seen from Australia
seen from Türkiye
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Russia
seen from Mexico
seen from Mexico
seen from Denmark
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Puerto Rico
seen from Malaysia
seen from Mexico
seen from United States
seen from Mexico
seen from Pakistan
seen from United States
Hello! I love using your Sulani Coop and I was wondering if you’d be willing to remake the Animal Shed that also came with Cottage Living in the same style to match?
Hey! Happy to hear you've been enjoying the Sulani Coop - I originally created it for one of my Sulani households, but I'm not sure whether I'll end up creating a matching animal shed in the near future.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I personally can’t wait to see what Olympic level mental gymnastics some of these creators are going to pull in order to justify not following the rules. With their lord and savior Intentionally Misconstrued Sim Guru DM now null and void they’re going to have to find a new excuse to toss out. I believe they’ll either just stop making CC or run to the Simstagram folks who don’t mind their crap as much and probably won’t report them.
this is old im sorry 😔🙏 but I think it's funny the excuses people did and continue to use now, in order to bypass the policy even more. I especially liked the ones that were invalidating the policy itself while still continuing to cite the sim gurus as Word of God lol. And the sim lawyers acting big brain like they saw something we didn't when EA added whole other paragraph to it that wasn't there originally. Like I said then, if TSR took down VIP like lightning once they saw the policy and then only put it back when EA updated, the wording was clear.
There must be some reason EA considers early access to be profitable to them, because there's no way they'd allow it otherwise. Or, they didn't want to spend resources on evaluating the thousands of patreon accounts that exist now, since that takes away from them as well. Patreon also gets a cut of the profits, which is why they really don't do much about problematic people on their platform (plus they also likely don't want to spend the resources on investigating). So if certain creators are making 10K+ a month, them getting taken down takes away from patreon as well. There's always some racket going on, companies like that are the big boy version of the small fries we see in our midst here and so the focus is always on profit. I do wonder 🤔
