Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Fabswingers.com site feedback |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well because they aren’t ‘running’ a profile they’re just joining having a swatch or collecting photos and then leaving. People put effort in and pay so why should lazy creepy profiles be allowed to view." You could use the looking for and adjust You can limit your photos You can hide your profile | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well because they aren’t ‘running’ a profile they’re just joining having a swatch or collecting photos and then leaving. People put effort in and pay so why should lazy creepy profiles be allowed to view." Don't post things you don't want people to see then. Keep the pics you don't want them looking at as friends only or keep them private and only send them to a selected few. The options are there for you to use. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well because they aren’t ‘running’ a profile they’re just joining having a swatch or collecting photos and then leaving. People put effort in and pay so why should lazy creepy profiles be allowed to view." Anyone can collect pics wether they have a blank profile or not, dont post anything you dont want others to have, the site free to use just block non site supporters then you dont have to interact with them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get what the OP is saying it happens a lot where I'm from in Essex. 9 times out of 10 there fake single females who have no pictures don't fill in anything about themselves buy the gold membership and leave site within 2 weeks!" Thats upto them if they want to waste a fiver, if you know what to look out for just dont interact with said profiles | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well because they aren’t ‘running’ a profile they’re just joining having a swatch or collecting photos and then leaving. People put effort in and pay so why should lazy creepy profiles be allowed to view." They are only frustrating themselves, so I wouldn't worry about them. Block and move on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People with no photos and barely 3 words on their bio, it’s really weird that they view our accounts, especially the ones that view repeatedly, with ‘fill this in later’ Wish I didn’t have to spend so long blocking them all individually. Would be ideal if there was a setting to switch off certain account from viewing such as unverified or no photos. " Agreed. Having more control over who can see YOUR profile would be a welcome change. If we could apply the same filters to VIEWING as we do to MESSAGING, that would be a step in the right direction. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People with no photos and barely 3 words on their bio, it’s really weird that they view our accounts, especially the ones that view repeatedly, with ‘fill this in later’ Wish I didn’t have to spend so long blocking them all individually. Would be ideal if there was a setting to switch off certain account from viewing such as unverified or no photos. " it's when the blank profiles compalin that they can't get replies or meets and say "this place is shit" can't beat stupid lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Unfortunately, it's these profiles that make money for the site, so the owners are unlikely to make any changes that drive the users creating them away. One of those perverse incentivised behaviours that make the internet so problematic." Bingo! 
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I do not give one shite who looks at my profile. I'm not obliged to meet them or chat. " Ok, that's good for you, but doesn't help others. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So make more benefits for those that get paid membership i.e. you can view images. At the moment, any account i.e. non-paid can view images. Make that a perk of paid membership." Why? Because a minority of people get a bee in their bonnet about people looking at their profile? If you don't want people to see it don't post it. It really is that simple. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So make more benefits for those that get paid membership i.e. you can view images. At the moment, any account i.e. non-paid can view images. Make that a perk of paid membership. Why? Because a minority of people get a bee in their bonnet about people looking at their profile? If you don't want people to see it don't post it. It really is that simple. " Making image-viewing a paid feature adds clear value to paid memberships. Right now, unpaid members can view images, which removes an incentive to subscribe. Gating this feature creates a tangible benefit for paying members and encourages more people to support the platform financially. Without distinct perks, there’s little reason to upgrade. “If you don’t want people to see it, don’t post it” oversimplifies the issue. Many users are fine with sharing images but want more control over who sees them. Limiting access to paid members adds accountability—paid users are more traceable and likely invested in the community. Suggesting users avoid posting entirely ignores these valid concerns and pushes them toward self-censorship. Paid features help platforms thrive. Offering premium-only perks like image-viewing ensures the platform is sustainable and well-resourced. It also reduces casual misuse by ensuring features are used by engaged, paying members. Ultimately, our suggestion strikes a balance: it incentivises subscriptions, respects user privacy, and ensures the platform grows sustainably—all while improving the experience for paying members. Simply telling users “don’t post it” dismisses these broader benefits. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fab's usp is that it's free an there are already benefits to being a paid member. If you wish to control who sees your pictures they can be set to friends only or sent directly to those of your choosing. There are many paid sites where viewing pictures and sending !messages is limited. The people you don't want viewing your profile have money. " Yep. £5. Less than a pint. Not much more than a coffee. People who want to just view amateur photo content/videos wouldn't baulk at that cost. It wouldn't offer any guarantees that they weren't just here to look. 