripped of most detail of the activities of AFF, I suspect on the premise that most of these activities happen to reflect badly on AFF. This vandalism appears systematic and long-term in purpose. Revert, revert, revert. Centrepull (talk) 09:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You don't appear to understand how encyclopedias, including Wikiepdia, work. I suggest you read our core policy on verifiability again, as it has a good description on why we verify from independent, published sources. Please don't "revert, revert, revert" unless you have reliable sources to back up the criticism section. Gwernol 11:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Translation

Italian translation of the Adult FriendFinder website is very bad, probably obatained by using an automatic translator, this happen also in other no-english languages? If yes it may be good to write about this problem in the article, maybe under the section "criticism". Sorry for my english. --Italian Viper (talk) 10:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism, etc.

I'll admit I'm sort of going on a gut feeling here, but based on the diction and generally un-wikipedia-esque approach of some of those removing criticism sections, does anyone else have a suspicion that AFF may have its hands in the editing of this page? Miles Livingston (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)