A question for those who refuse to see someone who uses "fake" pictures -

[Bit Banger]

Whould you see someone whose ad doesn't have pictures, or only pictures of flowers?

I get the "dishonesty" of using someone else's photos and claiming they are yours.

But how many of these ads actually make that claim? Look at a BP ad with photos down the side. How often does the text refer to the photos? Or are they just sexy pictures designed to say "buy me" like the photos in a Chinese menu?

Pre-Internet we had to rely on print media which often contained stock photos. Did you actually expect the gal in the photo to show up at the door?

So today, in the era of Internet advertising, how many of you would actually bother responding to an ad lacking sexy images?

OK - I'll admit it. I'm a visual kind-of-guy. I'm likely to skim past the text-only ads, unless of course it's for someone I know who announcing availability.

[2small]

Whould you see someone whose ad doesn't have pictures, or only pictures of flowers?

I get the "dishonesty" of using someone else's photos and claiming they are yours.

But how many of these ads actually make that claim? Look at a BP ad with photos down the side. How often does the text refer to the photos? Or are they just sexy pictures designed to say "buy me" like the photos in a Chinese menu?

Pre-Internet we had to rely on print media which often contained stock photos. Did you actually expect the gal in the photo to show up at the door?

So today, in the era of Internet advertising, how many of you would actually bother responding to an ad lacking sexy images?

OK - I'll admit it. I'm a visual kind-of-guy. I'm likely to skim past the text-only ads, unless of course it's for someone I know who announcing availability.

I have responded to one of those no picture ads. It was for a very mature woman who claimed she liked her privacy which I can understand. Alas since she was located in Lakewood I never pulled the trigger as I wasnt worried about what she would look like because she stated in her ad if you didnt like her looks when you got there you could leave and no hard feelings. I was nervous about it maybe being a Lakewood police scam. If she was anywhere but Lakewood I probably would have TOFTT.

[pfunk]

Whould you see someone whose ad doesn't have pictures, or only pictures of flowers?

So today, in the era of Internet advertising, how many of you would actually bother responding to an ad lacking sexy images?

If she has several good reviews, and zero no-shows, then yes, I would!

[NaughtyNiceGuy]

Never, too many other choices.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

I have responded to one of those no picture ads. It was for a very mature woman who claimed she liked her privacy which I can understand. Alas since she was located in Lakewood I never pulled the trigger as I wasnt worried about what she would look like because she stated in her ad if you didnt like her looks when you got there you could leave and no hard feelings. I was nervous about it maybe being a Lakewood police scam. If she was anywhere but Lakewood I probably would have TOFTT.

I have heard that reverse stings have been known to use photos. Just a rumor, I'm sure.

[Guest]

I have heard that reverse stings have been known to use photos. Just a rumor, I'm sure.

I have also heard those rumors lately. If you show a face your (maybe) le , if you don't show your face you might also (maybe) le. So either way you don't know .

But you can always google her phone # & see where she post ads at & where her reviews are listed.

Edited June 4, 2012 by Mace
Deleted Review URL in post

[boink36]

Whould you see someone whose ad doesn't have pictures, or only pictures of flowers?

I get the "dishonesty" of using someone else's photos and claiming they are yours.

But how many of these ads actually make that claim? Look at a BP ad with photos down the side. How often does the text refer to the photos? Or are they just sexy pictures designed to say "buy me" like the photos in a Chinese menu?

Pre-Internet we had to rely on print media which often contained stock photos. Did you actually expect the gal in the photo to show up at the door?

So today, in the era of Internet advertising, how many of you would actually bother responding to an ad lacking sexy images?

OK - I'll admit it. I'm a visual kind-of-guy. I'm likely to skim past the text-only ads, unless of course it's for someone I know who announcing availability.

What we expected in those days and what we have come to ecpect now

has changed significantly. my answer would be, in the old days yes but

not now.

[bandit]

Ditto Boink. No booking for fake pics.

I pay for the way they look. So they need to market themselves.

Bathroom pics turn me off also. Reeks of cheap.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

No booking for fake pics.

So they need to market themselves.

The government can identify people from social media photos, and it's just a matter of time before you can do the same. Fake pictures will be a thing of the past once you can verify who the girl in the picture really is.

[2Big]

The point is not "sexy pics". The point is that someone not posting pictures in a situation where visuals are important is basically telegraphing his/her intent to deceive.

In this day and age there is absolutely no reason to not post a picture. None. Whatsoever. Excuses are just that: excuses.

The same situation applies in the "real world": If a person on a dating site is not willing to share a pic it means that they have something to hide. I learned this lesson the hard way, after exchanging many emails with folks who claimed to be "attractive", only to wonder why they had sent their moms/older sisters to the date.

These things require absolute ruthlessness and brutality: No pic? No thanks!

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

The point is not "sexy pics". The point is that someone not posting pictures in a situation where visuals are important is basically telegraphing his/her intent to deceive.

In this day and age there is absolutely no reason to not post a picture. None. Whatsoever. Excuses are just that: excuses.

The same situation applies in the "real world": If a person on a dating site is not willing to share a pic it means that they have something to hide. I learned this lesson the hard way, after exchanging many emails with folks who claimed to be "attractive", only to wonder why they had sent their moms/older sisters to the date.

These things require absolute ruthlessness and brutality: No pic? No thanks!

You say there is absolutely no reason to not post an actual current photograph of oneself on the internet. I say there are extremely valid reasons to never, ever post an actual photograph of oneself on the internet.

Please reassure me that it's safe to post my pictures! Any info and helpful links are much appreciated, especially if related to PIV Facial Image, Type 10 Facial SMT Image, ANSI INCITS 385-2004, ISO/IEC 19794-5, Scars Marks Tattoos SMT, or Ear Biometrics.

Thanks in advance for your help. Blonde gals like me need extra reassurance that showing photos is okay, and won't result in future negative consequences. BTW, I have heard that guys' sexual abilities are correlated to ear size, and I'm all excited about some hot new websites that offer free gifts and prizes to guys who send in photos of their ears! How cool is that?