🤷♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People who want to just view amateur photo content/videos wouldn't baulk at that cost. 🤷♂️" The cost isn't an issue, it's the payment showing up on a phone bill, email, or bank statement that is. Plus, it gives Fab more money, surely a win-win? "I think a problem here is that it is too easy to set up a very basic profile, ive had many guys contact me, where they are here on business or on holiday, and they setup the profile, just for that duration, and to make contact, so they put very little effort into it. " This. Having photos available to paid members, in our opinion, would be a huge win for everyone, except for those that won't contribute. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So make more benefits for those that get paid membership i.e. you can view images. At the moment, any account i.e. non-paid can view images. Make that a perk of paid membership. Why? Because a minority of people get a bee in their bonnet about people looking at their profile? If you don't want people to see it don't post it. It really is that simple. Making image-viewing a paid feature adds clear value to paid memberships. Right now, unpaid members can view images, which removes an incentive to subscribe. Gating this feature creates a tangible benefit for paying members and encourages more people to support the platform financially. Without distinct perks, there’s little reason to upgrade. “If you don’t want people to see it, don’t post it” oversimplifies the issue. Many users are fine with sharing images but want more control over who sees them. Limiting access to paid members adds accountability—paid users are more traceable and likely invested in the community. Suggesting users avoid posting entirely ignores these valid concerns and pushes them toward self-censorship. Paid features help platforms thrive. Offering premium-only perks like image-viewing ensures the platform is sustainable and well-resourced. It also reduces casual misuse by ensuring features are used by engaged, paying members. Ultimately, our suggestion strikes a balance: it incentivises subscriptions, respects user privacy, and ensures the platform grows sustainably—all while improving the experience for paying members. Simply telling users “don’t post it” dismisses these broader benefits." Yes you can see pictures without paying but you can't watch videos. You have control over who can see what, you have a friends only section so you can limit your pictures to those who you want to be friends with or set them to private and only send them to those you want to. I don't see the issue, the choices are there and available to you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes you can see pictures without paying but you can't watch videos. You have control over who can see what, you have a friends only section so you can limit your pictures to those who you want to be friends with or set them to private and only send them to those you want to. I don't see the issue, the choices are there and available to you. " On or off isn't a great range of choice though is it? We said having the option to show YOUR pictures to who YOU want would be a great addition. Beyond that, it could prove to be a great revenue maker for Fab. Let us agree to disagree. We would like more granular control over who sees our pics, you do not, that's ok. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Unfortunately, it's these profiles that make money for the site, so the owners are unlikely to make any changes that drive the users creating them away. One of those perverse incentivised behaviours that make the internet so problematic." Having been involved on moderating another adult community site many moons ago for years.. It was an issue then, it probably still will be in years to come. A lot is relatively harmless voyeurism, some are people testing the waters.. And everything in between. But ultimately these sites run on user numbers and revenue. So no site (that I've ever see, in 20ish years) Has ever done anything to cut / reduce blank, or paying profiles | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can I ask a serious question. What impact on your online life does a 'blank' profile have? " A blank profile has no meaningful presence in the community but still benefits from the content others provide. It can also be used for less innocent purposes, such as stalking or collecting pictures without consent. Giving users more control over who sees their content is a reasonable expectation. " If you don't want to be contacted by them then use the relevant filters. But I'm struggling to see how it affects day to day existence on the site when someone just looks at your profile? " It’s not just about contact; it’s about control. Users should have the right to decide who can view their photos and profiles. It’s about protecting personal content from voyeurs, collectors, or those who contribute nothing to the community. " I look at profiles all the time. The vast majority I'll never contact, wink at, fab a photo etc. And as I browse in stealth mode they'll never even know. I have zero impact on their Fab life unless I choose to interact with them. 🤷♂️" That’s exactly the issue—blank profiles take without giving. Others are unknowingly sharing with someone who contributes nothing in return. Giving users the ability to decide who views their content isn’t much to ask for. Ultimately we're never going to agree that users should have more granular control over their profile. However, extra revenue from these profiles surely isn't a bad thing, but people will probably disagree there as well. Hapoy fabbing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think that pretty much nails it. On the "Can I ask a serious question. What impact on your online life does a 'blank' profile have?" I'll reverse it. What positive impact on the site let alone my online life does a 'blank' profile have? " Is there a difference between being viewed by a blank profile and a profile with one photo and a few words? Or any profile with dozens of blurry, badly taken photos and lots of words (mostly a huge pointless disclaimer). The point is that it would be easy for someone to just upload a few fuzzy pics if there were restrictions placed on accounts with none. Likewise the commonly requested minimum word count. Easily achieved just by copying and pasting the disclaimer that so many use (which is meaningless). You'll never be able to control who views you, without hiding your profile or images. That's life. If restrictions were ever to be added then you can guarantee that those you think are using the site now with blank profiles just to view images would do whatever the minimum was to meet them. They'd still add nothing to the site. But they're soooo easy to ignore, as they presently are. The beauty of Fab is that it's always been a free to use site since day one. Site support is optional and gets you a few extras, such as viewing videos, but there are plenty of very genuine people on here who use the site for free. