Considering giving up main job for side hustle.

floorpie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What is unprofessional about generating porn?

I don't know what the legal interpretations of "unprofessional" are. My laymen's understanding is something like, actions that are incompatible with a profession, or incompatible with expectations for professionals in the field.

I have a code of conduct and ethical requirements in my job that I just follow, similar to the nurses board's code of conduct. To stay on the good side of this code of conduct, for example, it's common practice in my profession to make social media private so that people can't see even benign pictures and content.

You need Garda vetting to be a nurse because you may work with children or vulnerable patients. That such patients may view their carer's pornography with a simple Google search makes this activity de facto unprofessional according to common understanding (I believe), even if it's not her fault that they look it up.

As I said though, I don't think my employer could fire me for this outright. But as it would bring my boss and group into disrepute I'm certain they'll find another legal way to get rid of me, and that they'll ensure I have no recourse.

fvp4 wrote: »

Where did 15 come from?

They aren't providing the link to OF to anybody, who do KYC for uploaders. They are instead trying to sell porn by email to users. So it is possible that they are a minor and therefore can't be verified on OF, or that they aren't the creator of the pictures/videos being sold. I find it objectionable that this activity is being cheered on here when even tame instances of unsolicited advertising are usually banned.

floorpie

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What she actually said:



I don't see any implying in the above statement. If you believe that she is implying explicit content and showing her face then she could equally be implying that (a) she is a guy?

? They're implying that they're at the top of the earnings scale because they are not a guy, because they advertise on social media, and because they post explicit content with face. I don't think they'd worry about being fired if they weren't showing their face.

AndrewJRenko

Wallet Inspector wrote: »

Up to the HSE, which would likely consider getting one's tits out to be so.

No point in pretending that a state body wouldn't think along those lines, whether it's conservative or not.

What's unprofessional about getting your tits out? €12k a month sounds very professional to me.

HSE won't act unless there is a clear breach of policy. I haven't seen any policy that she would be breaching.

Wallet Inspector

Their policy on staff's use of social media.

Sleeper12

floorpie wrote:

They aren't providing the link to OF to anybody, who do KYC for uploaders. They are instead trying to sell porn by email to users. So it is possible that they are a minor and therefore can't be verified on OF, or that they aren't the creator of the pictures/videos being sold. I find it objectionable that this activity is being cheered on here when even tame instances of unsolicited advertising are usually banned.

I've posted here & received no PM from op offering anything. One poster claimed to have received a pm but they seem to be banned now & I think they were trolling. Other posters stated that they received no pm. Very difficult to weed out the truth from the lying on some threads. If you don't mind me asking have you personally been sent any links from the OP?

Wallet Inspector

floorpie wrote: »

I find it objectionable that this activity is being cheered on here when even tame instances of unsolicited advertising are usually banned.

Because it's sexual and it's essential that you show how liberated you are and how anything should go with regard to the sexual. Otherwise you're a prude in a 1960s time warp.

Also, horny dudes.

Sleeper12

floorpie wrote:

? They're implying that they're at the top of the earnings scale because they are not a guy, because they advertise on social media, and because they post explicit content with face. I don't think they'd worry about being fired if they weren't showing their face.

Can you please link where they implied these things?
The quote below is clearly talking about OF in general and not their own account

Health11 wrote:

The lower side of things are heavily skewed by a)guys and b)those without social media c)those who dont post explicit content/don't show their face.

jimmycrackcorm

YellowLead wrote:

I have no idea what nursing contracts are like so can’t speculate. But in my role for example it is in my contract that I cannot take on any additional work while I do that my current role. Conflicts of interest etc. It’s not down to whether or not it’s legal, it’s down to whether or not there are certain clauses in the contract.

It's certainly debatable whether OF is actually work.

floorpie

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Can you please link where they implied these things?
The quote below is clearly talking about OF in general and not their own account

Yeah just read the bleedin post! The context is "I'm earning a lot". Somebody says "No, you're lying, the average is $100". They say "That figure is skewed by men, people without social, and people that don't show their face/explicit. I'm earning a lot, you don't have to believe me."

I.e. if you're earning a lot, it implies that you're not a man, that you use social, and that you show face and do explicit content.

floorpie

floorpie wrote: »

They aren't providing the link to OF to anybody, who do KYC for uploaders. They are instead trying to sell porn by email to users. So it is possible that they are a minor and therefore can't be verified on OF, or that they aren't the creator of the pictures/videos being sold. I find it objectionable that this activity is being cheered on here when even tame instances of unsolicited advertising are usually banned.

I am totally confused.

When do we assume anybody on here is a minor when they are talking about their job.

