Here's another site that makes you wonder if it's real or fake:
Philanderers.com. It's a service to help people who are married have extramarital affairs. My first thought was that it was a joke. But upon looking around it for a while, it appears legitimate. I wonder if any single people use this who want to have an affair with someone who's married? And here's an evil thought: if you ever try to cancel your membership, they could threaten to tell your spouse.
Comments
There is no real screening done on these sites. I would avoid them like the plague.
craigslist.com
outsidelove.com
philanderers.com
wildmatch.com
Stay far from anything that say wives or milf or lonely
These women from my area contact me telling me they'd like to hear from me and send me pictures that are frankly, gorgeous. I then pay to send them an email. Receive a response like "would love to chat some time" but then you never see them online long enough to chat. The killer was when I noticed a pattern a couple weeks ago of about four of these really "attractive women" signing on all at once at the same time and signing off at the same time. Very suspicious. Should really get around to complaining to Ashley Madsion but I figure what;;s the use.
I thought if I put my comments out on the web it might help out some other potential sucker.
Good luck!
AM has some real women.
Someone needs to start a simple cheap service for this.
Philanders is real but doesn't have many members.
AFF has way too many people.
By the way E harmony and Great Expectations get thier share of complaints. E Harm considers matches with people you cant contact (non payers) as contacts so they dont have to refund for no matches.
Mike
In many years on the Philanderer site, i have never come across a shill profile. Does that mean every woman I have ever written to responded? Yeah, in my dreams. Fortunately, quite a few have responded, exchanged emails with me and a resulted in face to face meeting. From those a few select turned into genuine affairs.
You Won?
From: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
You may not know this sender.Mark as safe|Mark as unsafe
Sent: Fri 1/04/08 9:41 PM
To:
Dear Winner, We are pleased to inform you that as a result of our recent UKNATIONAL LOTTERY DRAWS (#669) held on the 20th of December, 2007. Your e-mailaddress attached to ticket number: 82689846671030 with serial number009/01 whichconsequently won in the category "D" with the following Winning Numbers8,10,13,22,32,38 Bonus No. 4.You have therefore been approved for a lump sum pay out of
Note: Outsidelove.com isn't even a dating site. It just seems to be a link trade.
1) posted an ad as a Guest (ie. did not buy credits); shortly thereafter I got 5 winks from very nice-looking women (according to ther photos) who wanted to chat with me, but they were not FULL AM members.
2) I purchased credits so that I could "chat" with these women;
3) I sent each of them what I think would be a very intersting email.
4) None of them responded - but that was because none of them had signed into the system for 5+ days;
5) By putting them on the "List", I can tell when they did sign-in to see if they read my mail;
6) 4 of the 5 signed in at 10:18 AM on the same day (yes, all 4 at 10:18) and one at 10:20.
7)Yes, you are getting the picture here - none of them responded to my ad.
8) I created another "Guest ad" - identical profile - Wanna guess how many women sent me winks asking to chat if I can just sign up with AM?
Save the $$ boys; it's a recession out there - lets these bastardos go out of business.
The hard facts are these:
1. All of these sites have mostly men looking to get laid. Sorry guys, the odds are against you.
2. Women can get laid anytime they want, so why use a site at all?
3. Most women on sites (like the ones I listed above) are receptive of couples, not single guys, so unless you already have a women you probably are not going to get a ticket to the dance.
Can't argue with sucess...
AM is a clever, soft-scam, no-one gets really hurt, or loses huge amounts of money. I'm truely an honest guy, but I can't help a sneeking repect for such cons.
I withold my bile for news sources such as the NY Times, which have published articles which, effectively, support the con. Whether they are fooled too, or a unscrupulous writer takes a bribe...
I'm also contemptuous for those posters who come over all old-testament on the 'adulterers' (Stone them why not). To the tiny minority who are truely satisified in their monogamy, or simply feel happier that way, and have expressed there bit of wisdom - I salute you - to the others .... you remind me for all the world of homophobes, driven by fear of their own latent homosexual urges - i.e. look inward first & get wise, rather than sling around the judgements.