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well because they aren’t ‘running’ a profile they’re just joining having a swatch or collecting photos and then leaving. People put effort in and pay so why should lazy creepy profiles be allowed to view." How do you know they aren't running a profile? For all you know they could be exchanging messages and chatting to dozens of people every week..... J | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You'll never be able to control who views you, without hiding your profile or images. That's life. If restrictions were ever to be added then you can guarantee that those you think are using the site now with blank profiles just to view images would do whatever the minimum was to meet them. They'd still add nothing to the site. But they're soooo easy to ignore, as they presently are." So basically they add nothing but just ignore them. Of interest the first stage of the Online Safety Act 2023 comes into effect in March of this year. I've been having a look at the ofcom website. It's a staged roll out and "... All service providers which allow pornography must implement highly effective age assurance to ensure that children are not normally able to encounter pornographic content..." This means you will need to prove your age by one of a number of specified ways like putting debit card details in your account, uploading your passport or driver's license or doing an online facial recognition when you log on so your age can be determine. There's a few more like allowing access to your bank account details, email account and mobile phone provider but I'm betting most won't want that. I'm interested to know what fab is doing to prepare for this as it's getting pretty close and Ofcom can sanction for non compliance. I'm sure by the time it's fully implemented we will see a drop in the number of blank profiles on here because it might be free but the feds will need to know who they are! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks for the replies it’s definitely a topic that has mixed opinions. I’ve now hidden most of my photos as suggested, but essentially that means I don’t get as much contact. I feel that since we are paying customers, it shouldn’t come to that. Then if it gets boring, we won’t pay again. Basically the blank profiles win. "How do they win though? The Internet is awash with porn. Do you really think that huge numbers of people come here just to ogle photos when they can do that for free, without having to bother even setting up a profile on a website? There are profiles full of photos that are seemingly less active than many of the silhouette profiles with limited text. Many with dozens of images have just one or two verifications from years ago. Are they really that active on site and in some way affected by the actions of others? There seems to be some huge assumptions being made about how people use the site. You're as likely to just be viewed by an inactive profile with pictures as you are one without. And with stealth browsing thrown into the mix too, most profiles will be looked at by far more people than you'll ever know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks for the replies it’s definitely a topic that has mixed opinions. I’ve now hidden most of my photos as suggested, but essentially that means I don’t get as much contact. I feel that since we are paying customers, it shouldn’t come to that. Then if it gets boring, we won’t pay again. Basically the blank profiles win.
How do they win though? The Internet is awash with porn. Do you really think that huge numbers of people come here just to ogle photos when they can do that for free, without having to bother even setting up a profile on a website?
There are profiles full of photos that are seemingly less active than many of the silhouette profiles with limited text. Many with dozens of images have just one or two verifications from years ago. Are they really that active on site and in some way affected by the actions of others?
There seems to be some huge assumptions being made about how people use the site. You're as likely to just be viewed by an inactive profile with pictures as you are one without. And with stealth browsing thrown into the mix too, most profiles will be looked at by far more people than you'll ever know. "Don't think its fair to use the word assumptions most people on fab forums have views based on experiences on fab there might not be huge numbers but the ones that do are also the ones that can perpetrate some concerning predatory behaviour in which almost evey women and couple on fab have experienced we have seen this on forums time after time so tbf it's actually a matter of safety over anything else as a business there should be more actions to deter these types of behaviour the new laws coming out will help with that 100% although not sure it should take that in order for it to be done. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks for the replies it’s definitely a topic that has mixed opinions. I’ve now hidden most of my photos as suggested, but essentially that means I don’t get as much contact. I feel that since we are paying customers, it shouldn’t come to that. Then if it gets boring, we won’t pay again. Basically the blank profiles win.
How do they win though? The Internet is awash with porn. Do you really think that huge numbers of people come here just to ogle photos when they can do that for free, without having to bother even setting up a profile on a website?
There are profiles full of photos that are seemingly less active than many of the silhouette profiles with limited text. Many with dozens of images have just one or two verifications from years ago. Are they really that active on site and in some way affected by the actions of others?
