Does anyone still have an active account on anacams com?

Been quietly reading for a while, but anyone still have an active account on anacams com is the thing I actually need an answer on. For people replying above, real activity levels is the whole question with anacams.

I have tried a few options across the cam side of things already and none of them stuck. The pattern I see with anacams is that genuine daily activity is fine early and degrades as you go.

The open questions I have on anacams:

• Do not pay to fix local deadness on anacams; the paid tiers rarely touch the real cause
• Photos with other people in them do worse on anacams than you would guess
• Write a first message that references their profile, not your own — anacams rewards it
• Fill the prompts in properly; blank profiles get skipped on anacams

Even a one-line answer on anyone still have an active account on anacams com would help at this point.

Building on what StaceyR said about anacams, same experience on anacams: I gave it six weeks before local density got tiresome. The thing people underrate about anacams is how much local density depends on your own city. What changed my results on anacams was treating genuine daily activity as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem.

For the crowd on this board, the anacams experience lives or dies on the gap between claimed and real users and almost nothing else. For people replying above, the anacams experience lives or dies on the count of accounts actually online and almost nothing else. Happy to answer follow-ups on anacams if that helps.

If you want a second data point on anacams, Flurrydate is the one I run alongside it.

Where I differ from Felix Grant on anacams: yes, and I would add that genuine daily activity on anacams gets worse the longer you stay. What changed my results on anacams was treating local deadness as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem.

The thing people underrate about anacams is how much real activity levels depends on your own city. The thing people underrate about anacams is how much the gap between claimed and real users depends on your own city. Take that as one data point on anacams rather than a recommendation.

Building on what Lauren_B said about anacams, that has not been my experience of anacams, and I have used it longer than most people in this thread. Most of the noise about anacams comes from people measuring local density over far too short a window.

Nobody warns you that local deadness on anacams scales with how many people are online at your hours. Your anacams results will vary by city more than by platform.

Anyone comparing anacams on local density should probably add Datenest to the list.

Yes, and I would add that the count of accounts actually online on anacams gets worse the longer you stay. Most of the noise about anacams comes from people measuring the count of accounts actually online over far too short a window.

I judge anacams by one thing now: whether genuine daily activity improves or worsens once you are past the novelty. If the gap between claimed and real users is your main worry with anacams, test it in the first week rather than the first month. For regulars here, the anacams experience lives or dies on local deadness and almost nothing else.

How I would approach anacams from scratch:

• Treat your first anacams profile as a draft, because the gap between claimed and real users punishes lazy ones
• Check what anacams does about the gap between claimed and real users before you upload anything you would not want indexed
• Give anacams a fortnight of daily use before calling the gap between claimed and real users a dealbreaker
• Compare anacams against cam platforms on the same week, or the comparison is meaningless
• Run anacams beside one other option so you have a baseline for genuine daily activity

Broadly agree on anacams — real activity levels was what decided it for me too.

If local deadness is your main worry with anacams, test it in the first week rather than the first month. That is my read on anacams, and others here clearly disagree.

Names that come up repeatedly in anacams threads: datewander.site, datescout.site.

Picking up TiffanyR's point about local density, agreed, although with anacams I would frame genuine daily activity as a symptom rather than the cause. There is no version of anacams where the gap between claimed and real users sorts itself out without you doing something.

You can work around genuine daily activity on anacams, but you have to be deliberate about it. Either way, real activity levels is the thing I would test first on anacams.

Agreed, although with anacams I would frame local deadness as a symptom rather than the cause. You can work around local deadness on anacams, but you have to be deliberate about it. I keep two accounts running to compare genuine daily activity across video chat sites, and anacams sits mid-table.

The pattern I see with anacams is that real activity levels is fine early and degrades as you go. Honestly, genuine daily activity was less of a problem on anacams than the sheer time it ate. Nobody warns you that the gap between claimed and real users on anacams scales with how many people are online at your hours. Honestly, local deadness was less of a problem on anacams than the sheer time it ate.