The op isn't advertising, to my knowledge anyway ( unless the PM story is true in which case she should be banned). On this thread there is no evidence of advertising.

And far from cheering her on it is the people who doubt her who are asking for her to post her pictures. You are literally reading a totally different thread.

Sleeper12

floorpie wrote:

Yeah just read the bleedin post! The context is "I'm earning a lot". Somebody says "No, you're lying, the average is $100". They say "That figure is skewed by men, people without social, and people that don't show their face/explicit. I'm earning a lot, you don't have to believe me."

I read the thread. You are assuming an awful lot & reading between lines. I can't find a single post where she claims to show her face or provide explicit content. I can't even find her claim to be nude.

You didn't respond to my question. Did you personally receive links from the OP?

Wallet Inspector wrote:

Because it's sexual and it's essential that you show how liberated you are and how anything should go with regard to the sexual. Otherwise you're a prude in a 1960s time warp.

Funny thing is plenty on other threads give out about the "scammers" on the housing list getting a house for life. Or maybe the lazy scroungers that live off social welfare or lone parents. Here we have someone willing to support themselves and pay tax & they still get slated. Is this girl is telling the truth then I truly admire her in many ways

floorpie

fvp4 wrote: »

I am totally confused.

When do we assume anybody on here is a minor when they are talking about their job.

The op isn't advertising, to my knowledge anyway ( unless the PM story is true in which case she should be banned). On this thread there is no evidence of advertising.

And far from cheering her on it is the people who doubt her who are asking for her to post her pictures. You are literally reading a totally different thread.

Please read the thread. Posters have asked for their OF account, she said "yes, just PM me", then the same users came back and said she will only sell her content by email or Snapchat because OF will take a commission.

We have no reason to disbelieve the PM story because she herself said to ask her for details in PM.

I do not assume that they're a minor, in fact if you read the thread I repeatedly say that we should take the employment dilemma in good faith.

However, we DO have an unverified user attempting to sell porn to users of boards.ie, per their own posts. We do not know the provenance of the images or who the user is, FOR EXAMPLE, they could be a minor who can't get verified on OF. In other words, it shouldn't be cheered on by old members of the board and should have been banned. I don't know what's so confusing about that.

YellowLead

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What she actually said:

I don't see any implying in the above statement. If you believe that she is implying explicit content and showing her face then she could equally be implying that (a) she is a guy?

Okay dude...she earns 10k a month from pictures of her sitting knitting....yah Lots of men willing to subscribe and part with their cash for non explicit content....yah

The top earners are all doing hardcore stuff and they are at it around the clock, have others helping them as it’s too much work. Yet OP spends one hour with all her clothes on sitting there innocently Of course

floorpie

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I read the thread. You are assuming an awful lot & reading between lines. I can't find a single post where she claims to show her face or provide explicit content. I can't even find her claim to be nude.

You didn't respond to my question. Did you personally receive links from the OP?

Lol what are you talking about. Re-read the post! She furthermore says in other posts that she has a large social media following, and is a girl, therein confirming that she exhibits 2 out of 3 of the attributes of high earners. Let's just wait until she confirms.

Why do you keep asking if I've gotten a link? I couldn't give a sh*t about any link from OP and I'd report anybody trying to sell me things via PM.

Wallet Inspector

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Funny thing is plenty on other threads give out about the "scammers" on the housing list getting a house for life. Or maybe the lazy scroungers that live off social welfare or lone parents. Here we have someone willing to support themselves and pay tax & they still get slated. Is this girl is telling the truth then I truly admire her in many ways

What a bizarre misrepresentation. That would only be noteworthy if they were the same people holding each view. Also nobody is slating anyone for being willing to support themselves and pay tax. That's having a job - and they do have a job, nursing.

People are only being skeptical that it's a true story because the HSE would not be happy about it. If someone chooses to do OnlyFans and similar for their sole income, and has thought about the lack of longevity and has considered what careers they can go for in middle age that their past won't affect, best of luck to them.

But nobody is slating anyone for supporting themselves and paying tax.

85603

fvp4 wrote: »

Very few people need to prove their employment status on this forum. It’s generally taken that they aren’t lying. I would have assumed that demands to reveal personal info are discouraged sitewide.

this situation is a bit extraordinary to say the least.

nobodys asking for personally identifying information.

just something beyond a claim to be making huge money for a simple side venture.

it has all the signs of being a lie. if op wants to back up these claims then she can do so, if she doesn't then what we factually have is an extraordinary claim made in public but with absolutely nothing to back it up.

