Home Sugar Support™ Forum News Reorganization Of SA Website Today??!!?

This topic contains 7 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Abbyy1 9 months, 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #52109

    Abbyy1
    Participant

    I’m a fan of the SA website, …but you could say I’m not quite so excited about the new changes to the website implemented as of this morning (Aug 2, 2018). The new ‘Seeking’ category combines the ‘What I’m looking for’ in a person with the ‘Financial lifestyle’ you prefer for SugarBabies, and these two things don’t fit well crammed into one category. On top of that, SugarBabies are limited to only picking 7 traits from this conglomerated category, forcing them to attempt to choose between one or the other.
    I understand that SA is trying to ‘streamline’ the site, but I think that streamlining can be overdone to the point where important distinctions are lost, and this has happened with the most recent changes.
    I also understand that laws have changed regarding enforcement of some crimes, in specific regard to holding websites which may facilitate those crimes responsible. And I know that many of the recent changes to the SA website are in response to those new laws in an effort to reinforce SA’s own policies to discourage crime. Specifically, I’ve noticed SA has been trying to downplay (or even eliminate) specific references regarding finances or money, which I can understand as their way of trying to prevent their website from being associated with crimes such as prostitution. This is all well and good.
    However, you can’t lump someone’s personality in with a lifestyle or standard-of-living…that is like saying that someone’s personality IS their standard of living! The two aspects are different, and unrelated. A person has their personality regardless of what their standard of living is. Forget comparing apples to oranges, it’s like putting apples in the same category as travel mugs! And then saying you can only pick 7 so you have to choose between one, or the other! They are obviously two different things, and don’t belong in the same category. You can be seeking/have preferences in BOTH categories — just like you can have preferences for personality AND for level of physical fitness/physical beauty. But they are two different things — it’s grossly overgeneralizing to try to lump them together, especially to say you have to choose between one or the other! Maybe you will find someone with all of your preferences, or maybe you will find a few ppl with most of them and you’ll have to pick which combinations are more important to you….But it’s perfectly fine to be looking for specifics in BOTH categories — and without trying to imply that one of the categories doesn’t exist.

    #52110

    Abbyy1
    Participant

    Thoughts? Comments? Sorry for the sonewhat-rant, but does anyone feel that this latest change goes a little too far to cater to some kind of New-Age-Puritanical mindset that it’s somehow wrong for women (or SugarBabies) to be considering finances when considering a relationship? I mean, eliminating it as a category completely.. really?? I feel like I just got slapped for DARING to think about finances in a relationship.

    #52113

    GamerGirlJ
    Participant

    I mostly dislike the changes as well. I take issue with the change in the website name from “SeekingArrangement” to “Seeking”. I came to SA because it was distinctly different than other websites; “Seeking” makes it sound exactly like every other damn dating website out there and makes it significantly less enticing to me.

    #52114

    teamswirl
    Participant

    The whole thing is a bad idea. It is only going to increase the amount of men on the site who do not know anything about being a SD. They should really go back to the lifestyle expectations they originally had. Every change they have made to this site has been making the site worse. When they stopped putting amounts on the lifestyle expectations, that’s when I got angry. There were guys who made $100K/year claiming to be able to give an extravagant lifestyle. Please. I know they are worried about the government coming after them, but soon they will have to shut down this site because everyone will see it as a waste.

    #52116

    Abbyy1
    Participant

    @teamswirl…Well there were guys on there before who made $100K and their lifestyle said ‘Substantial’…they just didn’t read the guidelines!! I agree that the quality of guys seems to have gone down over the past couple months….but that’s when the super-sketchy sites like Craigslist personals and Backpage got shut down and my guess would be that the sketchy guys & salt daddies have now come over to SA because those other sites are gone.

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by  Abbyy1.
    #52118

    teamswirl
    Participant

    I just feel like they do not care anymore. They are so obsessed with saving the site from getting shut down that they are ignoring the fact that members are unhappy. I don’t think they realize all of the changes they are making are not decreasing the amount of escorts and scammers on the site.

    #52136

    hoosierdaddy
    Participant

    I’m not arguing against your take on the SD quality, but that substantial thing is not necessarily always the daddy talking nonsense. It actually is greatly magnified by SA’s special ability to mislead in their questions. When signing up as an SD, you are NOT asked for category of lifestyle you can provide. The question we are asked is what is your monthly budget. This question comes in the context of our net worth and annual income, so it is likely most guys took it as OUR monthly budget, not what we can offer the SB. Off topic, but since you specifically complained about guys being misleading, I just want to throw out there that you might want to give daddies the benefit of the doubt and be quicker to blame SA ignorance.

    Cheers

    #52142

    Abbyy1
    Participant

    What really gets me with this latest change is that by taking out the financial categories altogether, it just feels like they’re trying to cater to some misogynist’s trite point of view that women shouldn’t concern themselves with finances in a relationship.
    Why not lump physical appearance and body type in with personality traits for what Daddy’s are ‘Seeking’, and say they have to choose between one and the other? I mean…they could…but that would be oversimplifying, too. Each really should have it’s own category as each is usually unrelated to the other…and the financial aspect deserves its own category, too.

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by  Abbyy1.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.