gemma hiles

GEMMA HILES free subscription click here

Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Bella Thorne OnlyFans

Author Message
get in the van Offline
Senior Poster
***

Posts: 207
Joined: May 2015
Reputation: 10
Post: #1
Bella Thorne OnlyFans
I see that Bella Thorne's OnlyFans is free to join now, rather than the $20 a month she used to charge. I don't know if she's still doing PPV messages, but probably people wouldn't fall for that again, bearing in mind she scammed her subscribers with the $200 PPV which was supposed to be a nude photoset.
15-02-2022 01:32
Find all posts by this user
bigglesworth Offline
Master Poster
****

Posts: 877
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 39
Post: #2
RE: OnlyFans
She has always denied being a scammer, saying that the photoset was never described as nude and she'd already said on Twitter that she wouldn't be going nude on OnlyFans. But the photoset was advertised as showing her in 'a state of undress' and it's not surprising that many people took that to mean nude.
15-02-2022 02:30
Find all posts by this user
ShandyHand Offline
No Paywall Onlys - not babeshows
*****

Posts: 3,972
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 65
Post: #3
RE: OnlyFans
^ Yes but this is just more evidence guys often think with their dicks before their heads. We knew this. Ffs we've been warned enough with these tactics by now.

The idea that the babeshows "are not that deep" is driven by those that don't wish to acknowledge how much effective customer service and a consideration of psychology impacts users' future interactions.
15-02-2022 11:18
Find all posts by this user
Rammyrascal Offline
Team Thicc
*****

Posts: 99,821
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 249
Post: #4
RE: OnlyFans
(15-02-2022 02:30 )bigglesworth Wrote:  She has always denied being a scammer, saying that the photoset was never described as nude and she'd already said on Twitter that she wouldn't be going nude on OnlyFans. But the photoset was advertised as showing her in 'a state of undress' and it's not surprising that many people took that to mean nude.

Yep. If I saw someone saying they were in a state of undress, my first thought would be that they were naked in the photos

Piper Niven Superfan
(This post was last modified: 15-02-2022 14:34 by Rammyrascal.)
15-02-2022 14:33
Find all posts by this user
marlowe Offline
Posting Machine
*****

Posts: 1,262
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 48
Post: #5
RE: OnlyFans
If you wanted to, you could give Bella Thorne the benefit of the doubt on the basis of the wording alone, but the context of this PPV offer is that it was made on the famous/infamous OnlyFans, a platform which is mostly known for nudes and adult material. I know she denies being a scammer, but it's hard to believe that she wasn't deliberately leading people on and encouraging them to think they would get more than they actually did. Plus the whopping pricetag of $200 would surely suggest that you'd be receiving more than lingerie pictures.
17-02-2022 00:04
Find all posts by this user
ShandyHand Offline
No Paywall Onlys - not babeshows
*****

Posts: 3,972
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 65
Post: #6
RE: OnlyFans
(15-02-2022 14:33 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  
(15-02-2022 02:30 )bigglesworth Wrote:  She has always denied being a scammer, saying that the photoset was never described as nude and she'd already said on Twitter that she wouldn't be going nude on OnlyFans. But the photoset was advertised as showing her in 'a state of undress' and it's not surprising that many people took that to mean nude.

Yep. If I saw someone saying they were in a state of undress, my first thought would be that they were naked in the photos

Yes but your second thought should be 'why aren't they saying naked?'. If they are naked they be better off advertising as "naked". It's only when the content is a fudge or not there that the advertising has to reach for a euphemism or anything that can be read two ways. Think like a creator for a moment before you click. Every. Single. Time.

Plus anyone that has had to deny being a scammer to a wide group of ppl has done something that's at very best misleading in the past. Another red flag.

Third if someone of this high profile went nude for the first time on OF the news would be all around the net. What's wrong with waiting for confirmation on such events?

Seriously this stuff is not hard to parse. FOMO is a tool used on suckers. Don't be one.

(This is all general comment not aimed at Rammy specifically. He just affirmed the common conception of this phrase I know.)

The idea that the babeshows "are not that deep" is driven by those that don't wish to acknowledge how much effective customer service and a consideration of psychology impacts users' future interactions.
17-02-2022 10:30
Find all posts by this user
Spike1876 Offline
Senior Poster
***

Posts: 244
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 8
Post: #7
RE: OnlyFans
(17-02-2022 10:30 )ShandyHand Wrote:  Third if someone of this high profile went nude for the first time on OF the news would be all around the net. What's wrong with waiting for confirmation on such events?

Or to put this point another way... The pictures / videos would be out there soon enough for free, so don't spend your hard earned... Big Grin
17-02-2022 11:05
Find all posts by this user
ShandyHand Offline
No Paywall Onlys - not babeshows
*****

Posts: 3,972
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 65
Post: #8
RE: OnlyFans
^ Lol I didn't say or condone that mate. I said news of them will tip you off on whether they are worth buying. Just like this news about Bella should confirm wether she is worth bothering with or subbing to if you're wanting nudity from her.

The idea that the babeshows "are not that deep" is driven by those that don't wish to acknowledge how much effective customer service and a consideration of psychology impacts users' future interactions.
(This post was last modified: 17-02-2022 17:37 by ShandyHand.)
17-02-2022 11:21
Find all posts by this user
William H Bonney Offline
More sinned against than sinning
*****

Posts: 2,750
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation: 53
Post: #9
RE: OnlyFans
(15-02-2022 01:32 )get in the van Wrote:  I see that Bella Thorne's OnlyFans is free to join now, rather than the $20 a month she used to charge.

No Bella still charges $20 a month, but she has a free account on OnlyFans too, which must be what you saw.
27-02-2022 21:49
Find all posts by this user
barracuda Offline
Master Poster
****

Posts: 665
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 25
Post: #10
RE: OnlyFans
(15-02-2022 01:32 )get in the van Wrote:  I don't know if she's still doing PPV messages, but probably people wouldn't fall for that again, bearing in mind she scammed her subscribers with the $200 PPV which was supposed to be a nude photoset.

Well this is what Bella Thorne's account description says these days:

"More free and original content, fewer sales, more livestreams, more 1 on 1 access, and more surprises to come. This account will sell content you can’t buy anywhere else when I do have sales."
04-03-2022 22:51
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 



GEMMA HILES free subscription click here

gemma hiles