YellowLead

Timmyr wrote: »

offered me email or snapchat, didnt want to give onlyfans as they take 20%

OP could confirm this didn’t happen? Also there was a post somewhere saying it wasn’t her drumming up business if people were asking for it via PM.

Sleeper12

YellowLead wrote:

Okay dude...she earns 10k a month from pictures of her sitting knitting....yah Lots of men willing to subscribe and part with their cash for non explicit content....yah

Men will pay for the most unusual things. If you search online you will find sites /accounts dedicated totally to feet or cleaning in their underwear. It's not all about the sex

YellowLead wrote:

The top earners are all doing hardcore stuff and they are at it around the clock, have others helping them as it’s too much work. Yet OP spends one hour with all her clothes on sitting there innocently Of course

You know a lot about this. I don't subscribe to any. How many subscriptions have you had to bass your claims on? Or are you just assuming?

Sleeper12

floorpie wrote:

Why do you keep asking if I've gotten a link? I couldn't give a sh*t about any link from OP and I'd report anybody trying to sell me things via PM.

Right so you are just like me & several others that have clearly stated that they haven't received any links or pms from op. At this stage more have claimed not to have pm from her than claim to have received pm from them. Many posters on many threads claim things to wind up a thread. We have no idea if anyone claiming to receive a link is a troll or not. The main poster making pm claims seems to be a banned member now if you have a look back over the first part of the thread

YellowLead

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Men will pay for the most unusual things. If you search online you will find sites /accounts dedicated totally to feet or cleaning in their underwear. It's not all about the sex



You know a lot about this. I don't subscribe to any. How many subscriptions have you had to bass your claims on? Or are you just assuming?

There are loads of articles about it if you research!!!

To your first point - I know men are into all sorts and not just overtly sexual stuff. But that’s not where the money is made - because it’s not unusual it’s everyday so they don’t need to pay.
But sure - I don’t have proof. But since OP made a joke about how great her tits were I would imagine they at least feature

85603

85603 wrote: »

this situation is a bit extraordinary to say the least.

nobodys asking for personally identifying information.

just something beyond a claim to be making huge money for a simple side venture.

it has all the signs of being a lie. if op wants to back up these claims then she can do so, if she doesn't then what we factually have is an extraordinary claim made in public but with absolutely nothing to back it up.

It doesn’t seem like a lie to me. If she’s on OF and not making any money then why post asking if she should give up her job. It wouldn’t be an issue.

Sleeper12

YellowLead wrote:

OP could confirm this didn’t happen? Also there was a post somewhere saying it wasn’t her drumming up business if people were asking for it via PM.

Have you received a link or pm?

Just to be clear, if anyone received a link & it was forwarded to a mod then the thread would be deleted /closed. Thread is still open and OP doesn't appear to be banned. It seems that a few people claimed to get links but won't back up the claim by forwarding link to the mod. The vast majority state no link & no pm.

We all understand how trolling works right?

floorpie

floorpie wrote: »

Why do you keep asking if I've gotten a link? I couldn't give a sh*t about any link from OP and I'd report anybody trying to sell me things via PM.

You say she’s advertising here. If so then it has to be via pm. Some people have said it but it’s not clear on the thread.

If it is true she should be banned.

YellowLead

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Have you received a link or pm?

Just to be clear, if anyone received a link & it was forwarded to a mod then the thread would be deleted /closed. Thread is still open and OP doesn't appear to be banned. It seems that a few people claimed to get links but won't back up the claim by forwarding link to the mod. The vast majority state no link & no pm.

We all understand how trolling works right?

This is fair enough, we will have to assume those talking about receiving PMs were trolling given there is no proof. A little odd that OP said herself she would be on 30k a month judging by all the PMs she was getting - but I guess she just ignored them.

floorpie

fvp4 wrote: »

You say she’s advertising here. If so then it has to be via pm. Some people have said it but it’s not clear on the thread.

If it is true she should be banned.

What do you mean that it's "not clear"? She said to message her for the link

Health11 wrote: »

If it doesn't go against Boards rules I will happily post it here or PM if necessary.

Health11 wrote: »

How am I flogging a product? If someone DMs and ask me for that product, it is hardly me flogging it?

Wallet Inspector

If there was money to be made from obtuse arguing for the sake of arguing, some folk could make an absolute fortune.

CrabRevolution

I don't understand why some posters so desperately want to believe such an obvious windup.

If I started a thread saying "I'm a premier league footballer and have offers from Man City and Real Madrid for my next transfer, which should I choose?" nobody would buy it. Yet this thread is equally as plausible and we have posters falling over themselves trying to say it's genuine.

EddieN75

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I don't understand why some posters so desperately want to believe such an obvious windup.

