Amazing New Renfaire Stuff

[VegLife]

I think we need a better way to report and rally when it comes to these kind of arguments, which i have also been guilty of starting. Publicly shaming and questioning a priducer BEFORE you ask in private doesnt seem a just way to do thing when they very well might be able to clear things up for you if you just àsked. Not taking sides here as i had the same concerns but even if they come out clean youve already made a scene and that sticks to them and throws off all their branding and presentation.

... But always great to hear the undiscerning comments "oh they wouldnt do that" "oh its no big deal". Smh tickle community at its finest

 

[CoatOfArms]

I couldn't agree more. I get that majority of people don't see tickling as a fetish. I can even imagine someone making a play set in medieval times, and using tickling as a comedic way to represent torture. But it's not the case with these videos. The whole thing is designed as a fetish video from the start, with the plan to sell it. There is no mistake here. Now imagine that all the participants weren't fully informed about the purpouse of this. And imagine than one woman discoveres, that her photoes and video is circling on fetish sites and soemone is making a profit out of it. If she decided to sue them, and it turns out that the release form said nothing about it, she would win the case and the producers would be in huge trouble.

And this is my reason why I don't want to subscribe their site at the moment. It's too riksy right now. Now, if they will confrim that all the participants know about the purpose behind the video, for example by showing the blank release form, I will be happy to do it. But as long as this aspect is not clear, I am not going to do subscribe.

On the other hand, considering that they now have 195 subscribers, it is possible that no one will ever see any of those videos.

 

[FeatherFeet]

I couldn't agree more. I get that majority of people don't see tickling as a fetish. I can even imagine someone making a play set in medieval times, and using tickling as a comedic way to represent torture. But it's not the case with these videos. The whole thing is designed as a fetish video from the start, with the plan to sell it. There is no mistake here. Now imagine that all the participants weren't fully informed about the purpouse of this. And imagine than one woman discoveres, that her photoes and video is circling on fetish sites and soemone is making a profit out of it. If she decided to sue them, and it turns out that the release form said nothing about it, she would win the case and the producers would be in huge trouble.

And this is my reason why I don't want to subscribe their site at the moment. It's too riksy right now. Now, if they will confrim that all the participants know about the purpose behind the video, for example by showing the blank release form, I will be happy to do it. But as long as this aspect is not clear, I am not going to do subscribe.

On the other hand, considering that they now have 195 subscribers, it is possible that no one will ever see any of those videos.

I guess you never heard of wikifeet, or any multitdes of sites like it which show regular poses and situations or videos that some people have a fetish for. how many of those people do you think are informed that's what its being used for? right to privacy laws are pretty universally clear. if material of you is taken IN PUBLIC you have absolutely no expectation of privacy or where it goes. and honestly, none of us have any idea how many pictures of us taken in public are how many places for people to use however they want. this idea of getting consent from everyone in the audience is silly and childlike on the face of it.

this why almost every type of fair and convention when you purchase the ticket has a waver now that your image might be used in materials later if they take pictures of you at it. im sure the people simply attending these fairs had a similar agreement when buying their tickets. the level of not understanding how the real world works on this site is sometimes rather pitiful.

 

[CoatOfArms]

Do you seriously not see a difference between a photo or video taken in public and published on someone's private profile or organizer's website (that later leaked and was posted on fetish site) versus a video which is made as a fetish video from the very beginning, with the clear purpose of selling it? This is not a situation where you have a fair, the video is made and published on Facebook or some other fair's website, and someone with tickle fetish found it and published it. The purpose of making those videos is clear.

This is a reason why I would like to know what the participants are told. Because if they are only told that the footage might be used by organizers as some promotional material, most of them won't think that this means being turned into porn and sold. And I might be pitiful, but I strongly believe that an innocent person should not be used as a fetish model without their consent.

 

[FeatherFeet]

Do you seriously not see a difference between a photo or video taken in public and published on someone's private profile or organizer's website (that later leaked and was posted on fetish site) versus a video which is made as a fetish video from the very beginning, with the clear purpose of selling it? This is not a situation where you have a fair, the video is made and published on Facebook or some other fair's website, and someone with tickle fetish found it and published it. The purpose of making those videos is clear.

This is a reason why I would like to know what the participants are told. Because if they are only told that the footage might be used by organizers as some promotional material, most of them won't think that this means being turned into porn and sold. And I might be pitiful, but I strongly believe that an innocent person should not be used as a fetish model without their consent.

