Youtube Slot Community and SlotLady

[Mission146]

I'm mostly going to avoid posting in this thread lest they perhaps change their minds about doing the interview.

I'll also say that I don't think they were trying to, 'Duck,' anything because, had they simply declined the interview, then I likely wouldn't have posted that I approached them about doing one. The only reason that I publicly posted anything is because the thing was scheduled and I announced the upcoming article both here and on WoV, so at that point, I have to explain myself if there's not going to be such an article.

Anyway, thanks again and I'm going to bow out of this thread for at least a bit. We'll see if they change their minds. I'll be upfront and say that I invited them to read my posts in this thread to see that I have defended them, in some ways, lest they not think that I'm a neutral party. I even challenged why EZ Life would go after them to begin with as I didn't see the point of it.

[JeffDime]

I'm mostly going to avoid posting in this thread lest they perhaps change their minds about doing the interview.

I'll also say that I don't think they were trying to, 'Duck,' anything because, had they simply declined the interview, then I likely wouldn't have posted that I approached them about doing one. The only reason that I publicly posted anything is because the thing was scheduled and I announced the upcoming article both here and on WoV, so at that point, I have to explain myself if there's not going to be such an article.

Anyway, thanks again and I'm going to bow out of this thread for at least a bit. We'll see if they change their minds. I'll be upfront and say that I invited them to read my posts in this thread to see that I have defended them, in some ways, lest they not think that I'm a neutral party. I even challenged why EZ Life would go after them to begin with as I didn't see the point of it.

Understandable. I have just read enough of your work to know you would have given them a fair shake. Very tough to find good journalism in the gambling space. Overall it is an opportunity missed for them. I know it would not have been a puff piece but certainly not a hit piece. No one can argue they have had success in building a channel. Just unfortunate this thread was the reason cited. Overall just a bummer. But their loss in the end.

[Dan Druff]

This is so ridiculous that they cancelled the Mission146 article because he posts here.

Obviously this also proves what we long suspected -- that Sarah and Victor regularly read this thread.

I have repeatedly stated, both in this thread and on my show, that I do not have anything against Sarah/Victor. I have given them credit and compliments where due. I have repeatedly reminded people that they haven't scammed or cheated anyone, and that ultimately it's their right to decide what content to present on their channel, even if that content is not truthful. I have also reminded people that Sarah/Victor haven't really hurt anyone, financially or otherwise. I think I've been more than fair to them.

Unfortunately, it appears that they want to 100% control the narrative, and any lies they tell to remain unquestioned. That's not how the internet works.

If you present yourself to the internet public, and are not entirely truthful in your approach, you take the risk that people will discover your lies and call you out on them. You can't have the benefits of a high-follower YouTube channel without the scrutiny which comes along with it.

They dislike this site because people are good at digging through the bullshit and getting to either the truth or the likely truth. When you're trying to tell half/morphed stories on your channel, a site like this one scrutinizing you is the last thing you want.

I am still quite willing to have a civil conversation with Sarah and/or Victor if they so desire. We can do it in e-mail or text if they don't want it on the phone. Use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the page if interested, or text me at (775) 372-8355.

I believe they cancelled the interview because they knew Mission would ask the tough questions, and they didn't want to answer these questions.

What a bizarre couple and slots channel. I thought this Raja guy and his creepy dirty old man act was strange enough, but Sarah/Victor really do take the cake when it comes to weird slots Youtubers.

[Mission146]

This is so ridiculous that they cancelled the Mission146 article because he posts here.

Obviously this also proves what we long suspected -- that Sarah and Victor regularly read this thread.

I have repeatedly stated, both in this thread and on my show, that I do not have anything against Sarah/Victor. I have given them credit and compliments where due. I have repeatedly reminded people that they haven't scammed or cheated anyone, and that ultimately it's their right to decide what content to present on their channel, even if that content is not truthful. I have also reminded people that Sarah/Victor haven't really hurt anyone, financially or otherwise. I think I've been more than fair to them.

Unfortunately, it appears that they want to 100% control the narrative, and for any lies they tell to remain unquestioned. That's not how the internet works.

If you present yourself to the internet public, and are not entirely truthful in your approach, you take the risk that people will discover your lies and call you out on them. You can't have the benefits of a high-follower YouTube channel without the scrutiny which comes along with it.

