Revamping Upload Rules: Seeking Your Input on Updated Guidelines

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

It seems you're the one craving attention with so many forum threads and making sure you reply to any of these threads with complaints.
#1- You get a paid membership for moderating, so stop saying you don't get paid.
#2- You're a moron if you think all the time you spend on your forums and uploads doesn't take away from actually getting other members pics uploaded.
#3- 5 or 6 awesomes from people you give special favors to doesn't make your threads great.
#4- If you stopped moderating it's very doubtful the wait time would change, and it would probably improve!
#5- You're right, I stopped contributing to this site because the moderation got so poor it wasn't worth it. If Diz took the time to notice, the daily average quantity, along with the quality of uploads has decreased in the last 5 years. That coincides with when you became a moderator. Kind of points out what members think of you doesn't it. This would be a much better site if you stopped calling everyone with a complaint names, and shut up and spent more time actually working as a moderator. Just a suggestion for your pea-sized brain, but I doubt it will do much good since you're such an attention whore.

#1 - A paid membership that I don't take advantage of...
#2 - I never said this - it seems you are creating sentences to suit your narrative (AGAIN). What I actually said was I am still someone who visits this site to enjoy it, and not just to be a moderator. If I wasn't visiting to enjoy it, I wouldn't visit to do any moderation. I feel like I'm repeating myself a lot with you (again) but I appreciate there are people out there, such as yourself, that just like to moan for the sake of it.
#3 - Here we go again, making things up out of thing air in an attempt to garner some form of point. Take my most recent thread that I've started - "Less if Four" - the very last post of that new thread currently has 24 awesomes, which isn't too bad at all for a new thread. But of course I've given "special favours" to these 24 members in order to get these awesomes... 😂
#4 - You really have no idea when it comes to the stats behind moderating images so I don't know why you act like you do. Let me break it down for you into data you might be able to comprehend:

- There are currently 14 image moderators on WBW, each able to spend differing amounts of time on the site.
- In the last 6 months I have personally moderated 26,442 images. Only one of the 13 other moderators has moderated more.
- In the last 7 days there have been a total of 3,974 images moderated - I was responsible for 35% of that.

So yeah, if I stopped moderating images, the wait time would most definitely change.

#5 - The daily average amount of uploads hasn't decreased in the last 5 years (another "stat" you've pulled out of your arse). The quality of images is debatable, but people upload a variety of images and everyone has different tastes in women. A prime example of this is you voting 1 on every single image I've uploaded - over 14k, great use of your time 😂 - and most of them get an average score of 8.5ish. I thought I was special but it turns out you do the same thing to a select group of members here, but you know, whatever floats your psychotic boat.

Also, although I started my current account in 2018, I've actually been a member of WBW for around the same sort of time as you - would've been around 2007/2008 I think I first signed up. But of course my current account fits in well with your stat creation lie so I guess go with that if you wish. I could argue that since you stopped uploading images in 2020, the average quality of images has increased...

[reply=strictguy][/reply]

I'm not really sure what members think of me - I can only go by things like ratings (images & threads), awesomes, and messages that people send (good and bad). Overall I'd say most members can see I contribute a fair bit to the site, and although it may not always be to their taste/liking, it's appreciated more than the trolls who simply visit the site to moan and give some excitment to the final years of their lives 🤷‍♂️

I await your next response with excitement (afterall, I do crave the attention).

I attempted to initiate a discussion regarding the improvement and simplification of upload rules. However, some members joined the conversation with a childish behavior, resembling a toddler rather than contributing constructively to enhance and clarify the newly revamped upload rules I am working on.

The next individual who goes off-topic will receive a one-week timeout. I've grown very tired of this immature behavior.

Either engage constructively with the current discussion, or fuck off.

Quote:

Originally posted by Diz-X

I attempted to initiate a discussion regarding the improvement and simplification of upload rules. However, some members joined the conversation with a childish behavior, resembling a toddler rather than contributing constructively to enhance and clarify the newly revamped upload rules I am working on.