Well, that's a nice belief. But sadly the only way in the world of cameras everywhere to avoid that is basically stay in your house or do nothing. Also, legally speaking there is a distinction between porn and fetish material for the very reason that for most people specific kinks do not equate to anything sexual or involve sexual body parts, there is a ton of legal literature around this. And people on this site do not have enough self-awareness to realize their fetish to most people means nothing at all because it is so entangled in their own sexuality, they consistently elevate it to that level to everyone else, which is just a huge level of lack of self-awareness.

It's not the same thing, not legally, not morally, not practically. We could have a better debate about this if that very big distinction could first be established. But since so many of the arguments against come from that notion, it's almost pointless to try to explain it to people.

Don't get me wrong, I have tons of problems with how this group is handling the entire renfaire bit, not the least bit is withholding the content after fundraising for it, but I am not going to jump to an unwarranted conclusion (because there is no evidence to suggest these girls have NOT been told, so you are making huge assumptions on that front) about that unless there is a reason to.

 

[VegLife]

I guess you never heard of wikifeet, or any multitdes of sites like it which show regular poses and situations or videos that some people have a fetish for. how many of those people do you think are informed that's what its being used for? right to privacy laws are pretty universally clear. if material of you is taken IN PUBLIC you have absolutely no expectation of privacy or where it goes. and honestly, none of us have any idea how many pictures of us taken in public are how many places for people to use however they want. this idea of getting consent from everyone in the audience is silly and childlike on the face of it.

this why almost every type of fair and convention when you purchase the ticket has a waver now that your image might be used in materials later if they take pictures of you at it. im sure the people simply attending these fairs had a similar agreement when buying their tickets. the level of not understanding how the real world works on this site is sometimes rather pitiful.

Appeal to fallacy > basic ethics

You cant stop people from doing it so it makes it okay to support it.

 

[FeatherFeet]

Appeal to fallacy > basic ethics

You cant stop people from doing it so it makes it okay to support it.

I don't recall saying anywhere i support doing it without their consent. I simply we have some pretty ridiculous expectations about privacy in the world we live in when doing it in public. And my main point is the idea someone suggesting tickling feet on a festish site is the same as having an orgy in public.

 

[Vindiggity2]

I think we’re getting away from the main point of all of this…the dude is holding this stuff hostage, waiting to more than double his subscriber count under what most of us have said are rather shady practices…and his subscriber count is GOING BACKWARDS. He went from like 270something to 216 in a matter of two weeks, if memory serves me right. The prevailing argument from his fan base is to release the content, which he won’t, holding onto his faith that he’ll get 500 subscribers. People are unsubscribing (including myself) because he won’t release it. It’s a tough look for sure. Hopefully he gives the people what they want, otherwise I don’t think we’ll ever see the footage. Rather unfortunate. Didn’t mind his content and subscribed for a few months until I saw him pull this. Immediately unsubscribed, but I’ll go back if the content comes out.

 

[VegLife]

I don't recall saying anywhere i support doing it without their consent. I simply we have some pretty ridiculous expectations about privacy in the world we live in when doing it in public. And my main point is the idea someone suggesting tickling feet on a festish site is the same as having an orgy in public.

dont mean to come at you directly just was elaborating my issue with your line of thought.

 

[VegLife]

I think we’re getting away from the main point of all of this…the dude is holding this stuff hostage, waiting to more than double his subscriber count under what most of us have said are rather shady practices…and his subscriber count is GOING BACKWARDS. He went from like 270something to 216 in a matter of two weeks, if memory serves me right. The prevailing argument from his fan base is to release the content, which he won’t, holding onto his faith that he’ll get 500 subscribers. People are unsubscribing (including myself) because he won’t release it. It’s a tough look for sure. Hopefully he gives the people what they want, otherwise I don’t think we’ll ever see the footage. Rather unfortunate. Didn’t mind his content and subscribed for a few months until I saw him pull this. Immediately unsubscribed, but I’ll go back if the content comes out.

I mean they set the terms and explained themselves, you guys dont have to stay and support him which you already know. You did the right thing and soon the ball will probably be back in their court. Can complain about it but yeah might not ever happen, its expensive. The main point is the simplest one

 

[CoatOfArms]

After looking back at my posts, I admit that I overreacted a bit, I am sorry if I have offended someone. But I am concerned about the issue with participants, because if there is something shady with it, this might create controversies and terminate the whole project, similar to Canelli (not exactly like that, but I hope you know what I mean).