They dislike this site because people are good at digging through the bullshit and getting to either the truth or the likely truth. When you're trying to tell half/morphed stories on your channel, a site like this one scrutinizing you is the last thing you want.

I am still quite willing to have a civil conversation with Sarah and/or Victor if they so desire. We can do it in e-mail or text if they don't want it on the phone. Use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the page if interested, or text me at (775) 372-8355.

I believe they cancelled the interview because they knew Mission would ask the tough questions, and they didn't want to answer these questions.

What a bizarre couple and slots channel. I thought this Raja guy and his creepy dirty old man act was strange enough, but Sarah/Victor really do take the cake when it comes to weird slots Youtubers.

I cannot imagine why they would find this site unsavory:

https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...Elected-Office

(LOL JK)

In all honesty, they must not read it too often or they'd have already known that I post here and would have declined right off the bat. Quite frankly, I think it's perhaps just as likely that someone told them that I post here and, consequently, would not be likely to offer a neutral interview.

Naturally, I would. Like I've already said, it's always my policy that people can simply refuse questions without me taking offense. More than that, anyone I interview is afforded the opportunity to read the raw transcript and straight up remove anything they don't want to appear. Not only do I not do, 'Gotcha,' moments, but you shouldn't even end up with, "I wish I hadn't said..." moments because you can just take it out.

Honestly, I think it's just that they really hate this site, so I'd be shocked if they take an interview with you. If they followed this thread closely (as in, daily or even weekly) then one would assume they'd have just outright rejected the interview rather than scheduling it and then cancelling on the grounds that I post here. I also can't imagine that they were afraid of my questions because they could decline any question they wanted to and nobody would have ever known that I even asked it; there's also the reading deleting/clarifying the transcript thing.

I do hope they change their minds, but we'll see. My entire goal was to give them the opportunity to speak on a third-party (relative to them) website, that being WoV, and have a fair and impartial interview.

DISCLAIMERS:

Would I have made money?

-Yes. I make money on all of my articles.

Would I expect to make more money off of interviewing them than other articles?

-Not remarkably so. Besides, interview articles take longer to do than anything else. Interview-based articles basically cut my output speed by 2/3rds, so even if I did make slightly more, it would be less per time spent.

[EZ Life Slot Jackpots]

They thought it was just going to be a cushy interview for some free press. Once they learned what the topic of the conversation was going to be about they want no part of it. They are one of the shadiest slot channels on YouTube. The other night something happened on their live stream, they both got upset, ended the stream immediately and made the video private because of what information was shown on the screen. This is just another reason why they are a joke.

This is so ridiculous that they cancelled the Mission146 article because he posts here.

Obviously this also proves what we long suspected -- that Sarah and Victor regularly read this thread.

I have repeatedly stated, both in this thread and on my show, that I do not have anything against Sarah/Victor. I have given them credit and compliments where due. I have repeatedly reminded people that they haven't scammed or cheated anyone, and that ultimately it's their right to decide what content to present on their channel, even if that content is not truthful. I have also reminded people that Sarah/Victor haven't really hurt anyone, financially or otherwise. I think I've been more than fair to them.

Unfortunately, it appears that they want to 100% control the narrative, and for any lies they tell to remain unquestioned. That's not how the internet works.

If you present yourself to the internet public, and are not entirely truthful in your approach, you take the risk that people will discover your lies and call you out on them. You can't have the benefits of a high-follower YouTube channel without the scrutiny which comes along with it.

They dislike this site because people are good at digging through the bullshit and getting to either the truth or the likely truth. When you're trying to tell half/morphed stories on your channel, a site like this one scrutinizing you is the last thing you want.

I am still quite willing to have a civil conversation with Sarah and/or Victor if they so desire. We can do it in e-mail or text if they don't want it on the phone. Use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the page if interested, or text me at (775) 372-8355.

I believe they cancelled the interview because they knew Mission would ask the tough questions, and they didn't want to answer these questions.

What a bizarre couple and slots channel. I thought this Raja guy and his creepy dirty old man act was strange enough, but Sarah/Victor really do take the cake when it comes to weird slots Youtubers.

I cannot imagine why they would find this site unsavory:

https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...Elected-Office

(LOL JK)

In all honesty, they must not read it too often or they'd have already known that I post here and would have declined right off the bat. Quite frankly, I think it's perhaps just as likely that someone told them that I post here and, consequently, would not be likely to offer a neutral interview.