The next individual who goes off-topic will receive a one-week timeout. I've grown very tired of this immature behavior.

Either engage constructively with the current discussion, or fuck off.

Then begin with your boy sentinel! He's the one belittling and calling people names!
Here are things on TOPIC!!!!
The majority of complaints seem to be:
#1- Underage- I've suggested putting all the underage rejected pics into a separate queue so all the mods can get a consensus, and it will keep a mod from uploading girls that have been rejected as underage by a different mod. And please don't tell me you have hundreds of underage pics each day.
#2- Pro/models- Same thing, that way one mod may know she is a pro when the other mods don't. Even if there are quite a few pics, at least you won't have members complaining they're being penalized when the same pics are uploaded by someone else.
#3- Post a list of all the moderators so the members know who to contact if they have a problem. Right now the only way any of us know who the moderators are is if they reply to posts of these forum threads.
#4- Bad quality- Address what you consider bad quality. I've had pictures rejected that were far less grainy and clearer than some of the pics being uploaded now.
#5- Gross/gore- Excuse me, but I doubt the vast majority of members want to see obese, ugly women on this site. It's called What Boys Want, not Anything That Comes Along.
#6-Altered/cropped- How about a clear definition on this. You have mods saying any altered photo is rejected, then turn around and say pics can get uploaded because they're different sizes. Isn't resizing altering? This holds true for pics that should be rejected as duplicates. I've seen the exact same pics here, only difference is one has been cropped, but it still gets through.

You say you want to improve this site, well here is my opinion. Right now if you were to do away with the Beach/Bikini babes, Non-nude babes, and Lingerie babes, your uploads would drop about 70%. There are certain members whose almost entire profile is nothing but non-nude, or Beach/bikini. I'm not against any of those pics, but it would help to put some kind of a limit on them when there is only a very slight variation between them. You also might want to consider rejecting some of the quasi-pro model photos. If you want examples just look at a lot of what the sentinel uploads. Many of them could be found in fashion magazines and I don't know about anyone else, but women needing 3 pounds of make-up and lip injections don't appeal to me.

Now this is from sentinel:
- In the last 6 months I have personally moderated 26,442 images. Only one of the 13 other moderators has moderated more.
- In the last 7 days there have been a total of 3,974 images moderated - I was responsible for 35% of that.

Can you verify because it doesn't seem like much? Its been posted by other moderators that it only takes 10 to 20 seconds to moderate a photo. If that is the case, then his average per day is 147 pics. Since he likes to pat himself on the back and tell everyone how great he is, then it only takes him less than 30 minutes a day to moderate his pics. I'm sure he spends a lot more time than that finding uploads for all his many forum threads. as for the 3974 pics in a week, if there are 14 moderators, then that's only about 44 pics per day per moderator. Hardly seems like they're overworked does it?
I also remember him boasting about moderating most of the pics I uploaded, and you made it clear in a message that wasn't true. So which one of you was lying?
I think I have pointed out some things that need to be addressed and could help this site be better. It would be nice if I got some kind of feedback from you and not your loudmouth sentinel. As far as I'm concerned if he answers then I'll know you don't give a damn about your members!!!!!

Every restriction you put on moderating , slows the speed of processing.
If you have to check for underage queue that is less time moderating. How far back does the queue go? An underage photo from 20years ago is still underage.
The same with pro or amateur photos, run through another list? There could be thousands.
A list of moderators adds to their workload and there is a process of appeal and they lose time answering emails, so less moderating.
Bad quality is a bugbear but someone took the effort to upload, so the marginal ones can get included, but you could institute a hard line, any blur and its out.
Gross /Gore has never been allowed (Halloween different?)
Altered or cropped another difficult area.
My personal favourites are the Beach/Bikini babes, non nudes and lingerie babes, so your answer is to get rid of the most popular threads, though I agree with limiting very similar photos.

@strictguy timed out for one week! I fucking warned you.

