RE: The Irony of CM "rules"

RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Kedikat -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 12:05:05 AM)
Some other sites may be based in other countries. so they can post other types of pics. As far as this site is concerned. I appreciate that it is here. Whatever rules they make for a free site is up to them. So far I have very few gripes and minor ones at that.

Pimpernell -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 12:22:46 AM)
Overseas sites are now having to be careful. Plenty of sites have been convicted for laws pertaining to other countries, just because people could access those sites from the stricter country.

Kedikat -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 12:29:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pimpernell Overseas sites are now having to be careful. Plenty of sites have been convicted for laws pertaining to other countries, just because people could access those sites from the stricter country. Lovely. Free nontrade. Wonder what world war number will be the one, fun lovers versus the jealous anal retentives?

stef -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 4:27:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joyinslavery True enough IronBear but whining (I know that's not Your term) or not, I don't think it's too much to ask for consistency and overall fairness, be it rules, laws, whatever. Welcome to the real world where everything isn't black and white. The biggest part of the problem is that there is more than one person reviewing images/profiles and different people can look at the same thing and have differing opinions about it. What one reviewer might pass, another might decide to err on the side of caution and deny. It's not a perfect system, but it's better than the alternative of having a single reviewer and having it take weeks for an image to be reviewed. ~stef

losttreasure -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 4:33:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied To the OP: After having recently gone through pic denial/approval, some points of interest: you can't zoom in on a body part, and primary pics have different approval criteria than secondary pics. Sometimes a pic that is not approved for the primary pic will be approved for a secondary. All you can do is keep uploading pics until you hit on the right formula. True, but the hit or miss formula of determining what the requirements are seems a little ... amateurish, even for a "for free" website, doesn't it? I know that I"ve tried several times to upload photos, and they have always been refused for no reason that I can understand. And then I'll see someone in the forum that has basically an identical photo (of them though, not of me. Same pose, content and framing) that is their primary photo. I've seen the threads about this issue, and have never said anything before, but it is one of those head-scratching things about this site. I have the suspicion that whoever the reviewer(s) are for photo approval, that they decide sometimes just to make things interesting and roll the dice on the approval process. Oh well. FHky It is interesting... I've had several photos uploaded with never any approval problems whatsoever.

MrrPete -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 4:59:17 AM)
I've not had a problem posting pictures of myself. But then everyone loves a man in a kilt.[:)] losttreasure, your photos are very nice[;)]

Aileen68 -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 5:04:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: losttreasure It is interesting... I've had several photos uploaded with never any approval problems whatsoever. Same here.

FirmhandKY -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 6:42:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear Rules is Rules and you can't play in the sand box unless you follow the Rules..... Your Sand Box, you pay for it's upkeep, you get to make the Rules Maybe that'll be simple enough for the whiners to understand, but I doubt it. ~stef stef, If you are referring to me, I think "whining" is inaccurate. As a matter of fact, I don't see anyone in this thread whining. However, I do think "petulant" fits some of the people here. FHky

Mercnbeth -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 7:14:53 AM)
Because we've been here a while I guess our photos come under the grandfather clause. We tried to update and add a couple but no matter the size or format we couldn't get them updated. No matter. Although we would have loved to post a couple of new pictures it's not worth complaining about. After all, there are many alternatives where you can post whatever picture you want. They are pay sites, but that's the trade off. It's a thankless task to moderate a free site. If some of the postings on the message board are any indication, I am suspect of the chronological age matching the majority level of the post would not meet the minimum height requirement of this ride. The photos on the ads are not the responsibility of the CM owners. Any scrutiny of these photos, regarding age or "appropriateness", would be directed to the ad source. But the scrutiny for photos "approved" for profiles on this site would be the responsibility of the site owners. It's not something that I would want to do.

stef -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 7:19:23 AM)
I wasn't referring to anyone specifically, but to the general class of "users" who take and only give back complaints. There have been a lot of them lately. "I have the suspicion that whoever the reviewer(s) are for photo approval, that they decide sometimes just to make things interesting and roll the dice on the approval process." Do you honestly believe that? When people say things like this, it makes me want to buy more shares of Alcoa. ~stef

sub4hire -> RE: The Irony of The Feds "rules" (8/3/2006 7:49:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pimpernell Overseas sites are now having to be careful. Plenty of sites have been convicted for laws pertaining to other countries, just because people could access those sites from the stricter country. That's interesting. I try to stay up on the litigation..etc about this law since it affects me personally. I assumed in the beginning this would be coming but I alway's thought there would be no way to enforce it? How can we sue...say someone in Cuba here? Or jail them?