Naturally, I would. Like I've already said, it's always my policy that people can simply refuse questions without me taking offense. More than that, anyone I interview is afforded the opportunity to read the raw transcript and straight up remove anything they don't want to appear. Not only do I not do, 'Gotcha,' moments, but you shouldn't even end up with, "I wish I hadn't said..." moments because you can just take it out.

Honestly, I think it's just that they really hate this site, so I'd be shocked if they take an interview with you. If they followed this thread closely (as in, daily or even weekly) then one would assume they'd have just outright rejected the interview rather than scheduling it and then cancelling on the grounds that I post here. I also can't imagine that they were afraid of my questions because they could decline any question they wanted to and nobody would have ever known that I even asked it; there's also the reading deleting/clarifying the transcript thing.

I do hope they change their minds, but we'll see. My entire goal was to give them the opportunity to speak on a third-party (relative to them) website, that being WoV, and have a fair and impartial interview.

DISCLAIMERS:

Would I have made money?

-Yes. I make money on all of my articles.

Would I expect to make more money off of interviewing them than other articles?

-Not remarkably so. Besides, interview articles take longer to do than anything else. Interview-based articles basically cut my output speed by 2/3rds, so even if I did make slightly more, it would be less per time spent.

[Dan Druff]

They thought it was just going to be a cushy interview for some free press. Once they learned what the topic of the conversation was going to be about they want no part of it. They are one of the shadiest slot channels on YouTube. The other night something happened on their live stream, they both got upset, ended the stream immediately and made the video private because of what information was shown on the screen. This is just another reason why they are a joke.

EZ, can you please tell me what happened on that livestream?

More specifics would be great. Thanks.

[Mission146]

They thought it was just going to be a cushy interview for some free press. Once they learned what the topic of the conversation was going to be about they want no part of it. They are one of the shadiest slot channels on YouTube. The other night something happened on their live stream, they both got upset, ended the stream immediately and made the video private because of what information was shown on the screen. This is just another reason why they are a joke.

Honestly, I was going to cover a wide variety of topics. I honestly don't understand why they changed their minds.

To be frank, I would have covered the OnlyFans thing only because it's absolutely necessary, at this point. I wasn't going to probe too hard on whether or not the pictures were actually leaked. I'd have probably asked once and just taken that answer at face value.

Mainly, I was going to focus a lot on the Youtube video revenue v. EV/actual loss aspect of sessions as that is primarily what interests me. I was curious in knowing whether or not they approach things, at least ideally, from a maximum fixed loss standpoint and whether or not they have ever considered going strictly by EV. I think it's an interesting question because, if fixed loss, then the -EV of a session actually increases the better they are doing, because they are placing more bets.

For example, on the Three-Card Poker Pair Plus + Six Card Bonus betting, it's actually the lowest expected loss (though maximum actual loss) if they were to literally lose every single hand. Obviously, I think they'd much prefer a winning session.

Naturally, I wouldn't have expected a deep dive into their personal finances; however, the thing that I was most curious about what the mathematics on a per individual video basis.

I think what might have been illuminated by this is the potential cost of newcomers starting competing channels. In essence, they'd either have to be an AP or extremely well-bankrolled as one would expect they'd get pummeled until viewership increased significantly enough that the videos were paying for themselves. I think the actual costs involved with producing this type of content, not to mention the existing competition, would be good information for those potentially considering starting such a channel to have.

I was interested in how the channel started and whether or not it was, in fact, just Sarah (as in, Victor not even behind the scenes) for some period of time. They don't seem to hide the fact that they are together now, so I'd have thought they would have been open to discussing precisely when Victor became part of the channel (actively) or if that was always the case.

I would have probed as to whether or not they have some sort of deal in place with El Cortez. Have to. If they did, I think they'd just refuse to answer, but I have to try.

I really don't understand it, but they didn't have specific knowledge of what topics I'd have covered. The OnlyFans thing might have been 10% of the content, and at least to me, the least interesting part of the interview.

Oh well. Perhaps I'll look for a different slot channel to interview. I think I've extended an offer to you before, but I don't remember. I'd be interested in your cost/revenue approach for your slot videos, but I'm not really going to get into the slot channel drama stuff if you want to chat. I mean no offense, but unless there's an actual bona fide scam going on with someone, I genuinely have no interest in all of that other stuff. Quite frankly, I think an endless obsession with drama is one of the reasons why our society, in this country, is in the miserable fucking state it is and we all hate each other.