As for the topic of keeping the videos hostage, to some extend I understand their position. The moment they release the content, it will end up all over the internet and people will be able to watch it without subscribing their page. So it makes sense they want to gather some money first. Having said that, they have chosen a strange method to gain 500 subscribers, in my opinion a method destined to fail. They probably assumed that people will be so eager to see this content, that the goal would be very quickly reached. But in reality the number of subscribers dropped. And it is no surprise, many people only want to access this specific content, they are not interested in other videos. But to see it, they have to pay and wait, without knowing how long it will last. So it makes sense that potential buyers want to wait until the number will be closer to 500.

Perhaps a better method would be to create a separate tier right now, but only with 5 or 10 videos for a start. People (especially those who want to see only this content) would be more eager to subscribe and pay, because they will be able to see the actual videos they are paying for. In other words, they will not be just buying a cat in a sack. Then they could announce that next 20 videos will be published after reaching 300 subscribers, next 20 for 400 and so on. With this method I think they will reach their goal much faster.

 

[CoatOfArms]

So I must say I am really exited, I've managed to find a prove that the tickling in stocks really happened.

By a bit of strange luck I have discover the location of one of events where the tickling happened, it is even showed on this trailer video from Stimulating Feet. After some digging I managed to find some photos and even videos. But before you get too exited, those were mostly photos of empty stocks (but definitely those stocks). There were only two photos showing tickling. As for the videos, it was this "walk around" type of video, and you can see someone sitting in the stocks for a very short time, but because the operator was focusing on something else, you can't clearly see what is happening there and the quality is not the best. But for me the important thing is the confirmation that it has really happened.

I am sorry if my post seems a bit vague, but I decided not name the place or post any photos here, I hope you won't hate me for this. I know that this makes my post less believable, but I am worried that if I name the place, the organiser will be bombarded by messages asking for the content, which might destroy any chances of this happening.

So I guess we can only hope that the footage will be released soon or that Stimulating Feet will slightly change their mind and make the required number of subscribers lower. I do understand their goal and now I support them but I still think that with their current strategy they might never reach it.

 

[ragenow]

aaaaaannnddd it's gone

 

[CoatOfArms]

Just a trailer on Youtube, you can still watch it on their Instagram page

 

[esquirol7]

Thank you very much for your feedback, and thank you so much for your great iniciative. All the TICKLING COMMUNITY are expecting with relish for your work!

 

[Vindiggity2]

Guess this isn’t happening. Dude is at 202 subscribers, never getting to 500. Hate it when we’re lied to by producers.

 

[CoatOfArms]

I might be quite naive, but he would reach 500 very quickly if he published at least one or better few videos, even by selling them. I'm just wondering what's the problem, he made this whole operation and filmed this stuff on festivals, had an intention to sell it, but behaves as if he has never wanted to have it released in the first place

 

[SoleMates]

anyone who doesn't see how vast that different is really needs a reality check.

Sorry, no. It's you who needs the reality check. I produce fetish content, and I also do regular photography. Once I decided to try and mix the two and do a mainstream calendar shoot with a bunch of female musicians who would be barefoot. It wasn't a fetish project, it wasn't marketed as a fetish project, it wasn't aimed at this community. In the end, though, only about seven out of the twelve bands agreed to go barefoot for the shoot. One of the singers who initially agreed eventually decided she "didn't want to be part of a fetish thing".

I was literally just asking them to pose with their shoes off. It's not like I was tickling them or tying them up or slathering them with baby oil or putting them in stocks or any of the other weird shit this community gets up to. Hell, I didn't even make their feet the focus of the shoot, like ask them to show their soles at the camera or anything. Even then, enough of them said "I'm not comfortable with this" that it pretty much blows your "it's just innocent" notion out of the water, because I had people refusing to participate on the grounds that it could be perceived as a fetish shoot even when it wasn't.

So yeah, as a producer myself this entire thing stinks, and that's not even getting into the whole "oh no no it's not a fetish" thing where the entire channel is posing as "reflexology". Pull the other one, indeed.

 

[CoatOfArms]

So yeah, as a producer myself this entire thing stinks, and that's not even getting into the whole "oh no no it's not a fetish" thing where the entire channel is posing as "reflexology". Pull the other one, indeed.

Hard to disagree with you, there is a strange wibe surrounding this project. I just can't imagine them convinving any ordinary person (by which I mean someone without tickle fetish) to even perform in such video. Unless they weren't told the truth about the purpouse of this project. On the other hand, the cameras were clearly visible, so it's not like they were filming them in secret, they must have been at least somehow aware of this. So I don't know what to think about it. I would love to see the footage but I don't want to support the project that makes fetish videos without participants knowledge.

 

[pacattack]

Holy shit people are still arguing in this thread.

