"BTW, all main photos are readily viewable on google. Just google your ID and it'll show up along with your first paragraph of text. Comfy thought, no???"

Not true.

What someone would see is your external profile. You have the options in "Tools" to modify your public viewable profile, or disable it entirely. When disabled, your profile no longer shows up on Google. It may take several days to get out of their cache, but it's a start toward going off the grid :)

However, and this is a *big* however, all SLS forum threads are Google searchable. Post wisely, we're never returning to 1983.

scary thought Huh,
and some on here can't understand why some even post their orientation as straight rather than bi.
another reason why i think all public photos should be hidden except to paid members.

I'd never post a face photo in a public gallery, but that is just me. BTW, all main photos are readily viewable on google. Just google your ID and it'll show up along with your first paragraph of text. Comfy thought, no???

As it is, free members can't see nude, private, personal or any pictures not among the first half dozen displayed on your main profile page. However, free memberships are NOT the reason most people don't want to post pictures like this is the Facebook of swinging. That you are comfortable showing everything from face to feet openly (can't help but notice you have 23 public pictures with not a one showing your faces, BTW) doesn't mean everyone else is. Sure, some members are completely in the open, they are usually the exception. Most have jobs/families/communities that require discreet to ultra-discreet participation, a fact of modern society.

Lone, That is true, you can block all free members, but then that would mean they also won't be able to read your profile either.
we don't want to cut them completely off.

but my point remains, would we as a whole, be more open with our pictures if every free member person couldn't see them.

maybe SLS could have an option for everyone to block free members from seeing everyone's pictures but still read the profile.
after all, we have met one really nice free member couple in the past, but would have never met them if we blocked all free members in the first place.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you can block free members from viewing your photos already, they wouldn't need to implement blocking "Free" members.

That being said we have no problem letting those who pay see photos of ourselves, but we only show privates to those we have communicated with in email.

If SLS decided to make all free members not able to see any pictures on anyone's profile would more of us members show more face shots, or more private photos of themselves in the public section.

I'm just curious how many would show photos of themselves that they normally wouldn't.