If I started a thread saying "I'm a premier league footballer and have offers from Man City and Real Madrid for my next transfer, which should I choose?" nobody would buy it. Yet this thread is equally as plausible and we have posters falling over themselves trying to say it's genuine.

I would go to Madrid if I were you. The weather , better chance of getting into the team and who wants to live in Manchester.

Best of luck with the move , I'd say Zidane is a cranky arsehole

CrabRevolution

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I don't understand why some posters so desperately want to believe such an obvious windup.

If I started a thread saying "I'm a premier league footballer and have offers from Man City and Real Madrid for my next transfer, which should I choose?" nobody would buy it. Yet this thread is equally as plausible and we have posters falling over themselves trying to say it's genuine.

To be honest it doesn't really matter. If the case is hypothetical then we can still answer whether people should leave a job or not based on what is being said.

ThumbTaxed

This thread is still going... ?

Sleeper12

CrabRevolution wrote:

I don't understand why some posters so desperately want to believe such an obvious windup.

I've no idea if it's a windup or not. I have to say that the wildest claims are coming from the other posters and not op though. Pms, links, porn, sacked if HSE finds out etc, etc.

Thread would have died days ago without the calls for links and proof. OP isn't even responding so she can't be blamed

Wallet Inspector

Yeah absolutely "wild" conclusions that someone would need to go down the sexually explicit route with very little free time, to make 12 grand a month - on the side. And wild to suspect the HSE of wanting to protect its reputation, particularly at the moment.

Quite the dishonesty here.

Wallet Inspector

Wallet Inspector wrote: »

Yeah absolutely "wild" conclusions that someone would need to go down the sexually explicit route with very little free time, to make 12 grand a month - on the side. And wild to suspect the HSE of wanting to protect its reputation, particularly at the moment.

Quite the dishonesty here.

The wild claims are that she is here to advertise. Unless proven I’d have to discount that.

As for the HSE, there’s been no definite answer yet.

Health11

ThumbTaxed wrote: »

This thread is still going... ?

Absolutely bizarre. Some men on here are clearly not happy that a young woman is earning decent money with little effort.

floorpie

Health11 wrote: »

Absolutely bizarre. Some men on here are clearly not happy that a young woman is earning decent money with little effort.

? Most of the people saying it's a bad idea are women. The middle aged men in the thread largely seem to be asking for the link, or are encouraging you to end a career to concentrate on making porn (guess why).

Also, you've said the same thing a few times in your tactical bumps, but nobody is jealous of people earning money in sex work, and the industry is open to all.

Sleeper12

Health11 wrote:

Absolutely bizarre. Some men on here are clearly not happy that a young woman is earning decent money with little effort.

They aren't all men. A few females too happy to tell you what you are & aren't allowed do

theballz

Anyone else cringe at "side hustle"?

People bring it up as if they're entrepreneurs by doing some gimmicky extra work in addition to their usual wageceling - It used to be called a side job for those who's main job wasn't adequate

Now they've repackaged the term into "side hustle" to make it sound more than what it really is...extra work you have to do because your actual career is subpar

floorpie

theballz wrote: »

Anyone else cringe at "side hustle"?

People bring it up as if they're entrepreneurs by doing some gimmicky extra work in addition to their usual wageceling - It used to be called a side job for those who's main job wasn't adequate

Now they've repackaged the term into "side hustle" to make it sound more than what it really is...extra work you have to do because your actual career is subpar

Sounds like you're jealous of my side hustle as a deliveroo cyclist. Wait til you hear about my entrepreneurship as an escort. 20k a month...decide my own hours....I see no reason why this income should ever end. Currently quitting my career on the advice of the jobs forum of boards.ie.

jaxxx

Sleeper12 wrote: »

They aren't all men. A few females too happy to tell you what you are & aren't allowed do

And therein we have the hypocrisy of toxic neo-feminism. Here's an idea, mind your own business. 2021 and there's still such a taboo on men and women, women in particular obviously, doing or working in anything 'adult' related. So long as it's all above board and all involved parties are 100% happy in doing it, keep your nose out of other people's affairs.

^^ "Mind your own" wasn't directed at you Sleeper btw, just in general.

floorpie

jaxxx wrote: »

And therein we have the hypocrisy of toxic neo-feminism. Here's an idea, mind your own business. l.

What's the hypocrisy exactly? And why should people mind their own business? OP is asking for advice. She isn't even sure if this is permitted by her employer.

jaxxx

floorpie wrote: »

What's the hypocrisy exactly? And why should people mind their own business? OP is asking for advice. She isn't even sure if this is permitted by her employer.