losttreasure -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 10:08:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrrPete I've not had a problem posting pictures of myself. But then everyone loves a man in a kilt.[:)] losttreasure, your photos are very nice[;)] Thank you, Mr. Pete.

mnottertail -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 10:22:03 AM)
I am pretty much in agreement with stef's two posts. Especially the latter. I am of the opinion that real life is far more bauxitic than ironic. Ron

Devilslilsister -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 10:25:05 AM)
quote: You mean to tell me that the bloody Pacific Duck Pond has been drained or the land masses have moved???? LOLOLOL You didnt know?? Daaaayum. Wazzup wit dat? Yeh, i've issues sleeping, so late one night i decided to drain the Pacific ocean and add it to the Atlantic ocean... Wanted u to be closer to me IB ^ ^ oh yeah.. Topic! Doh! i'm sure it sucks and coming BACK to the site and adding photos - imma have problems but ah well. Too many OTHER things to worry about - like running out of pepsi = ( and the damn CLOUDS covering the sun sos i dun get my tans.. and erm.... ooo i got a GOOD one. whether i should sit or stand whilst i ride my bicyle around the neighborhood...... u know i think sitting works the muscles more = )

MistressSassy66 -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 12:25:47 PM)
I agree with the Irony of it. I have accepted the fact that it just depends on what mood whoever is approving them that day. (Not sure if they have more than one person...but it sounded good.)

WhiteRadiance -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 10:47:44 PM)
Honestly I did not post this to bitch and moan or whine.. I understand- and respect the need for rules. I merely find myself wondering at the process that accepts certain risque photos of body parts, skin, nudity, etc, and rejects photos of a couple in full clothing. Seems like a crap shoot. I do love this site and appreciate those who moderate it. :) I know it is a thankless task. (Thanks to all the mods, owners and operators of CM- I DO appreciate you) [;)] Again, I am not thumbing my nose at the rules, but wondering why they are not consistant for everyone. I am not obsessing, just curious.. (I also would like to say that I have personally rejected many of the photos A1 has tried to post, so I am as much a censor as CM) I appreciate rules, CONSISTANCY, and logic. After all, being a Domme, I tend to make rules. Humans need guidlines. I do not question that! :) But why accept a total frontal nude shot for one person and reject a fully clothed shot of another? And yeah, I shrug and say, oh well, but still, I wonder... ! ~Staci

IronBear -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/3/2006 11:27:04 PM)
One solution could be that all phpots rejected could be assessed by another person or persons so that there is less personal interpretation of the classifications but that may nean more reviewers are needed.. quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I am pretty much in agreement with stef's two posts. Especially the latter. I am of the opinion that real life is far more bauxitic than ironic. Ron I think you on track there mate.. I'd ptobably have thought life is more leadic than ironic but perhaps there needs to be an increase of Fosters, meat pies with tomato sauce. Aussie football and free ranging sex.... Help bring perspectives together.. quote: ORIGINAL: MrrPete I've not had a problem posting pictures of myself. But then everyone loves a man in a kilt. losttreasure, your photos are very nice Can I expect to see a flood of pics with "Men in Kilts"? What about Nakid men in kilts or the men in raised kilts?

Theslavetrainer -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/4/2006 6:59:23 AM)
I had a photo rejected once, awhile ago. The only problem I found with the rejection process is that they don't tell you why it was rejected so that it can be fixed and resubmitted. Has that changed?

sub4hire -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/4/2006 8:21:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteRadiance I appreciate rules, CONSISTANCY, and logic. After all, being a Domme, I tend to make rules. Humans need guidlines. I do not question that! :) But why accept a total frontal nude shot for one person and reject a fully clothed shot of another? ~Staci I think Stef told us why. Because various people are reviewing photo's. One person see's it and thinks it is ok, the next see's it and understands the law a bit better and rejects it. All in all, for CM to totally go with the law on this..ALL photo's should be removed. Even clothed ones of all of us and on all profiles. Right now in the US that is really the only way to stay out of prison if you own a website. Imagine the uproar that would cause if they did that overnight?

KatyLied -> RE: The Irony of CM "rules" (8/4/2006 8:24:22 AM)
Sometimes people don't appreciate what they have here....

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125