[zealanddonk]

Have they added any more content to their OnlyClams or was it a fiddy dolla cash grab?

[Texter]

This is so ridiculous that they cancelled the Mission146 article because he posts here.

Obviously this also proves what we long suspected -- that Sarah and Victor regularly read this thread.

I have repeatedly stated, both in this thread and on my show, that I do not have anything against Sarah/Victor. I have given them credit and compliments where due. I have repeatedly reminded people that they haven't scammed or cheated anyone, and that ultimately it's their right to decide what content to present on their channel, even if that content is not truthful. I have also reminded people that Sarah/Victor haven't really hurt anyone, financially or otherwise. I think I've been more than fair to them.

Unfortunately, it appears that they want to 100% control the narrative, and for any lies they tell to remain unquestioned. That's not how the internet works.

If you present yourself to the internet public, and are not entirely truthful in your approach, you take the risk that people will discover your lies and call you out on them. You can't have the benefits of a high-follower YouTube channel without the scrutiny which comes along with it.

They dislike this site because people are good at digging through the bullshit and getting to either the truth or the likely truth. When you're trying to tell half/morphed stories on your channel, a site like this one scrutinizing you is the last thing you want.

I am still quite willing to have a civil conversation with Sarah and/or Victor if they so desire. We can do it in e-mail or text if they don't want it on the phone. Use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the page if interested, or text me at (775) 372-8355.

I believe they cancelled the interview because they knew Mission would ask the tough questions, and they didn't want to answer these questions.

What a bizarre couple and slots channel. I thought this Raja guy and his creepy dirty old man act was strange enough, but Sarah/Victor really do take the cake when it comes to weird slots Youtubers.

I cannot imagine why they would find this site unsavory:

https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...Elected-Office

(LOL JK)

In all honesty, they must not read it too often or they'd have already known that I post here and would have declined right off the bat. Quite frankly, I think it's perhaps just as likely that someone told them that I post here and, consequently, would not be likely to offer a neutral interview.

Naturally, I would. Like I've already said, it's always my policy that people can simply refuse questions without me taking offense. More than that, anyone I interview is afforded the opportunity to read the raw transcript and straight up remove anything they don't want to appear. Not only do I not do, 'Gotcha,' moments, but you shouldn't even end up with, "I wish I hadn't said..." moments because you can just take it out.

Honestly, I think it's just that they really hate this site, so I'd be shocked if they take an interview with you. If they followed this thread closely (as in, daily or even weekly) then one would assume they'd have just outright rejected the interview rather than scheduling it and then cancelling on the grounds that I post here. I also can't imagine that they were afraid of my questions because they could decline any question they wanted to and nobody would have ever known that I even asked it; there's also the reading deleting/clarifying the transcript thing.

I do hope they change their minds, but we'll see. My entire goal was to give them the opportunity to speak on a third-party (relative to them) website, that being WoV, and have a fair and impartial interview.

DISCLAIMERS:

Would I have made money?

-Yes. I make money on all of my articles.

Would I expect to make more money off of interviewing them than other articles?

-Not remarkably so. Besides, interview articles take longer to do than anything else. Interview-based articles basically cut my output speed by 2/3rds, so even if I did make slightly more, it would be less per time spent.

Transcribing interviews is torture, farmed that shit out to court reporters back in the day.

[lck2000]

Have they added any more content to their OnlyClams or was it a fiddy dolla cash grab?

They have. You can look at their OnlyFans page and see the description of what was posted, but you don't see the content unless you pay (and no I do not).
What is interesting is the number of likes they get on any given post. It's not a ton, I think the highest I've seen is 37. So 37 paid members liked it, assume lots just watch and don't give it the like. Still, these aren't huge numbers. Even if they have a 100 paid monthly people, that's $5K a month. For 2 people as an income... not hitting home runs.

Also interesting they've added "Top 0.96% of creators!" in their description. Basically trying to flex like they are top notch. Reality is, a whole hell of a lot of chicks sign up then don't post a thing. So being top 1% isn't a massive accomplishment, imo.

[PositiveVariance]

Have they added any more content to their OnlyClams or was it a fiddy dolla cash grab?

