too hard

720x720 upload bug has been fixed.

Quote:

Originally posted by omuh

I know you're being sarcastic (and completely deforming what I said btw), but really, what do you expect the mods to do when some of your uploads are pro? Let them through anyway?

Sarcastic remark really? I don't know what is your definiton of a proffesional model but you randomly reject photos of babes in bikini or without showing her faces. On the flip side you have ai enhanced photos on the home page. Whatever i say it doesn't matter. It was my mistake even to respond in this post in the first place. Btw i totally agree with vbollie about The Sentinel he is a class act. Have a nice day and i'm out.

Quote:

Originally posted by LunaMoon

Sarcastic remark really? I don't know what is your definiton of a proffesional model but you randomly reject photos of babes in bikini or without showing her faces. On the flip side you have ai enhanced photos on the home page. Whatever i say it doesn't matter. It was my mistake even to respond in this post in the first place. Btw i totally agree with vbollie about The Sentinel he is a class act. Have a nice day and i'm out.

The definiton of a professional is simple : if the woman is selling her content to make money, then she's a professional. That includes obviously pornstars, erotica models but also onlyfans (or similar subcription model websites) models or camgirls.

I never reject a pic as pro at random, only if I find proof that the girl is pro. Again, the vast majority of your pics that has been rejected as pro are onlyfans models and the ones rejected as "altered" are cropped (again I don't reject them at random, only if I find the uncropped pic while reverse searching). As said before, you also have a good ratio of accepted / rejected pics, so I wouldn't worry about some pics getting rejected, it's pretty normal as unless you literally uploads pics you made yourself, there's always a possibility that what you took off the internet wasn't actually amateur or original (even mods who also upload stuff have some of their uploads rejected for the same reasons and it's fine).

PS : There is no need to actually see the woman's face to find her as being pro. The majority of pics I tag as pro I don't know personnaly, they are just found by the reverse search engines and I just check that's it's correct (usually find either the same pics/series with the onlyfans watermark, or batch of leaked pics of the onlyfans account that include the one uploaded, or and instagram account / reddit post of the girl who also advertise her OF in the links)

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

Maybe @omuh you could tell me what’s happened. 1286 approved. 358 photos, 510 videos.
418 missing (and that’s not in the life log for deleted after the fact)

I've checked the numbers and indeed something doesn't add up here and I have no idea what's up as there are definitely not enough deleted pics in the live logs to fill the gap. You'd probably have to ask Dizzy about that difference as I can't explain it.

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

Yup. Too hard. Thanks for taking the time to provide context.

Can't help you about that feeling sorry. Difficulty is subjective but I don't agree that having 3/4 of what you upload being accepted is something I'd qualify as "too hard", and the poll you started seem to agree with that feeling. Oh well, hope I managed to provide context to the rejected pics at least...

There are plenty of other websites that allow to upload content and have way less filters, maybe those would fit your liking better. But obviously, you'll find plenty of so called "amateur" content on those that aren't. That's the trade of.

[reply=omuh]

1 and 3 have nothing erotic, it's just women sitting. Don't belong on WBW which is a porn site.
2 is too small (less than 720p high). Should have been automatically rejected on upload but seems like there's a bug that let some through, so was rejected as "other"
4 has a child in the background, not allowed

Excuse me omuh, but since when do you get to decide what is erotic and what isn't? If those 2 pics don't deserve to be on a porn site, then what are these doing here?
non-nude-babes/4293100
non-nude-babes/4293050
non-nude-babes/4292482
non-nude-babes/4292384

non-nude-babes/4334377
non-nude-babes/4334343
non-nude-babes/4334470
non-nude-babes/4334317

non-nude-babes/4332351
non-nude-babes/4332209
non-nude-babes/4327962
non-nude-babes/4327962

These are from 3 different members, but there are several others who upload the same type photos all the time. There is nothing erotic about these pics, but there is no reason to reject them except your personal opinion, and that isn't supposed to count when you moderate photos. If you can't look at them objectively and moderate according to the rules, maybe you should stop moderating!!! As for that too small photo, why don't you view the discussion I had with Diz about the small pictures on Site update #1. According to him the photos already in the queue will be accepted for uploading, before the new patch went in effect, and obviously that photo was uploaded before the size issue was resolved. None of the other moderators are rejecting small pics, at least not by the number of small photos I've seen here lately, so it doesn't seem like you have the right to reject them either, does it? Now I'm sure you'll probably make some smart remark, then lock this thread because you can't stand being criticized. Have a nice day.