 

[FeatherFeet]

Sorry, no. It's you who needs the reality check. I produce fetish content, and I also do regular photography. Once I decided to try and mix the two and do a mainstream calendar shoot with a bunch of female musicians who would be barefoot. It wasn't a fetish project, it wasn't marketed as a fetish project, it wasn't aimed at this community. In the end, though, only about seven out of the twelve bands agreed to go barefoot for the shoot. One of the singers who initially agreed eventually decided she "didn't want to be part of a fetish thing".

I was literally just asking them to pose with their shoes off. It's not like I was tickling them or tying them up or slathering them with baby oil or putting them in stocks or any of the other weird shit this community gets up to. Hell, I didn't even make their feet the focus of the shoot, like ask them to show their soles at the camera or anything. Even then, enough of them said "I'm not comfortable with this" that it pretty much blows your "it's just innocent" notion out of the water, because I had people refusing to participate on the grounds that it could be perceived as a fetish shoot even when it wasn't.

So yeah, as a producer myself this entire thing stinks, and that's not even getting into the whole "oh no no it's not a fetish" thing where the entire channel is posing as "reflexology". Pull the other one, indeed.

and how many of those same models probably would or have posted pictures of themselves at the beach barefoot and are completely oblivious to the many people who see the pictures on their isntagrams, facebooks etc and consider it "fetish" material?

You completely miss the entire point of my argument. And my argument is, it's exceedingly hard to put an operational definition on fetish material. It often comes down to the only difference between regular pictures and fetish material is that you label it. There are so many fetishes for so many things that most regular people would not consider a fetish and do without having any idea it means something different to someone else.

The entire difficulty with this seems to be that people are upset this stuff is being "marketed towards the fetishests" rather than the content itself. And there are tons of business models that operate this way for example, antiquing. "Hey donate or sell us your old shit very cheap" is how its marketed to one group and then advertised as "valuable old pieces of art" to another group...for the same stuff.

Yeah, it's a personal choice whether or not you want to inform people that this might be used by the fetish people out there. But in all fairness if you post any picture of any kind of anyone on the internet, you probably should bill that statement these days, because it rings just as true whether you are advertising it on a fetish site or posting it for free on stockimages that some fetishest might have a fetish for whatever image you are posting and get off on it. You can't escape that reality these days, there are more fetishes than we even know exist, the only thing freaky about the foot thing is it's known to be more common these days.

 

[FeatherFeet]

Sorry, no. It's you who needs the reality check. I produce fetish content, and I also do regular photography. Once I decided to try and mix the two and do a mainstream calendar shoot with a bunch of female musicians who would be barefoot. It wasn't a fetish project, it wasn't marketed as a fetish project, it wasn't aimed at this community. In the end, though, only about seven out of the twelve bands agreed to go barefoot for the shoot. One of the singers who initially agreed eventually decided she "didn't want to be part of a fetish thing".

I was literally just asking them to pose with their shoes off. It's not like I was tickling them or tying them up or slathering them with baby oil or putting them in stocks or any of the other weird shit this community gets up to. Hell, I didn't even make their feet the focus of the shoot, like ask them to show their soles at the camera or anything. Even then, enough of them said "I'm not comfortable with this" that it pretty much blows your "it's just innocent" notion out of the water, because I had people refusing to participate on the grounds that it could be perceived as a fetish shoot even when it wasn't.

So yeah, as a producer myself this entire thing stinks, and that's not even getting into the whole "oh no no it's not a fetish" thing where the entire channel is posing as "reflexology". Pull the other one, indeed.

And also for the record your notion "people perceive it as" as evidence for making something so, is ridiculous. Just because someone thinks something is something doesn't make it that something. Sorry to say but pretty much every female who posts anything about herself online, and most of the males, have some fetishes following them. You think all those female youtube stars who do nothing but make arts and crafts have a million followers because people want to know how to make beaded necklaces? Whatever they "perveive" the reason to be or not has nothing to do with the reality.

 

[FeatherFeet]

I might be quite naive, but he would reach 500 very quickly if he published at least one or better few videos, even by selling them. I'm just wondering what's the problem, he made this whole operation and filmed this stuff on festivals, had an intention to sell it, but behaves as if he has never wanted to have it released in the first place

holding material hostage, especially when people already paid for it via donations is a horrible dishonest business model. they lost the momentum they were building when they decided to do that.

 

[gyobfan4]

Holy shit people are still arguing in this thread.

Of course they will it's renfaire type content it always causes people to argue and throw wobblers it's nothing new.

 

[Tellurium]

lol just release those things already, your subscribers would increase exponentially, and you wouldn't end up at a loss. It's obvious from the start your plan totally backfired on you.