They have. You can look at their OnlyFans page and see the description of what was posted, but you don't see the content unless you pay (and no I do not).
What is interesting is the number of likes they get on any given post. It's not a ton, I think the highest I've seen is 37. So 37 paid members liked it, assume lots just watch and don't give it the like. Still, these aren't huge numbers. Even if they have a 100 paid monthly people, that's $5K a month. For 2 people as an income... not hitting home runs.

Also interesting they've added "Top 0.96% of creators!" in their description. Basically trying to flex like they are top notch. Reality is, a whole hell of a lot of chicks sign up then don't post a thing. So being top 1% isn't a massive accomplishment, imo.

By them adding "Top 0.96%" of creators, they are giving away nearly their exact income. I'm assuming somewhere in their analytics it gives them this number. This is very interesting because if they were to say, "In the top 1%" that leaves a HUGE range, since the Top 1% of creators earn from $6,000 to $3 Million per month. Additional data shows the top .01% earn at least $100,000 per month. The range for top 1% to .01% is 6k -100k.

By them telling us EXACTLY 0.96%, that tells us they are between $6,000 and $7,000 Monthly. 120 to 140 people at $50 each.

Now, you may say "PV, why are you hating? They are making more money than 99.04% of creators on the site". Yes, this is true, but you must realize Social Media Creators, Instagram Chicks, and Models are a very SMALL percentage of the overall makeup of Only Fans, but this is what most people know it for.

Do you know who makes up 90%+ of Only fans? Yes, SEX WORKERS! Escorts, call girls, and MOSTLY PROSTITUTES! If your a sex worker, how great is it to say, "I'm on Only Fans?" Definitely helps their image, and many use it for just that, as well as "1 on 1's", basically a "cam girl". When most Folks think "Only Fans", they think of a site where they can see their favorite Social Media Star, in the nude! Being on OF, kinda removes the "Street walker" or "Lot Lizard" outta a girl.
In my ghetto voice..."Damn Fool, she b up on OF?, She gotta b cool AF".


The average monthly earnings on Only Fans is around $200. If you remove the top 1% from the average, the earnings are somewhere in the double digits ($10-$99). The bottom 50% are earning virtually nothing.

Any girl that has a decent following on social media and looks half way decent, will rank in the top 1% of "creators" with virtually no effort.




A recent video title from their Only Fans....
(You can see the title, even if your not a subscriber)


"Sarah gets her pussy POUNDED!! Vic gives Sarah a hard pounding, his big dick hits bottom multiple times!!"




_

[1dollarboxcar]

EZ with more tea.... i just started watching it....

[JeffDime]

My read is that she’s was an online Sugar Baby only. That she sent these guys photos & even some sexual content she did with her Boyfriend Victor. I think the “Open Relationship” is again total bullshit in order to keep the whole veil of availability up for the simps.

I think this is all encouraged by Victor. Much as the Slot Lady concept was his. He has no problem profiting off Sarah engaging in all kinds of behavior, but I think there is no actual sexual contact with these guys. I’m sure all of these guys paid good money for having this digital relationship.

I find that when Sarah denied ever being an “escort” in their last response video to be one of the few truthful statements in it. I think the post on Reddit talking about her being an escort was over the top and probably written by one of these Sugar Daddies.

Anyways, that’s where I am at. I think EZ’s video really provided alot of clarity here. Look, this will not sustain. The cat is out of the bag. The value of Victor/Sarah screwing is going to 0.000. Sell Sell Sell. They are getting the money while they can but in a month or two they will just be your average 30 somethings posting amateur porn on the internet. It’s less than a dime a dozen. It’s fucking free for all.

Their gambling brand is also forever tarnished. Even in today’s age people are going to look at them differently. Sarah, the young entrepreneur and expert at corporate structure. Victor, the deeply private person who was given a female name & hid behind the camera for 5 years. Forced to make content because the good girl Sarah was so sick of the creeps that came with doing gambling content. Well, they screw on the internet for a living now. It’s all downhill from here.

They can do whatever they want. But they do lie their asses off to their audience. That, no one can dispute. The entire narrative of the history of their channel is ironically built up like a house of cards.

I don’t wish them ill. But unfortunately their success in utilizing the times we live in to constantly take one short cut or another to keep the money flowing has forced them from ever taking any kind of true interception. Once the photos were out that took away the mystery & with it the scarcity. That was the true value these guys saw in her.

The inflection point was when the channel was dying & Sarah wanted out. She didn’t get out. I hope I’m wrong. But I’m not. Shit will get real. Maybe not now…but one day. Victor needs Sarah. He needs her to manage his money, bring in money to keep up his addiction & keep him from basically self destructing. She doesn’t need him. But I’m sure he’s convinced her she does.