Update I have made on some inputs:



Only women-centric content is allowed

The content should focus on and revolve around individuals who are biologically female. Transgender content is not permitted.

All subjects must at least 18 years

All individuals featured in uploaded content must be a minimum of 18 years old, including those appearing in the background or any images within the background.

Copyrighted or Celebrity content is not allowed

Ensure that you have the right to upload the content. Respect copyright laws and refrain from uploading material that infringes on the intellectual property rights of others.

Refrain from uploading content featuring celebrities, professional models or material behind a paywall (such as OnlyFans etc.). Photography sessions with amateur models are permitted.

Watermarked content is not allowed

Content must be free of watermarks, logos, stamped text, or promotions, with the exception of timestamps.

Fake / AI / Altered content is not allowed

Examples of fake content include manipulations of the human body, such as alterations or modifications through photo editing software.

AI-generated content refers to digital material, like images, or videos, produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence technologies.

Altered content includes actions such as taking a screenshot or screen recording, as well as cropping the content to eliminate a watermark, for instance.

The exception to these rules is that you are allowed to blur/hide faces to make them unrecognisable.

Gross / Gore / Joke content is not allowed.

Gross and Gore Content includes material featuring scat, feces, vomit, menstrual blood, urination, and/or blood.

Low quality content is not allowed

Resolutions below the specified criteria are not accepted upon upload:
× Videos must have a minimum resolution of 240x240.
× Images must have a minimum resolution of 720x720.

Submissions that are out of focus, blurry, overexposed, underexposed or exhibit heavy compression artifacts will be declined.

I don't understand why many pics taken by me are refused as Copyrighted !
Can you explain ?

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

Would it be worth mentioning sites like OnlyFans (behind a paywall) classify as “professional”, as this is a confusing area.

I think that would be helpful to add more color to what it means to “respect copyright laws,” as well as what “infringes on the intellectual property rights of others.” I’m sure the law is very clear, but (1) most laws can vary from one jurisdiction to another, and (2) I wouldn’t expect most people to be crazy familiar with those laws.

Quote:

Originally posted by LemonR

I don't understand why many pics taken by me are refused as Copyrighted !
Can you explain ?

I’ll send you a private message to discuss this and help.

Quote:

Originally posted by darkstar001

Well, it looks to me that omuh is a moderator. So to me, the question is should we take lessons from someone who has been on the site since 27th April 2010 but has only uploaded 46 images and the last of these was 7 years ago? Plus your average scoring of girls is only 5.62 so I would view you as one of the site's serial low scorers. The site is over-moderated. Pics are sometimes rejected immediately after they are uploaded. Then rejected again when a moderator decides that they are a model/celebrity/underage/other etc and then they can be removed after they've been approved. I never knew that there were so many models and celebrities in the world. To address your point about underage material. I am one of the site's more discerning posters. I won't post if I think that the girl is underage. Those that have been rejected as underage aren't. I have checked their profiles and ascertained that they are over 18 years of age. For example: one of them works in a bar in Newcastle and there are photos of her there.

My contributation to the site has mainly been tagging pictures and moderating, then handling the crew and helping Diz with the site a few years ago. I then stepped out for a couple years and came back recently only to help mod pics has queues were getting bigger and bigger, just to give a hand to Diz. You can look at the numbers of tags I've added I'm fairly sure I'm among the top taggers if not the top 1.
I don't need to have uploaded thousands of pics to have learned how to mod them. Every picture I reject as "pro" or "altered" I have checked on reverse search engine and found the name of the model or the uncropped picture. I don't remove a picture without proof. And yes, there are a ton of pro models, especially nowadays that pro models aren't only pornstars and erotica models, but also onlyfans models and such (and those are most of the rejected pics as pro)
The only exception are underaged content since we have no way to verify this, so if it looks too young, we remove because as many other users have said, better be safe than sorry on that regard (that and "bad quality" content as it's also something where the line is subjective, but I try to stay fair while keeping 2023 standards).
As to how I rate pics, not sure what the problem is? My average is... above the average (you know, 5). Most pics I rate between 6 et 8 but yeah when I don't like some I rate them 4 or 5, rarely below. I'm not a "only 10" voter if that's what you're looking for. My average has also been lowered by the fact that when I wasn't a mod, I used to vote "1" on pics I had reported (and I reported a lot) to be able to keep track of those.

