Also, I don't think these numbers could be extrapolated to every country/region/culture on earth but they do seem to hold for european and english speaking markets.
So you work for this company and your opinion that it’s 33% of english-speaking and european people? Napkin math puts the number of victims at ~400 million (population of europe + north america/3), maybe double that if you charitably count all of Africa being “english speaking”.
Any issues you have, you should read the study listed above. Gather what you want from it, believe what makes sense to you. It doesn’t matter to our mission.
I don’t think they’re calling NAAG disreputable, they’re calling you disreputable since you’ve now openly admitted that you don’t think that the number on your site is accurate but have chosen to pass the buck.
Not with obviously untrue statements that you admit to, no.
Like lol what a silly premise. “Look to your left, look to your right, if you can’t find revenge porn of either of these people, there’s revenge porn of you! We don’t think this applies to the billions of people that don’t speak English or live in Europe, but we have very enlightened definitions of ‘percentage’ and ‘people’”
Literally, I’ve cited the Nation Association of Attorneys General. How it keeps getting reduced to bullshit is beyond my comprehension.
EDIT: I'll just make one more comment about our marketing materials then I'm going to leave it alone.
Most people don't realize how prevalent NCII is. Most people would be mortified to find out our database is home to millions of hidden cameras from short-term rentals, bathrooms, changing rooms and private environments of that ilk.
We want to encourage everyone to at least check to see if this is something they may be a victim of. We used solid referenced studies from reputable agencies to highlight how common this problem can actually be.
For everyone and anyone that wants to upload a picture, without giving us a credit card we'll check for free. That's part of our onboarding and that's what happens for the majority of signups. People upload a picture, we say "there is nothing we've found" and they bounce.
What we don't want people to think is, "This service is only for people that send intimate images, there is no way I'm impacted by this." Unfortunately, this problem is far more common than most realize. I feel like your stance only highlights that.
We want people to try, for free, to see if there is content out there we can help them remove.
How it keeps getting reduced to bullshit is beyond my comprehension
Can you answer a simple yes or no to the statement “I believe that there are over two and a half billion victims of revenge porn”?
If yes, why did you post this:
> Also, I don't think these numbers could be extrapolated to every country/region/culture on earth but they do seem to hold for european and english speaking markets.
Comments
How did you arrive at the number of over 2.6 Billion victims of revenge porn? 33% of people seems like an incredible number.
Here's the quick read: https://www.fastcompany.com/90467411/shocking-study-finds-1-...
Here's the real study: https://www.naag.org/attorney-general-journal/an-update-on-t...
Also, I don't think these numbers could be extrapolated to every country/region/culture on earth but they do seem to hold for european and english speaking markets.
So you work for this company and your opinion that it’s 33% of english-speaking and european people? Napkin math puts the number of victims at ~400 million (population of europe + north america/3), maybe double that if you charitably count all of Africa being “english speaking”.
Any issues you have, you should read the study listed above. Gather what you want from it, believe what makes sense to you. It doesn’t matter to our mission.
EDIT: regarding our marketing, I’ve cited our source.
I hope this service succeeds but that particular claim, especially in the light of the articles you shared, makes you seem untrustworthy.
How is NAAG disreputable?
I don’t think they’re calling NAAG disreputable, they’re calling you disreputable since you’ve now openly admitted that you don’t think that the number on your site is accurate but have chosen to pass the buck.
You can’t make everyone happy.
Not with obviously untrue statements that you admit to, no.
Like lol what a silly premise. “Look to your left, look to your right, if you can’t find revenge porn of either of these people, there’s revenge porn of you! We don’t think this applies to the billions of people that don’t speak English or live in Europe, but we have very enlightened definitions of ‘percentage’ and ‘people’”
No, obviously, not with bullshit claims.
Literally, I’ve cited the Nation Association of Attorneys General. How it keeps getting reduced to bullshit is beyond my comprehension.
EDIT: I'll just make one more comment about our marketing materials then I'm going to leave it alone.
Most people don't realize how prevalent NCII is. Most people would be mortified to find out our database is home to millions of hidden cameras from short-term rentals, bathrooms, changing rooms and private environments of that ilk.
We want to encourage everyone to at least check to see if this is something they may be a victim of. We used solid referenced studies from reputable agencies to highlight how common this problem can actually be.
For everyone and anyone that wants to upload a picture, without giving us a credit card we'll check for free. That's part of our onboarding and that's what happens for the majority of signups. People upload a picture, we say "there is nothing we've found" and they bounce.
What we don't want people to think is, "This service is only for people that send intimate images, there is no way I'm impacted by this." Unfortunately, this problem is far more common than most realize. I feel like your stance only highlights that.
We want people to try, for free, to see if there is content out there we can help them remove.
Can you answer a simple yes or no to the statement “I believe that there are over two and a half billion victims of revenge porn”?
If yes, why did you post this:
If no, why is that figure used on your website?
Your website says “33% of people”
Do you think it’s useful to state that given your own admission that it’s likely much lower?
Truth does not matter to your mission.