quote:

ORIGINAL: DigitalPlayThing

For the record I have been on and off this site for a number of years with a few different profiles as they keep getting deleted. That said I think one of the issues nowadays is the making domination/submission so much about money. All I see are 18/19/20 year old girls just wanting money, with no real regard to the mindset of the subs they want their money from. This in turn causes guys to become skeptical, guarded, and really just not wanting to buy in. I understand a professional but so many of the profiles on here are young girls just saying "Give my your wallet bitch" with no understanding or care for the synergy between Domme/sub.

It seems so much more about money, than actual lifestyle anymore and it creates an atmosphere of negitivity...

Well there are my two cents for all it's worth.

dp

quote:

I'm a stickler for rules as well. However, I also believe some of those rules are more important than others. While somebody is sifting through hundreds of cartoons that you reported, that pic on somebody's profile with a kid and a dog in a <cough> compromising position <cough> is now taking hours to be removed because the system is being clogged up with drawings of bunny rabbits and teddy bears.

quote:

But do you really honestly think it's the original artist putting these 'photos' up?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Overall, over the whole 3 or 4 days, (4 days on one account, 3 days on another), yes, there were literally hundreds. I guess I reported close on 300 pics in all.
And, yes, they were all cartoons or similar - nothing that could even remotely be considered within the ToS.
And I did immediately desist when I got the GL - that still didn't stop the profiles getting removed.

In black, since you don't do well with the purple.

I have to tell you, I'd have probably sent you a cease and desist letter, too. My next step after that would have been bugging the legal types who drew up ToS if there was a better way to deal with the uploading pictures gig. One that wouldn't get us into hot water for trademark/copyright violations and such while maintain the 'we'd prefer you don't misrepresent yourself' spirit of the thing.

I'm a stickler for rules as well. However, I also believe some of those rules are more important than others. While somebody is sifting through hundreds of cartoons that you reported, that pic on somebody's profile with a kid and a dog in a <cough> compromising position <cough> is now taking hours to be removed because the system is being clogged up with drawings of bunny rabbits and teddy bears.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

~fr~

Just a minor observation.

Some have suggested this thread is all drama and bitching about the moderation. If that is correct, then what does it say about the health of a forum that the most active thread since the Newtown massacre and subsequent consolidation has been the purported "moderation-related drama and bitching" thread?

I prefer to see this as a thread that shows how many people care about CM, a thread that shows the potential this place has, and shows the number of people that want CM to be around, thriving, and who care enough to invest time in what they think might be improved to make it what they hope it might be.

Don't know about the rest of you, but I'm posting here because CM is good and can be great, not because I want to slap anyone.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ETA - Somebody had better report that post. That emoticon isn't My original artwork.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

And, yes, they were all cartoons or similar - nothing that could even remotely be considered within the ToS.

http://browse.deviantart.com/cartoons/?offset=288

Some of these are quite stunning. The ability of the artists amazing. Wouldnt you agree?

And if those artists posted them, its allowed, as far as I know, because its their own work.

quote:

That said, if they were very fleetingly browsing the uploaded pics, CM wouldn't be sooo flooded with such crud.
If that were the case, that 'nasty' pic would have got spotted the moment it was uploaded and subsequently 'not approved' for posting on the profile.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Just0Plain0Mike

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

And, yes, they were all cartoons or similar - nothing that could even remotely be considered within the ToS.

http://browse.deviantart.com/cartoons/?offset=288

Some of these are quite stunning. The ability of the artists amazing. Wouldnt you agree?

And if those artists posted them, its allowed, as far as I know, because its their own work.

I think it would depend on exactly you read/interpret the rule about posting pictures. "Please do not post commercial photos or artwork" The way I see it, this could be interpreted in two ways. Commercial photos is pretty obvious, but the artwork is vague. Does this rule mean no artwork, which could be argued, or no commercial artwork, which seems to be the intent of the rule. FD is obviously interpreting it the first way, but to me the intent is clearly the second. This is sort of supported by the fact that FD got GLed for reporting them, unless of course he's correct that because he stuck out he got hammered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Just0Plain0Mike

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

And, yes, they were all cartoons or similar - nothing that could even remotely be considered within the ToS.

http://browse.deviantart.com/cartoons/?offset=288

Some of these are quite stunning. The ability of the artists amazing. Wouldnt you agree?

And if those artists posted them, its allowed, as far as I know, because its their own work.