Quote:

Originally posted by omuh

75% of your uploads have been accepted. How is that too hard? That's a pretty good ratio.

I've gone back to review this and this not true. Video uploads are MUCH easier.

369 photos live
368 rejected (340 in reject queue, 28 in live log)
-----
50% accept rate.

Again, too hard. Whether mods like the feedback or not, it's feedback of users trying to help make the site great, frustrated by the subjectivity.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

Excuse me omuh, but since when do you get to decide what is erotic and what isn't? If those 2 pics don't deserve to be on a porn site, then what are these doing here?

The general consensus we had with mods back in the days was non-nude pics had to show at least one of the following : cleavage (or underboobs or sideboob) / full legs / tight clothing showing ass / see-through clothing or poking nipples.
This is to prevent the site from being filled with facebook-like pics or just random pictures of women (and I can assure you that some users do upload batches of those...).
The rejected pics didn't have any of those, I don't judge, just stick to that guideline.

Most pics you listed have cleavage, a few with full legs, poking nipples or flashing panties. But I do believe you that some have non of that and are still in the galleries (the same way there are plenty of bad quality, cropped or pro pics still accepted). The gallery is far from being perfect as it's remains moderated by humans.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

As for that too small photo, why don't you view the discussion I had with Diz about the small pictures on Site update #1. According to him the photos already in the queue will be accepted for uploading, before the new patch went in effect, and obviously that photo was uploaded before the size issue was resolved. None of the other moderators are rejecting small pics, at least not by the number of small photos I've seen here lately, so it doesn't seem like you have the right to reject them either, does it? Now I'm sure you'll probably make some smart remark, then lock this thread because you can't stand being criticized. Have a nice day.

That 1 pics was deleted before Diz stated that. I haven't deleted any for that reason since then. I probably deleted less than 5 pics for that reason in that small time frame. But I can revert the decision if vbollie wants it, no issue with that.

As for criticism, I've always stated things as they are and tried to explain how the system works and that's it. I'm not the one insulting others when things go wrong... So yeah, you might be projecting a bit on that one

Edit : Just found the one pic and put it back into the queue ^^

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

I've gone back to review this and this not true. Video uploads are MUCH easier.

Video are easier because you can't reverse check a video. So there are most likely way more videos that are accepted but are in fact camgirls or onlyfans models.

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

369 photos live
368 rejected (340 in reject queue, 28 in live log)
-----
50% accept rate.

Yeah, as said before, I don't understand the difference between the live photos and the accepted in the mod stats.
Either there's a bug in there or there are a lot of your accepted pics that have been deleted afterwards and don't show in the livelog because they were deleted before the log existed.
Have you been uploading stuff for a while or is it recent ? (the livelog is quite recent when it comes to WBW developement compared to the mod stats)

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

Again, too hard. Whether mods like the feedback or not, it's feedback of users trying to help make the site great, frustrated by the subjectivity.

When it comes to your uploads, there isn't much subjectivity involved as the main reason your pics are rejected are pros and cropped ones. There is no subjectivity there, a pic is pro or not and it's cropped or not. And again, when it comes to the way I mod, I never reject a pic without proof for those 2 reasons.
The only two rules that include subjectivity are : underage and quality, but those are barely found in your uploads from what I've seen.
Now I can understand the frustration but there isn't much mods can do about it. You kinda have to accept the fact that when you take content from the internet without yourself being the source, there is bound to be some that you didn't know was pro or cropped.
The only advice I could give is that if you find that a batch of pics gets a particularely high reject rate for those reasons, just reconsider the site where you've been taking them to not really be reliable for future uploads.
Other than that it's just bound to the fact WBW has content that is more heavily vetted and as said before this is what makes it more reliable when it comes to amateur content compared to other, less vetted, sites.

[reply=omuh]The general consensus we had with mods back in the days was non-nude pics had to show at least one of the following : cleavage (or underboobs or sideboob) / full legs / tight clothing showing ass / see-through clothing or poking nipples.
This is to prevent the site from being filled with facebook-like pics or just random pictures of women (and I can assure you that some users do upload batches of those...).
The rejected pics didn't have any of those, I don't judge, just stick to that guideline.

Back in the days, huh. Is that guideline still in effect, or are you just using it to make an excuse for rejecting worthwhile pics? It would serve this site far better to post those guidelines, if they were actually in force so people would know. It would also be worthwhile to start rejecting pics that look like plastic face manikins. The pics you rejected are a lot more appealing than some of the wanna be Barbies that some of the members seem to think are so great. A few might be OK, but when we keep seeing dozens of them posted each day it gets rather sickening. This site is advertised as "The Best Amateur Porn Community", but it's gotten to be nothing except quasi-pro models and non-nude facebook pics.
As for criticism, you just close off a thread when you don't like it, huh?