I don't feel like the site is overmodded. That's actually what drew me to WBW : the fact that the content is actually amateur and not one of those site claiming to have amateur galleries when they're actually filled with 80% of pro stuff. It's not perfect, but that's the price of having a proper modding of the content.

Anyway, again, if you feel like your uploaded content was wrongly rejected and have proof of it, feel free to reach to a mod with the proof. But saying only "I know her, she's on facebook" isn't a solid proof, that's all I was saying. I do remember once I was contacted for a girl rejected a UA that turned out to be military (so obviously 18+) and I did put the pics back in queue, but again, you need proof.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

It seems you're the one craving attention with so many forum threads and making sure you reply to any of these threads with complaints.
#1- You get a paid membership for moderating, so stop saying you don't get paid.
#2- You're a moron if you think all the time you spend on your forums and uploads doesn't take away from actually getting other members pics uploaded.
#3- 5 or 6 awesomes from people you give special favors to doesn't make your threads great.
#4- If you stopped moderating it's very doubtful the wait time would change, and it would probably improve!
#5- You're right, I stopped contributing to this site because the moderation got so poor it wasn't worth it. If Diz took the time to notice, the daily average quantity, along with the quality of uploads has decreased in the last 5 years. That coincides with when you became a moderator. Kind of points out what members think of you doesn't it. This would be a much better site if you stopped calling everyone with a complaint names, and shut up and spent more time actually working as a moderator. Just a suggestion for your pea-sized brain, but I doubt it will do much good since you're such an attention whore.

I'll only reply about the moderation of Sentinel : Sentinel is currently the mod that has modded the most pics the past months. So yeah, without him the queue would be way longer.

Quote:

Originally posted by revfredmorton

how about someone to review the delete log to create some sort of consistency for what is posted? i know it is open to whoever is reviewing the pics, but there is no consistency. someone reviewing the delete log would create some sort of consistency.

That's something I kinda used to do back in the days when I handled the crew, to some extent, on top of testing the new mods to be sure they would be able to mod efficiently. But it's a very time demanding task and while it's possible to try and improve consistency, it's definitely impossible to have a 100% uniform teams since, well, we're all humans. But I do agree this would be helpful, or at least try to refine the mod process. It would definitely increase mod time though.

Quote:

Originally posted by LemonR

I don't understand why many pics taken by me are refused as Copyrighted !
Can you explain ?

Quickly checking your queue log, I'm guessing those are onlyfans models or cropped pro model shots. Most of the stuff rejected seems to be cropped though. But that's only a quick check, can't really recheck everything.

Quote:

Originally posted by nok_nok

Every restriction you put on moderating , slows the speed of processing.
If you have to check for underage queue that is less time moderating. How far back does the queue go? An underage photo from 20years ago is still underage.
The same with pro or amateur photos, run through another list? There could be thousands.
A list of moderators adds to their workload and there is a process of appeal and they lose time answering emails, so less moderating.
Bad quality is a bugbear but someone took the effort to upload, so the marginal ones can get included, but you could institute a hard line, any blur and its out.
Gross /Gore has never been allowed (Halloween different?)
Altered or cropped another difficult area.
My personal favourites are the Beach/Bikini babes, non nudes and lingerie babes, so your answer is to get rid of the most popular threads, though I agree with limiting very similar photos.

I can explain quickly my process of moderating pics, if that can give some insight to some of you. I can only say for myself though, I don't know how exactly other mods work.