I think it would depend on exactly you read/interpret the rule about posting pictures. "Please do not post commercial photos or artwork" The way I see it, this could be interpreted in two ways. Commercial photos is pretty obvious, but the artwork is vague. Does this rule mean no artwork, which could be argued, or no commercial artwork, which seems to be the intent of the rule. FD is obviously interpreting it the first way, but to me the intent is clearly the second. This is sort of supported by the fact that FD got GLed for reporting them, unless of course he's correct that because he stuck out he got hammered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Thank you LP - your effort is much appreciated.
And yes, I agree, such a photo would get swamped in the other deluge of reports.

That said, if they were very fleetingly browsing the uploaded pics, CM wouldn't be sooo flooded with such crud.
If that were the case, that 'nasty' pic would have got spotted the moment it was uploaded and subsequently 'not approved' for posting on the profile.
Many sites, even free ones, you often have to get mod approval before it can be included on your profile.
It really wouldn't take much effort to glance through photos as they were presented for approval.
But until they change the system, the only avenue is to report them.

quote:

Please only post pictures you took yourself

quote:

Please do not post commercial photos or artwork

quote:

Please do not post explicit primary photos

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

That said, if they were very fleetingly browsing the uploaded pics, CM wouldn't be sooo flooded with such crud.
If that were the case, that 'nasty' pic would have got spotted the moment it was uploaded and subsequently 'not approved' for posting on the profile.

Its my understanding that was tried, many years ago, and the complaints were that they were not getting approved fast enough. The practice seems to have been stopped in 2009.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I have no problem with his position. I do have a problem with some of his assumptions and how he is going about trying to effect change.

Okay, just a quick bit of feedback from the sidelines: I'm not sure you're getting that point across very well, and I'm not sure you're getting that point over to me as a disinterested party on the sidelines in the exchange. Same for him. That's why I suggested the above rephrasing of what I see as the core of his position, which seems like a starting point it should be easy to work from for either one of you. It's incidentally also one that, down the line, converges with most other issues that have been raised on this thread and the other threads on the same/similar topic(s).

Just trying to help.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

My point is simple

We have written rules.
Enforce them exactly as written.
Don't make up new rules on a whim.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Please only post pictures you took yourself

That only relates to photography. I can go to the Warhol Museum here, take photos of all his art work, come back here and upload them, and, according to you, that is acceptable per point 1.

quote:

Please do not post commercial photos or artwork

That would also be acceptable per point 2, because the photos I took are not going to be used for commercial purposes at any time.

quote:

Please do not post explicit primary photos

I dont recall seeing any of his artwork as being explicit... but its been a while since I visited.

Now, if we are going strictly by the 3 points, I can post those to my profile with no problems... of I should be able too.

Yet I will have broken copyright laws.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Thank you LP - your effort is much appreciated.
And yes, I agree, such a photo would get swamped in the other deluge of reports.

That said, if they were very fleetingly browsing the uploaded pics, CM wouldn't be sooo flooded with such crud.
If that were the case, that 'nasty' pic would have got spotted the moment it was uploaded and subsequently 'not approved' for posting on the profile.
Many sites, even free ones, you often have to get mod approval before it can be included on your profile.
It really wouldn't take much effort to glance through photos as they were presented for approval.
But until they change the system, the only avenue is to report them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

That would be great.... If no new circumstances ever arose.

There isn't a set of rules in existence that people won't find a way to twist, spin, end run, loophole, or otherwise play games with either the wording or intent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I have no problem with his position. I do have a problem with some of his assumptions and how he is going about trying to effect change.

Okay, just a quick bit of feedback from the sidelines: I'm not sure you're getting that point across very well, and I'm not sure you're getting that point over to me as a disinterested party on the sidelines in the exchange. Same for him. That's why I suggested the above rephrasing of what I see as the core of his position, which seems like a starting point it should be easy to work from for either one of you. It's incidentally also one that, down the line, converges with most other issues that have been raised on this thread and the other threads on the same/similar topic(s).

Just trying to help.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

My point is simple

We have written rules.
Enforce them exactly as written.
Don't make up new rules on a whim.

quote:

How fast can you glance at a photo and click a button??
I'm not talking about close scrutiny, just an initial quick glance.

quote:

I can skip through pics and press a button at the rate of several a second.

quote:

But seriously tazzy, are you saying they were being uploaded at such a rate that nobody could keep up with it??
That suggestst to me that whoever was given the task was not doing their job properly.