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

[reply=omuh]The general consensus we had with mods back in the days was non-nude pics had to show at least one of the following : cleavage (or underboobs or sideboob) / full legs / tight clothing showing ass / see-through clothing or poking nipples.
This is to prevent the site from being filled with facebook-like pics or just random pictures of women (and I can assure you that some users do upload batches of those...).
The rejected pics didn't have any of those, I don't judge, just stick to that guideline.

Back in the days, huh. Is that guideline still in effect, or are you just using it to make an excuse for rejecting worthwhile pics? It would serve this site far better to post those guidelines, if they were actually in force so people would know. It would also be worthwhile to start rejecting pics that look like plastic face manikins. The pics you rejected are a lot more appealing than some of the wanna be Barbies that some of the members seem to think are so great. A few might be OK, but when we keep seeing dozens of them posted each day it gets rather sickening. This site is advertised as "The Best Amateur Porn Community", but it's gotten to be nothing except quasi-pro models and non-nude facebook pics.
As for criticism, you just close off a thread when you don't like it, huh?

Sentinel explained the same thing about women in plain clothes and nothing showing in another thread not too long ago. WBW is a porn website to begin with, so yeah, makes sense that the content has to be porn/erotica. I do agree that this could be added to the guidelines though yeah.

As for the content itself, it evolves with time, there is nothing we can do about it if what's uploaded nowadays evolved into something you don't like. The same way the porn industry evolved from classic porn movies to onlyfans and pornhub content.

I didn't close the other thread, I don't even have forum moderation rights.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

It would also be worthwhile to start rejecting pics that look like plastic face manikins. The pics you rejected are a lot more appealing than some of the wanna be Barbies that some of the members seem to think are so great. A few might be OK, but when we keep seeing dozens of them posted each day it gets rather sickening.

The other thing to consider is that content is literally uploaded by users. You can’t make a sweeping statement about “wannabe barbies” and insinuating that most users don’t enjoy them when the two largest image sections currently are “non-nude” and “beach/bikini” - again, this is all content uploaded by hundreds of users (that clearly like those images).

The amount of diverse images on this site is what makes it great (imo) and if you prefer a certain type of image (“naked” for example) then you can go into that particular section and not be bothered by the terrible bikini / non-nude images that offend you so much 🤷‍♂️

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

The other thing to consider is that content is literally uploaded by users. You can’t make a sweeping statement about “wannabe barbies” and insinuating that most users don’t enjoy them when the two largest image sections currently are “non-nude” and “beach/bikini” - again, this is all content uploaded by hundreds of users (that clearly like those images).

The amount of diverse images on this site is what makes it great (imo) and if you prefer a certain type of image (“naked” for example) then you can go into that particular section and not be bothered by the terrible bikini / non-nude images that offend you so much 🤷‍♂️

Hundreds of uploaders? Please, get a life! Your average number of uploaders per day is maybe 40 to 50 at most, and if you took away the 15 who upload the most, you probably wouldn't get 100 pics. I don't know how many users are on the so called member list, but I would venture a guess that if you scrubbed the list of anyone who hasn't logged on in the last 3 years, it would be far less! Of course you're going to support the users who upload those barbie wannabes because you're one of them. You sure seem to like those plastic faced manikins, that might be one reason why so many are allowed in.

Some people just want to complain, no matter what’s going on. Too many non-nude, not enough non-nude, pros get rejected, but pros sometimes don’t get rejected, and all is wrong!

Just go to an unmoderated, shithole site. I’m not sure what benefit there is to (mostly) the same people starting this repetitive whine-fest every two or three months.

Quote:

Originally posted by dariusslay

Some people just want to complain, no matter what’s going on. Too many non-nude, not enough non-nude, pros get rejected, but pros sometimes don’t get rejected, and all is wrong!

Just go to an unmoderated, shithole site. I’m not sure what benefit there is to (mostly) the same people starting this repetitive whine-fest every two or three months.

Maybe if you had been around when it was a really good site, you'd understand the complaints. You're one of the people uploading almost all non-nude and bikini beach pics. It supposedly is a porn site, so why not upload some real women instead of plastic face barbies? That would actually go toward improving the site. Have a nice day.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

Maybe if you had been around when it was a really good site, you'd understand the complaints. You're one of the people uploading almost all non-nude and bikini beach pics. It supposedly is a porn site, so why not upload some real women instead of plastic face barbies? That would actually go toward improving the site. Have a nice day.

