211–220 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like they have a choice. Their business was only ever viable at the behest of their payment provider. The reason no one has made an OnlyFans before, and the reason why people have tried and failed, entirely comes down to this.
How do sites like Pornhub get paid then? Why can't OnlyFans switch to whatever provider they use?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should payment processors force them to. They will make less money
Probably the reputational risk to them from being associated with porn is not worth whatever OnlyFans brings in.
But that pretext for excluding sex workers from banking and payment processing really falls apart with OnlyFans. These are small, repeated, digital payments that are highly traceable because they're coming from and going to known people. And the existence of the underlying work product is easily verifiable: are the accounts actively posting content or not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why do you think they decided to ban sexually explicit content rather than use cryptocurrency?
because the payment providers have 99% of market share?
Patreon made similar decisions about four years ago when they began to tighten their terms for NSFW creators. https://www.engadget.com/2017-10-27-patreon-adult-content-cr... Much of the pressure came from payment processing partners and banks, much like is described in this article. https://www.vice.com/en/article/vbqwwj/patreon-suspension-of... It seems like for any crowdsourced funding platform there is a volume ca…
This is why many people who post fetish-y art (even stuff like mind-control kink) moved from Patreon to SubscribeStar. Even erotic roleplay site F-List moved to SubscribeStar.
This seems incredibly odd given that OnlyFan's primary payment processor is CCBill, a massive payment processor focused solely on adult content. Here is opportunity #3928 for Stripe to step in and earn their valuation and flex their payment muscle and allow adult payments.
Stripe's hands are tied - they need financial services to operate and banks (and CC processors) are the ones pushing down these puritanical values.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should there be? It seems absurd to MANDATE anyone participate in the sex trade. There are payment processors who specialize in adult content.
morality is relative.... next stop it is strip clubs, then hooters being banned? Payment processors provide a utility. They should have the right not to process illegal transactions and illegal activities. But as long as the activity is legal, it shouldn't be up to them to police morality. They should be treated like utilities. If we go down this path, the city's water and electric utilities can decide to shut down t…
This is going to be corporate suicide on a greater scale than Tumblr's policy. I say greater because OnlyFans is/was still on a massive upswing whereas Tumblr was 10 years past its peak already when the nails went in the coffin. Edit: I understand this is supposedly not their choice.
Why can PornHub successfully sell a premium porn service but OnlyFans cannot? Is it just the size of the company?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should there be? It seems absurd to MANDATE anyone participate in the sex trade. There are payment processors who specialize in adult content.
You know how US Dollars say “This note is legal tender for all debts” on them? It seems to absurd to allow companies with an oligopoly on most of the transfer of those notes to pick and choose what sectors are appropriate for citizens to interact with financially.
https://www.quora.com/On-every-US-dollar-bill-the-message-Th...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably the reputational risk to them from being associated with porn is not worth whatever OnlyFans brings in.
Why would OnlyFans not simply move to another payment processor then? This all seems a bit strange.
Reminder that payment processor pressure is what has caused a lot of (legal) art to be pushed off of Patreon[0].
0: https://www.vice.com/en/article/vbqwwj/patreon-suspension-of... (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17432801 )