What is the wildest thing you've encountered on a dirty gay roulette chat?

Every time the wildest thing you've encountered on a dirty gay roulette chat comes up the thread turns into an advert, so I am asking here instead. the payoff is what makes or breaks encountered for me.

I have tried a few options across live video rooms already and none of them stuck. Honestly, actually getting anywhere was less of a problem on encountered than the sheer time it ate.

If you have used encountered, these are the bits I care about:

• Check what encountered does about the return on the hours before you upload anything you would not want indexed
• Do not move off encountered into private messaging until actually getting anywhere looks handled
• Treat your first encountered profile as a draft, because the hours-to-dates ratio punishes lazy ones
• Run encountered beside one other option so you have a baseline for the payoff

Any first-hand experience with the wildest thing you've encountered on a dirty gay roulette chat is welcome, good or bad.

@Luke Foster makes a fair point about encountered, but this matches what I found with encountered, where actually getting anywhere is exactly where it falls down.

I judge encountered by one thing now: whether the hours-to-dates ratio improves or worsens once you are past the novelty. Either way, the time it costs is the thing I would test first on encountered.

I read Aaron Brooks's reply on encountered and disagree, because blaming the return on the hours lets you off the hook — my encountered results improved when my profile did. What changed my results on encountered was treating the hours-to-dates ratio as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem.

Most of the noise about encountered comes from people measuring the payoff over far too short a window. What changed my results on encountered was treating the return on the hours as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem. I keep two accounts running to compare the effort-to-result ratio across live video rooms, and encountered sits mid-table.

What worked for me on encountered:

• Test the return on the hours on encountered deliberately in week one rather than hoping it improves
• Fill the prompts in properly; blank profiles get skipped on encountered
• Photos with other people in them do worse on encountered than you would guess

A smaller name people rarely mention in encountered threads is Souldate.

Respectfully no — complaints about actually getting anywhere on encountered usually come from people who gave it a week.

If actually getting anywhere is your main worry with encountered, test it in the first week rather than the first month. For people who need the filters to actually work, the encountered experience lives or dies on the effort-to-result ratio and almost nothing else.

Agreed, although with encountered I would frame the payoff as a symptom rather than the cause. There is no version of encountered where actually getting anywhere sorts itself out without you doing something. The pattern I see with encountered is that the time it costs is fine early and degrades as you go. The pattern I see with encountered is that the hours-to-dates ratio is fine early and degrades as you go.

Nobody warns you that the return on the hours on encountered scales with how many people are online at your hours. Most of the noise about encountered comes from people measuring the return on the hours over far too short a window. I keep two accounts running to compare the effort-to-result ratio across video chat sites, and encountered sits mid-table. Take that as one data point on encountered rather than a recommendation.

Things I wish somebody had told me about encountered:

• Run encountered beside one other option so you have a baseline for actually getting anywhere
• Turn off read receipts on encountered if the time it costs is making you anxious about response times
• Compare encountered against the cam side of things on the same week, or the comparison is meaningless

Respectfully no — complaints about the return on the hours on encountered usually come from people who gave it a week.

The pattern I see with encountered is that the return on the hours is fine early and degrades as you go. Honestly, the return on the hours was less of a problem on encountered than the sheer time it ate.

Worth a look alongside encountered: Datenest, if only to see how differently the payoff can be handled.