[Mission146]

Have they added any more content to their OnlyClams or was it a fiddy dolla cash grab?

They have. You can look at their OnlyFans page and see the description of what was posted, but you don't see the content unless you pay (and no I do not).
What is interesting is the number of likes they get on any given post. It's not a ton, I think the highest I've seen is 37. So 37 paid members liked it, assume lots just watch and don't give it the like. Still, these aren't huge numbers. Even if they have a 100 paid monthly people, that's $5K a month. For 2 people as an income... not hitting home runs.

Also interesting they've added "Top 0.96% of creators!" in their description. Basically trying to flex like they are top notch. Reality is, a whole hell of a lot of chicks sign up then don't post a thing. So being top 1% isn't a massive accomplishment, imo.

That's honestly not that bad of a monthly assuming there is a strong retention rate. It should also be mentioned that OF is not their only source of income. As long as they can keep the costs of producing more Youtube content somewhat in check, divert those viewers to either Patreon or OnlyFans and have decent retention on the outlets with high revenues per user (meaning, OnlyFans) they'd honestly be doing pretty well.

It should also be mentioned that some people were skeptical that they would create new OnlyFans content as opposed to just getting what they could off of the leaked videos. That's one promise kept, thus far.

[Mission146]

EZ with more tea.... i just started watching it....

That video wasn't bad.

The one thing that I'll say is that I'm surprised that EZ Life would treat the leaking of the photos/videos as an open legal question on the grounds that Sarah and Victor are now producing OnlyFans content. I honestly don't see why that would change the legal status of an act that was committed prior to that happening. Is it possible that authorities would take the claim less seriously? Perhaps. It wouldn't change whether or not sharing such privately sent photos is a crime.

Even then, EZ Life claims in his video that someone offered him the photos of Sarah, which were private at the time, for $500. If Sarah and Victor produced that content and gave it to people, then they have the copyright claim to that content. With that being the case, it is indisputably illegal for someone to try to profit off of that content unless Sarah and Victor gave their consent to that person to do so. It's not even a gray area. For example, I couldn't just pay for Sarah and Victor's OnlyFans channel membership, copy all of the photos and videos, then create my own OnlyFans where I just upload THEIR photos and videos, except, I'm only charging $25 to subscribers rather than the $50 that they charge. On the other hand, if the person who attempted to sell it took the photos and videos, then there are some cases where they could sell them, but Sarah and Victor would likely need to have signed some sort of release with them, which I seriously doubt.

With that, while I can't speak as to people who shared the videos/photos with EZ Life when they were leaked or 'leaked' freely, I can definitely say that the person who offered to sell EZ Life the material for $500 indisputably committed an illegal action. The only possible exception would be if they had Sarah and Victor's permission to attempt to do so.

I'm also going to give EZ Life credit for acknowledging that anything that Sarah/Victor has ever done pales in comparison to the outlets that are doing actual scamming. From my perspective, Sarah and Victor have never victimized anyone. If simps want to give money to Sarah and she's not single (at that time), then I don't know that she has any duty of disclosure to say she's not single. It would be something different if she specifically said she was available, when such was not true, but omitting that she's not single and letting the simps give her money based on the assumption she is...I honestly don't see the problem. I mean, there IS a problem there, but it is the simps' problem.

I'm going to say that EZ Life's back must be really loose, because calling sharing pictures of yourself (that being Sarah) in a bikini at what looks to likely be a casino pool the sharing of personal information is a serious stretch. She's on camera all the time; in what world is that the sharing of personal information?

These are some of the things that I was sort of hoping to clarify with Sarah and Victor. Since the proverbial cat is out of the bag, I was hoping we could get a timeline from the channel starting to Sarah/Victor being a couple, or perhaps they were a couple the entire time. It's still possible that they were not a couple in the beginning as the channel has been around for over six years.

Anyway, I don't think they're going to talk to me anymore. Besides that, the stuff that I was most interested in discussing literally any slot channel would know, so perhaps one of the others would like to talk to me.