There seems to be some huge assumptions being made about how people use the site. You're as likely to just be viewed by an inactive profile with pictures as you are one without. And with stealth browsing thrown into the mix too, most profiles will be looked at by far more people than you'll ever know.
Don't think its fair to use the word assumptions most people on fab forums have views based on experiences on fab there might not be huge numbers but the ones that do are also the ones that can perpetrate some concerning predatory behaviour in which almost evey women and couple on fab have experienced we have seen this on forums time after time so tbf it's actually a matter of safety over anything else as a business there should be more actions to deter these types of behaviour the new laws coming out will help with that 100% although not sure it should take that in order for it to be done. "In the 17 years I've been here, 12 as a couple *and I still have a couples profile with a partner now) the most negative behaviour I've experienced has been from profiles with photos, photo verification and often meet verifications. Yes, there are blank one line profiles. But they tend to view rather than engage. And if they do send a message it takes literally seconds to delete and block. If people put photos online then people will look. It's how having a profile works, whether on here or a.n.other site/app. The only way to stop people seeing your photos is to place them in friends only albums and limit access. If you don't want to do that then public albums are literally that - public. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Unfortunately, it's these profiles that make money for the site, so the owners are unlikely to make any changes that drive the users creating them away. One of those perverse incentivised behaviours that make the internet so problematic." I don't get this. If they don't buy supporter pass or buy from the Lovehoney link, surely the revenue from them is close to nothing? Fab isn't full of ads generating income | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes you can see pictures without paying but you can't watch videos. You have control over who can see what, you have a friends only section so you can limit your pictures to those who you want to be friends with or set them to private and only send them to those you want to. I don't see the issue, the choices are there and available to you. On or off isn't a great range of choice though is it? We said having the option to show YOUR pictures to who YOU want would be a great addition. Beyond that, it could prove to be a great revenue maker for Fab. Let us agree to disagree. We would like more granular control over who sees our pics, you do not, that's ok." You can.. it's called friends only or Even more direct it's called private gallery.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You'll never be able to control who views you, without hiding your profile or images. That's life. If restrictions were ever to be added then you can guarantee that those you think are using the site now with blank profiles just to view images would do whatever the minimum was to meet them. They'd still add nothing to the site. But they're soooo easy to ignore, as they presently are. So basically they add nothing but just ignore them. Of interest the first stage of the Online Safety Act 2023 comes into effect in March of this year. I've been having a look at the ofcom website. It's a staged roll out and "... All service providers which allow pornography must implement highly effective age assurance to ensure that children are not normally able to encounter pornographic content..." This means you will need to prove your age by one of a number of specified ways like putting debit card details in your account, uploading your passport or driver's license or doing an online facial recognition when you log on so your age can be determine. There's a few more like allowing access to your bank account details, email account and mobile phone provider but I'm betting most won't want that. I'm interested to know what fab is doing to prepare for this as it's getting pretty close and Ofcom can sanction for non compliance. I'm sure by the time it's fully implemented we will see a drop in the number of blank profiles on here because it might be free but the feds will need to know who they are! " Strangely enough I don't have a blank profile and have multiple meet verifications on this and previous profiles going back 9 years proving that I am who I say I am and that I am over the age of 18. I will quite happily walk away from all that and delete my profile before I provide any of the information you mention for the same reason I don't share facepics here or give anyone my real name or phone number. That information has already been used and abused by other members so there is zero chance of me ever uploading passport or drivers license details or anything bank related. This is and always has been a hobby and one I will give up if any further information is requested. Based on previous threads like this I've no doubt I won't be the only long standing, well verified member exiting the building. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's no point in panicking about it yet folks. I'm sure admin will advise when/if anything happens. Bear in mind that even now certain non porn sites need age verification. I have to every year when I put my annual Grand National bet on and even when I buy vape liquid/coils. Not once have I had to provide ID documents because I've simply used a credit card to pay and obvs you need to be 18 to have one. And before anyone says 'I don't have a credit card'.....I know people who have got one of those free pre-paid ones, chucked a fiver on it and used that to verify age before. It would be a one time thing as let's face it....nobody is getting younger are they. 🤷♂️😂" I'm guessing that as all adult sites, based anywhere in the world, would need a system, that there's going to be a range of suppliers of age validation systems, so that they can all continue to operate with viewers from the UK. It would save them all having to invent their own system. I think that even showing your face, allowing it to estimate and assess that you're over 18, was an example that the government may have used. If a tool like that was used, nobody would have to provide passport details etc, to anyone. It's almost as if some are thinking it's going to be almost an apocalyptic event | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
