Well I'm thicker than p1gsh1t, and therefore too dense to know that a rhetorical question doesn't require an answer, so I'll answer it. No, I wasn't being puerile in the post you referred to, I genuinely do give up before the end when looking at Platinum members' photos. Maybe it's cos I only have mobile internet and a tiny screen (and I'm talking Nokia C101, so not even a smart phone) and can't appreciate the seemingly endless reams of photos like I probably would on a large pc screen. Anyway, I've been steered off topic of the OP's thread since my initial on topic post, and that's unfair on her, so that's it from me on this one.marlhamphoto(that question's rhetorical by the way).
The forums might not be lively, but this is still the best "working" site for me. .
Those of you with "metal" membership will still be able to see how many models are on line at any time - then you may understand why people are reluctant to part with cash for paid membership
So they've had another purge of people who they hold a personal grudge against?
You can't have it both ways - saying that on the one hand PS is just a portfolio hosting site and on the other that because people aren't actually logged in the place isn't working..
My sarcasm was obviously missed on you. The site clearly states that portfolio hosting is its primary purpose including saying that on the home page and when people have suggested it should look at other areas for improvement, we have been told that its primary purpose is portfolio hosting. Maybe that should be looked at.
It was a simple statement that as there are few models now using the site, there is little justification for people to pay when they are all else where. If the site cures that problem then people will come back.
All this talk of the forums on each site is a red herring. Its the attractiveness of the site to book shoots that is critical to its success or lack of. That and why have all the models gone and can some of them be got back.
Unless of course you think there are lots of active models on here and think the site doesn't need to do anything to rectify any perceived shortage?
Sarcasm or disdain?
Why should they though? I think what I said in my post makes it clear that whilst a minority might hark back to the good old days times have changed.
You seem to be suggesting that there's a specific problem with PS that prevents models joining or remainig and which can and should be fixed. Yet you don't say what you percieve that problem to be. Simply saying you don't like something but it's up to someone else to fix it, whatever it might be, isn't going to get you very far.
If I'm considering booking a model it doesn't matter to me where his/her portfolio is hosted. I simply click on the link provided. The presence of a forum on that site makes no difference to me whatsoever. Perhaps you're accustomed to using forums to generate interest from models? Other than that I'm struggling to understand the point you're trying to make.
As I've already said it makes no difference to me where the portfolio is hosted.
Having said that there is a significant problem with models who use PP for hosting. Having your FB feed filled with links to portfolios or images you can't view unless you're a member is tedious and invariably results in the model's FB being unfriended. I'm sure I'm not the only one that does that.
. All this site needs is a redisgn and an easier way to use it on mobile devices. That is all that pp has compared to this. ...