Was speaking in general, as per my last line, not so much as to the OP's scenario. People shouldn't be judged for doing something they enjoy doing just because it's taboo, so long as it's all above board (consent, ethical, etc). The hypocrisy is the toxic neo-feminist dictating what women should or should not do, case in point being the OP earning her living through OnlyFans, where these neo-feminists always spout on that things like this are objectifying to women, when women are choosing to do so of their own free will. Hence the "mind your own business".

YellowLead

jaxxx wrote: »

Was speaking in general, as per my last line, not so much as to the OP's scenario. People shouldn't be judged for doing something they enjoy doing just because it's taboo, so long as it's all above board (consent, ethical, etc). The hypocrisy is the toxic neo-feminist dictating what women should or should not do, case in point being the OP earning her living through OnlyFans, where these neo-feminists always spout on that things like this are objectifying to women, when women are choosing to do so of their own free will. Hence the "mind your own business".

I think most people just don’t find the claims credible - I say work away at only fans why the hell not, more power to anyone over 18 who wants to earn!
But it doesn’t add up putting only one hour a day in and pulling that kind of cash. Then starting a thread on boards to ask for advice....like obviously if you are cool with doing that sort of work and you can earn insane money for little effort why would you be asking for advice. Lol.

Sleeper12

floorpie wrote:

What's the hypocrisy exactly? And why should people mind their own business? OP is asking for advice. She isn't even sure if this is permitted by her employer.

Maybe I read the whole thread wrong but I didn't think she was looking for moral advice or judgement. I believe she was looking for tax and work advice. The thread has run its course imo, as the advice linked to the forum has long run out

bucketybuck

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Very difficult to weed out the truth from the lying on some threads.

Some are easier than others.

jaxxx

YellowLead wrote: »

I think most people just don’t find the claims credible - I say work away at only fans why the hell not, more power to anyone over 18 who wants to earn!
But it doesn’t add up putting only one hour a day in and pulling that kind of cash. Then starting a thread on boards to ask for advice....like obviously if you are cool with doing that sort of work and you can earn insane money for little effort why would you be asking for advice. Lol.

Well, I suppose it's something you wouldn't want spread among your own people network because it is so taboo. So an online forum is a decent place for anonymous advice?

Wallet Inspector

Dishonesty and misrepresentation again I see. Sleeper in particular is amazing for it. Unashamedly so.

Want to do OnlyFans? Do OnlyFans (but have a plan .

The critics here don't believe it's true (€12,000 per month while also working as a nurse in the HSE during a pandemic - sure thang) - that's not the same as disapproving, so stop making sh1t up.

Also I don't know what feminism got brought into it for. Today's feminism is actually highly supportive of sexualisation too.

Nobody said anything about objectification etc.

Wallet Inspector

fvp4 wrote: »

The wild claims are that she is here to advertise. Unless proven I’d have to discount that.

As for the HSE, there’s been no definite answer yet.

No Sleeper stated that those of us who are sceptical are making the wild claims... which are not wild.

Health11

floorpie wrote: »

?

Also, you've said the same thing a few times in your tactical bumps, but nobody is jealous of people earning money in sex work, and the industry is open to all.

Of course there is jealousy, as there is in any industry where a lot of money can be made.

You say the industry is 'open to all' but you can say the same about starting your own business. Theres a difference between a successful business and one that makes no money. Plenty of men/other girls have told me they would love to make money off OF but don't think anyone would pay for their content. Indeed you and your mates have quoted statistics saying that 90% of OF users don't make money.

Do you think you could make any money off OF if you tried 100%? ( and yes I know its beneath your level of moral superiority, before you make that point)

Your true attitude to women and sex work comes out every few posts.

Wallet Inspector

Health11 wrote: »

Of course there is jealousy, as there is in any industry where a lot of money can be made.

You say the industry is 'open to all' but you can say the same about starting your own business. Theres a difference between a successful business and one that makes no money. Plenty of men/other girls have told me they would love to make money off OF but don't think anyone would pay for their content. Indeed you and your mates have quoted statistics saying that 90% of OF users don't make money.

Do you think you could make any money off OF if you tried 100%? ( and yes I know its beneath your level of moral superiority, before you make that point)

Your true attitude to women and sex work comes out every few posts.

They said nothing about moral superiority and didn't display any bad attitude towards women and the work you claim to be doing.

All the lying here.

YellowLead

Health11 wrote: »

Your true attitude to women and sex work comes out every few posts.

At least this should stop the silly few people who were saying it could all be very ‘innocent’ photos etc and we were silly for assuming it was remotely connected to anything sexual