Plenty of people visit the site (incuding you, oddly enough...) so it seems they are enjoying it. As omuh mentioned earlier, the website evolves over time and this is mainly down to it's members. This is shown directly by the amount of uploads that are added each week, a large portion of which are non-nude and bikini. If people didn't like those types of images they would stop voting highly on them, which in turn might stop members from uploading them. I really can't see that happening anytime soon, but you never know.

There is so much variety on this site (in terms of the types of images) so if you only want to look at nude images, there's a specific category for that. I'm not sure why other people enjoying non-nude / beach images is such an issue for you, when it doesn't have to bother you at all 🤷‍♂️

Also, I appreciate it's been over 3 years since you uploaded an image to WBW, but for someone who is against non-nude images, you seem to have uploaded a fair few yourself. In your latest page of uploads alone, out of 48 images, 48% are non-nude (including 6 beach/bikini).

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

Also, I appreciate it's been over 3 years since you uploaded an image to WBW, but for someone who is against non-nude images, you seem to have uploaded a fair few yourself. In your latest page of uploads alone, out of 48 images, 48% are non-nude (including 6 beach/bikini).

That's true sentinel, but if you look at the pics i uploaded, none of them look like plastic manikins which sadly most of yours do. I don't so much mind non-nude or bikini, but when the girl's face is over-made up and looks fake, along with quasi-pro poses then they don't look like amateurs, which this site is supposed to be all about. Thankfully a few users here still actually upload amateur photos and not barbie wannabes. And no, I won't upload any pics as long as you're a mod. You made it quite plain you would find any reason to reject my photos, like using "other" and saying they 'don't add anything to the site'. At least my pics look like real people and not store window manikins.

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

That's true sentinel, but if you look at the pics i uploaded, none of them look like plastic manikins which sadly most of yours do. I don't so much mind non-nude or bikini, but when the girl's face is over-made up and looks fake, along with quasi-pro poses then they don't look like amateurs, which this site is supposed to be all about. Thankfully a few users here still actually upload amateur photos and not barbie wannabes. And no, I won't upload any pics as long as you're a mod. You made it quite plain you would find any reason to reject my photos, like using "other" and saying they 'don't add anything to the site'. At least my pics look like real people and not store window manikins.

Did you ever think that some people like the "plastic wannabe barbies"? You may dislike them but obviously some users like them. Many of us do not like seeing all of the overweight Boomer women posted on here, but we ignore them and move along. You seem overly fixated on a single type of pic. So either you really hate them (in which case downvote and move along) or you hate yourself for liking them (in which case I suggest therapy). Alternatively, you could come up with constructive criticism and help make the site better. Though given your advanced age, you may not have much in the way of constructive criticism and only whining left. Seems the only people having issues, aside from your plastic fetish, are those that mass upload and can't handle a few getting rejected. There isva complaint system(or used to be) or you can always go elsewhere. But since you are here complaining, I am guessing going elsewhere is unlikely for you.

let's bring this back on topic.

Moderator rules still remain inconsistent. The "quality" or "photoshop" standards are too subjective (below are a couple more due to "quality" or "photoshopped" that didn't get through).

And even though I screen on Google Lens and Yandex, I only have a 50% hit rate of upload. So too hard.

Particularly when, for some users, or some moderators, the beautiful Matilde Tantot and 2 other OF models made it through moderation from the same uploader in the last 6. This can't just be "oops, we missed some", but shows different levels of moderation depending on user.

SUGGESTION: let users moderate - unless it's an obvious OF model (simple Google Lens search), or there's a child in the photo, let it through. Deal with issues after the fact through DMCA and user moderation.

Quote:

Originally posted by vbollie

Particularly when, for some users, or some moderators, the beautiful Matilde Tantot and 2 other OF models made it through moderation from the same uploader in the last 6. This can't just be "oops, we missed some", but shows different levels of moderation depending on user.

There aren’t different levels of moderation depending on the user, it will only be different moderators using different image search tools (or not using them at all in some instances). But if professional images do get through, they are eventually reported and subsequently deleted (please report the ones you’re referring to if you haven’t already).

Unfortunately, unless we rely on one moderator to cover every image, there will undoubtedly be some degree of inconsistency. I guess that’s the payoff - people don’t want to wait for ages for their images to be uploaded, and get annoyed if any are rejected, but at the same time complain when a few pro images from other users sneak through.