But, yeah, any attempt to sell that content without Sarah and Victor's consent is absolutely illegal. Would law enforcement actually do something about it? No idea. Does it matter that they are Canadian? No. I don't believe that there's an exception that says someone in the United States can commit digital crimes against other individuals provided that those other individuals are from a different country. I obviously don't know that the person is from the United States, but if ACA reported this to the FBI as they claim, they must certainly think that the person is. That being the case, if a crime was committed, it was committed by them whilst they were in the United States and they can be held accountable to that.

[JeffDime]

But, yeah, any attempt to sell that content without Sarah and Victor's consent is absolutely illegal. Would law enforcement actually do something about it? No idea. Does it matter that they are Canadian? No. I don't believe that there's an exception that says someone in the United States can commit digital crimes against other individuals provided that those other individuals are from a different country. I obviously don't know that the person is from the United States, but if ACA reported this to the FBI as they claim, they must certainly think that the person is. That being the case, if a crime was committed, it was committed by them whilst they were in the United States and they can be held accountable to that.

Very well written as always Mission and I think all factually correct. The leaking of the pornographic material as a legal matter, I believe you are correct. In no way does it lessen any criminal conduct because Sarah/Victor are selling the leaked materials. If what was done was illegal, it was illegal. A crime is a crime and in a perfect world justice would be had. But we both know we don’t live in that world.

From a practical standpoint, I think it is a reasonable assumption that the FBI/Law Enforcement must be absolutely flooded with criminal complaints regarding the leaking of pornographic material. I can’t even guess the number. The sheer amount must be overwhelming. There is no way there are resources to police even a fraction of it.

There are probably two major reasons a case may get priority. The first is simply being that there is a connection with whatever law enforcement agency would dedicate man hours to such a pursuit and the victim. That just the way the world works.

I would like to think the second is the worst and most clear actions of revenge porn. This is probably a fraction of one percent of complaints. The cases that rise to the level where resources can actually be utilized to find justice.

We also know the application of law can be very random at times. So I am not saying this will not be investigated. But my money is on this complaint, if it did indeed happen, sitting on the bottom of the pile…forever.

[Mission146]

Anyone can read this, but it's largely meant for EZ Life:

I'm not sure how you feel about me, but let me holler at you for a minute, homeskillet;

I'm not an attorney and anything I say should not be construed by you to be legal advice. However, my concern for you is that you have now potentially created a bit of a hassle for yourself. It's important that you have some idea how to navigate that, so I would recommend discussing what you have shared with an attorney, which you can probably do for free.

In any event, you posted a video in which you stated that someone approached you to sell you those pictures/videos of Sarah and Victor for the sum of $500. That is now on record. If that's true, and I would assume it is, then you should really talk to an attorney. My concern is that their offer to sell that content to you might be a felony, and if it is a felony, then you might have a mandatory duty to report that such felony was committed. All of this stuff with leaked photos/videos, and now someone attempting to actually profit off of them...dude, OnlyFans or no OnlyFans, that's probably some serious shit.

For that reason, I would consult with an attorney in your state and determine whether or not someone committed a felony by attempting to sell you those (assuming they didn't have Sarah and Victor's permission to do so, which I seriously doubt) and whether or not you have a duty to report that.

Furthermore, while I don't think it was your intent, you actually kind of gave Sarah and Victor a justification to create an OnlyFans---not that they needed one as they can do whatever they want. However, if someone is going around profiting, or attempting to profit, off of this kind of content of theirs anyway, then it only makes sense that they should profit off of their own content. It was kind of a different argument when they were simply thought of as leaked with nobody profiting, but if a third-party is actually going around selling this sort of content, then why would they let that person continue to make money off of that when they can just do it themselves?

The last thing I would say is that if you are approached to divulge any information you have about the person who attempted to sell these to you, I would strongly recommend divulging that information. The selling of those photos and videos, or attempt to do (and they might have had people who actually bought) is almost certainly a crime and you are a witness to that crime. If law enforcement investigates this matter, then law enforcement will definitely wish to talk with you. If Sarah and Victor hire an attorney and he looks into this as a copyright claim, then he would likely file a subpoena for you to talk, as well as a subpoena duces tecum, which is a type of subpoena that orders you to attend and bring relevant documents...which relevant documents would be any records you might have of this person attempting to sell you this content for $500.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that there's any possibility that you could get into trouble, but you may have created a hassle for yourself. In the future, you might do well to either keep those cards a little closer to your chest or just play all of them at once.

On the other hand, it's possible that there is nobody and won't be anyone looking into this in a legal capacity, in which event, you will not have created a hassle for yourself.