So first, I quickly check the pic for stuff like : she looks obviously too young (> underaged), she looks questionably aged (> other), there's a child in the background (> other), the picture is shit quality (> bad quality), the picture has a watermark, sometimes I can notice it later on as they are suble at times (> watermarked), the picture is highly tilted/sideways/upsidedown (> other), there's something gross that's not allowed (> extreme, but that's very rare).
If I know for a fact that the person is a pro model because I 100% know her (this isn't very often but can happen), I reject as pro.
After that first quick look, I reverse search the pic. The results can show if the picture has been cropped (>altered) or it's actually a pro model, actress, celebrity etc. (> pro). If nothing shows it then depends. After years of moderation I've gotten used to have a hunch if the pic looks like something that could be pro or looked cropped. If that's the case, I'll use another reverse search engine (google for pro, tineye for cropped as they're good for that respectively). And same, if I find the pic to be pro or cropped, I reject accordindly.
If nothing shows at that point, I'll accept the pic in the right category.
As you can see, I do not reject something without proof. There are times when I'm 90% sure a picture has been cropped or is pro but if I find nothing, I'll accept it (and if someone find the proof and report it later on, so be it), the only exception to that being underaged where any doubt is a reject, for obvious and legal reasons.

If I notice that an uploader has had many pics rejected for the same reason, I'll have a look at their global queue just to trim what I can (this is useful for example when there's a big series of the same pro model, this way other mods don't have to search pics individually and they're all gone at once).

This does take some time per pic though. I could go faster, but the more steps I skip, the more likely some pics go through that shouldn't have (and people start complaining, although some will complain anyway because stuff got rejected, but in my case I can back up what I did).

Keep in mind as well that pics arrive in the mod queue at random, based on time spent in queue obviously but still at random, so we don't get all pics from the same user at once, it alternates from users to users. This is why pics from a same series can be moderated by different mods.

Hope this helps.

what happend with cosplay? Many cosplayer are underage and no nude?

Apologies if this has been addressed already --- I've been scanning this thread but did not see it addressed.

On the subject of "Altered Content", I suggest providing explicit guidance on whether "odd" dimensions are acceptable or not. At least one moderator appears to reject images that have an odd dimension, e.g. 2461 x 1760 vs 2460 x 1760. The rationale as I understand it is that this is an indication that the image has been altered/cropped because native CCD sensors never generate imagery with an odd dimension. This prohibition is not universally enforced, so you will find many images with odd dimensions on the site.

At first. I fully agreed with this rule. It made sense in a world when image resolutions were much smaller and images were rarely cropped by the original photographer/artist. But I think it should be relaxed now -- original image dimensions have reached the point where cropping and adjusting, often done on a mobile device, is common place, resulting in a higher likelihood that an "original" image might have an odd dimension.

Whatever the actual reason for rejecting images with an odd dimension might be, I would like to suggest this prohibition be relaxed in favor of a more judgement-based call on whether the "altered content" is acceptable. The photographer might have cropped the original image for aesthetic reasons, for privacy reasons, or for other reasons that are reasonable and legitimate and do not otherwise violate any of the other guidelines (such as cropping out a watermark). Obviously we want to avoid multiple slightly different cropped versions of the same image being accepted, but this is still possible with images that have been cropped differently but have even dimensions so a prohibition on odd dimensions does not solve that problem.

Something to consider, if possible.

Quote:

Originally posted by babeologist

Apologies if this has been addressed already --- I've been scanning this thread but did not see it addressed.

On the subject of "Altered Content", I suggest providing explicit guidance on whether "odd" dimensions are acceptable or not. At least one moderator appears to reject images that have an odd dimension, e.g. 2461 x 1760 vs 2460 x 1760. The rationale as I understand it is that this is an indication that the image has been altered/cropped because native CCD sensors never generate imagery with an odd dimension. This prohibition is not universally enforced, so you will find many images with odd dimensions on the site.

Forgot to also mention that if, for some reason, the prohibition on odd dimensions is going to be formalized, it should be automatically enforced when uploading, as minimum dimensions currently are, thus ensuring that the rule is applied universally and sparing the moderators from having to check for this.

