Live 960 - Chat & Discussion

Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but just wondered what others thought of the pixelcam 960 have started experimenting with recently? I suppose you could say it's a step in the right direction and that it may develop into something a bit more revealing over time, but like the satin sheets/cushion/hands between the legs trick, I find myself left wondering 'what's the point?' It doesn't matter how hard you squint at the screen, you still can't make anything out.

Ah, well, there's always the chance they'll forget to turn on the pixilation one time

(14-05-2010 04:16 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but just wondered what others thought of the pixelcam 960 have started experimenting with recently? I suppose you could say it's a step in the right direction and that it may develop into something a bit more revealing over time, but like the satin sheets/cushion/hands between the legs trick, I find myself left wondering 'what's the point?' It doesn't matter how hard you squint at the screen, you still can't make anything out.

Ah, well, there's always the chance they'll forget to turn on the pixilation one time

A pixelcam? Is this a live version of what the Japanese use to fuzz the fannies? If so I can't say I have seen it in use on Live 960. Saying that I only Sky+ when Chelsea and Tia are on so have probably missed it.

I've not seen this either. Are you sure it wasn't just the shocking picture quality Stan?

Hi everyone

After a strange week at 960 we are ready to give you a massive show tonight on both Sky and Freeview.

Tonight we have three girls on!!

Of course we welcome back the filthy Jem Stone and our latest addition to the Channel Rebecca Ryder............................AND............................​........the return of an orginal 960 babe that you do not want to miss.

Three girls + Naked Time = A compliance nightmere

It would great 2 see them all on-screen at the same time.

(14-05-2010 20:03 )MGR Wrote:  Three girls + Naked Time = A compliance nightmere

That sounds very exciting, MGR, and if your 'no-rules' heads up post from all those moons ago is anything to go by, you may well deliver too. If you could be so kind as to throw some strong liquor into the mix, I'm sure the results would be appreciated by all!!

Does it have to be Jem Stone, though

And at least give us a clue to the identity of the 'original 960 babe' ?

(14-05-2010 15:47 )Digital Dave Wrote:  I've not seen this either. Are you sure it wasn't just the shocking picture quality Stan?

Bunnybc, Dave, I'm definately not imagining it, and I'm sure someone will be along soon to back me up, but it's only been used about four or five times, and very briefly at that. It happens during 'naked time' and usually when Eden and/or Bella are on. The camera will switch to a pixilated close of their crotch area just prior to the girl spreading her legs for about five seconds. There's been nothing prolonged as of yet. They're definatley only testing the waters on this one.

(14-05-2010 20:38 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Bunnybc, Dave, I'm definately not imagining it, and I'm sure someone will be along soon to back me up, but it's only been used about four or five times, and very briefly at that. It happens during 'naked time' and usually when Eden and/or Bella are on. The camera will switch to a pixilated close of their crotch area just prior to the girl spreading her legs for about five seconds. There's been nothing prolonged as of yet. They're definatley only testing the waters on this one.

This is something we have been playing with and will be refined the more we do it. Have to start safe and then push it in slow increments.

(14-05-2010 20:54 )MGR Wrote:  Have to start safe and then push it in slow increments.

I like your talk, MGR. Let's just hope that's not all it is

Well there's a distinct lack of sparks flying around so far, but the night is still young to be fair, so I'm willing to give it a while longer.

Incidently - and this is not meant to sound flippant - which of these three is the 'original 960 babe'?

Oh, and while you're around MGR, I'd like to put forward a suggestion. I think it's fair to say your channel is 'experimenting' more than most at the moment (which is a very good thing) with things like the afore mentioned pixelcam and giving the girls handhelds to play around with, but how about this? When you have two girls on who, let's say, have a good chemistry, why not allow them to pleasure each other? Now before you point out that such behaviour isn't allowed, I think that probably only applies to what we see on screen. What I'm suggesting here is that all the 'action' happens out of shot, meaning we see one girl from the waist up while the other is down below working away with tongues, toys, etc. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that there are few things more of a turn-on than seeing a girl genuinely aroused. Think about it, if we don't see what's going on out of shot, then no one can prove it was. Only we'll know it was, if you get my drift.

Think it over, you know it makes sense.