Don't take this as an attack; I'm just trying to help you out. I do think you would do well to discuss this matter with an attorney.

[Mission146]

But, yeah, any attempt to sell that content without Sarah and Victor's consent is absolutely illegal. Would law enforcement actually do something about it? No idea. Does it matter that they are Canadian? No. I don't believe that there's an exception that says someone in the United States can commit digital crimes against other individuals provided that those other individuals are from a different country. I obviously don't know that the person is from the United States, but if ACA reported this to the FBI as they claim, they must certainly think that the person is. That being the case, if a crime was committed, it was committed by them whilst they were in the United States and they can be held accountable to that.

Very well written as always Mission and I think all factually correct. The leaking of the pornographic material as a legal matter, I believe you are correct. In no way does it lessen any criminal conduct because Sarah/Victor are selling the leaked materials. If what was done was illegal, it was illegal. A crime is a crime and in a perfect world justice would be had. But we both know we don’t live in that world.

From a practical standpoint, I think it is a reasonable assumption that the FBI/Law Enforcement must be absolutely flooded with criminal complaints regarding the leaking of pornographic material. I can’t even guess the number. The sheer amount must be overwhelming. There is no way there are resources to police even a fraction of it.

There are probably two major reasons a case may get priority. The first is simply being that there is a connection with whatever law enforcement agency would dedicate man hours to such a pursuit and the victim. That just the way the world works.

I would like to think the second is the worst and most clear actions of revenge porn. This is probably a fraction of one percent of complaints. The cases that rise to the level where resources can actually be utilized to find justice.

We also know the application of law can be very random at times. So I am not saying this will not be investigated. But my money is on this complaint, if it did indeed happen, sitting on the bottom of the pile…forever.

Thank you for the compliment. I agree with your first paragraph completely. The people who shared the photos and videos either had permission to do so or they did not. ACA's creation of an OnlyFans would not change whether or not they gave consent for those to be shared at the time.

I agree with the rest about law enforcement not having sufficient resources to investigate all of these claims. At least, I would have agreed but for EZ Life's statement that someone actually attempted to sell him this material for the sum of $500. That being the case, law enforcement might be inclined to take this matter a bit more seriously than they otherwise might have.

[1dollarboxcar]

there is no FBI involved here, they are Canadian citizens, so if there was some sort of Law Agency involved.... it would be Canada's version of the FBI...

since Sarah claimed that the FBI is involved and it is out of their jurisdiction.... tells you 100% that it's complete BS !! if she/they wanted it to sound

"legit " they should of said that the CSIS ( just looked it up.... Canada Security Intelligence Service ) was involved... if there was even some sort of

Law Agency involved here.... their case goes to the very bottom of the 1000's of piles of cases that are ore more serious than a $500 " leaked video "

that they end up putting on their Onlyfans anyways... so it didn't even happen, they are just playing the victim card.... it's kind of funny to watch them squirm and grovel over situations that they themselves created.... and then try to play the victim... enough said....

[Mission146]

there is no FBI involved here, they are Canadian citizens, so if there was some sort of Law Agency involved.... it would be Canada's version of the FBI...

since Sarah claimed that the FBI is involved and it is out of their jurisdiction.... tells you 100% that it's complete BS !! if she/they wanted it to sound

"legit " they should of said that the CSIS ( just looked it up.... Canada Security Intelligence Service ) was involved... if there was even some sort of

Law Agency involved here.... their case goes to the very bottom of the 1000's of piles of cases that are ore more serious than a $500 " leaked video "

that they end up putting on their Onlyfans anyways... so it didn't even happen, they are just playing the victim card.... it's kind of funny to watch them squirm and grovel over situations that they themselves created.... and then try to play the victim... enough said....

Is it your analysis that it is impossible for a citizen of the United States to commit a crime against a Canadian? I would honestly be pretty surprised if they've directly talked to the FBI, aside from perhaps leaving a message or filling out some kind of online form, but if a United States citizen was going around offering to sell these pictures without the consent of Sarah and Victor, then that citizen was very much in the United States when they committed that crime. Whether or not the FBI would be the correct agency to have jurisdiction, I'd have absolutely no clue. It might be a crime such that the proper jurisdictional level is that individual's state.

You'd have to talk to EZ Life about whether it happened or not; he's the one who said someone offered to sell him the material for $500. I obviously have no idea whether or not that happened.