Quote:

Originally posted by tatt2

what happend with cosplay? Many cosplayer are underage and no nude?

If you see underage content, you can report it!

Per omuh "After years of moderation I've gotten used to have a hunch". Having a hunch doesn't really cut it for me.

Per babeologist "At least one moderator appears to reject images that have an odd dimension, e.g. 2461 x 1760 vs 2460 x 1760". I always shoot in RAW and have just undertaken an experiment with some of my pics by changing them to JPEG so I can modify the picture. On every occasion, the original pixel dimensions had altered slightly by between 1 and 5 pixels. So "native CCD sensors never generate imagery with an odd dimension" is I'm afraid totally false. So you may wish to contact said moderator and point out the error of his ways when moderating.

Quote:

Originally posted by darkstar001

Per omuh "After years of moderation I've gotten used to have a hunch". Having a hunch doesn't really cut it for me.

Which is why I always verify that hunch. I don't reject a pic if I can't find anything though. But I can assure you that with experience, you tend to notice the patterns for cropped pics (lower quality due to multiple encoding/compression on the pics when cropping/saving that is different than pixelation from a low quality camera, weird framing etc.) or for pros and my doubt are often verified when reverse search checking the pics.
But yeah, there are sometimes false positive (I'm thinking amateur modeling that really look pro, or bad framing/weird ratio on the original pic) and those I won't reject since I won't find anything on those.

Quote:

Originally posted by babeologist

Apologies if this has been addressed already --- I've been scanning this thread but did not see it addressed.

On the subject of "Altered Content", I suggest providing explicit guidance on whether "odd" dimensions are acceptable or not. At least one moderator appears to reject images that have an odd dimension, e.g. 2461 x 1760 vs 2460 x 1760. The rationale as I understand it is that this is an indication that the image has been altered/cropped because native CCD sensors never generate imagery with an odd dimension. This prohibition is not universally enforced, so you will find many images with odd dimensions on the site.

At first. I fully agreed with this rule. It made sense in a world when image resolutions were much smaller and images were rarely cropped by the original photographer/artist. But I think it should be relaxed now -- original image dimensions have reached the point where cropping and adjusting, often done on a mobile device, is common place, resulting in a higher likelihood that an "original" image might have an odd dimension.

Whatever the actual reason for rejecting images with an odd dimension might be, I would like to suggest this prohibition be relaxed in favor of a more judgement-based call on whether the "altered content" is acceptable. The photographer might have cropped the original image for aesthetic reasons, for privacy reasons, or for other reasons that are reasonable and legitimate and do not otherwise violate any of the other guidelines (such as cropping out a watermark). Obviously we want to avoid multiple slightly different cropped versions of the same image being accepted, but this is still possible with images that have been cropped differently but have even dimensions so a prohibition on odd dimensions does not solve that problem.

Something to consider, if possible.

This is something I used to do to some extent a few years ago as, as you said, it was easier to expect a set of regular format for pics. I had a bunch of ratio I knew were used, including weirder ones, or say instagram ones that are more square than 4/3 etc. but I don't do that anymore as there are indeed too many ratios including cropping pics on the fly before publishing the original.
So I stick to reverse checking pics now, it's much slower but no chance to reject something by mistake.

So in the end it's more a matter of time VS error, as in, are you fine with going very fast on the "altered" topic at the risk of having a few pics get rejected by mistake, or way slower with no mistakes.
Alternatively there's also no checking pics at all for croppage, no time loss on this (although we'd still need the reverse check for pros anyway so...) but expect a tons of repost that are just cropped differently (back when the duplicate tool was deployed, we could find series with literally several sets of the same pics cropped differently, not sure going back to that would be good).

I will go one last time over this topic and see what kind of things I have missed in the new upload rules. When I don't see new stuff to add I will commit these rules in a dedicated page.

- I should add the snapchat filters are not allowed one to the rules for modified pictures.

When this is finished I am gonna work on category guide and a moderation guide. So we can start adding some new moderators to the crew and speed up the moderation process a lot!