(Wow - I did word it that way; it's been a tough week in lots of ways for me.)
I have no problem with the image I saw of the female, not at all. It's just that if a male torso image gets removed and this other female image stays, seems strange to me.
I found the link to which I was referring to yesterday but we're not on each other's official friends list. How would you like me to send the link?
I know that someone reported that picture. It is in the report logs. You need to contact JA if you do not have access to them. If you are a moderator, you MUST have access to the reporting system and the ability to see when someone hits the REPORT button!!!
I'm curious. How is it that you seem to be able to sniff out a picture with a guy with underwear on his head and a large woman at the beach with ample breast, but you can not locate a sexualized photo of a black woman with her nipples sticking out in an aroused state?
You were a mod. You know the reports go direct to JA. That is the way it has always worked.
I referred the pict to JA for her to make the call.
The pict of the male removed was not just a male torso. He was unclothed other than underwhere on his head. (Underwear is not allowed) The man was in a suggestive pose and the pict did not stop at just torso. It continued below the normal underwear line. But stopped before being "exposed"
How did I "sniff" it out? I see things as I use the site. Why do people gripe and complain but not send me the link. (Generally... I can count on my hands the number of times I have been sent a link in 3 yrs)
I have that picture that Twinkle posted. You are using your imagination to fill in the blanks. That is from an Abercrombie & Fitch ad. I wear clothing like that sometimes (as unattractive as that might be to some. LOL).
None of this dialogue would have aired had you not first consulted with JA AND sent a notice to Twinkle promptly stating why you pulled it. Then all of you could have discussed this thought he PM system if there were disagreements.
You do know that this is NOT about the picture per se' but the moderation. Right?
Yes, I was a mod. I remember how moderation works, here and on other sites, very well. . You made a judgment call before contacting JA, and you know you did. The way it worked was unless there was something gravely wrong, and in blatant violation of the TOS, there would be a discussion and a vote. Yes, there is a rule about wearing underwear. Moderation is much more than adhering to the TOS and COC (Codes of conduct); it's about using common sense.
You should ask JA about getting access to the reports AND refrain from discussing this with other members openly.
I've said my peace. Any further discussion should be Private. That is the professional way to handle this.
I pulled it. It was in violation of the photo guidelines. No question about that.
I am not the one who put it in the public forum. But once the user does I am allowed to comment publically about it. I have the pic as well it is in Mods group. I always screen shot my removals.
I want it on the record that you have publicly responded to me AFTER I strongly indicated that any further discussion should be in PM and that you publicly stated that you CAN discuss moderation actions. I also want it stated that my opinions and comments to you are not a means for removal from the site as long as I remain respectful.
Since you continue to talk about that picture...That picture depicts a barechested guy wearing underwear on their head. Nothing more. Nothing less. You chose to see nudity where there was none. You took the rule, "No one wearing underwear" to the extreme. As I said, Moderation is NOT just about enforcing the rules, it's about common sense. You have claimed the guy was "nude". The term is "Bare-chested". If we are going to pull those types of posts, then you MUST follow the same logic and pull every picture of Christ crucified.
Part of moderation is not only to enforce the rules but to educate those who have violated them. You and I know that it's imperative to notify members promptly when and why their posts have been removed so they can avoid further violations. You have not done so. You have also shown bias and your reasoning is flawed because they are incongruent with your actions. For example...that picture of a black woman with her nipples protruding out is still there at the writing of this post, and yet, pictures of guys in speedos are pulled. Not only that, you pulled a picture recently of a plus-sized woman at the beach with ample breasts that was NOT sexual.
I'm not trying to be flippant, but if you spent as much time moderating FAIRLY, using common sense, sending out letters in a timely manner, and less time worrying about defending Trump on every post, then this would not have escalated as it has...FYI, this is not the first time either.
Volunteering to be a mod is noble and it can be a thankless job. Phewwwww! Boy, I know that very well. Yet, you accepted that role as did I. I enjoyed it very much. I was an excellent moderator and I know that for a fact.
A little professionalism goes a long way
This post was edited by Jon at January 22, 2020 11:46 AM MST
You kindly asked that someone share the link to the pic and I know it was given to you.
However, that was nearly 3 hours ago and the picture is still present within the post.
I am curious...how long does it take to pull down an image that has been reported, and complained about by members in the forum, and is in clear violation of TOS. Many times over over and over the topic of women's breast and nipples have been discussed. I remember former member "Saphic Heart" was a big proponent of freeing the boobs, but JA has commented ad nauseum that any picture which blatantly focuses on the breast or genitals especially in an aroused state is grounds for removal of said photo. I can't post a picture of a man in Speedos if the picture is cropped too close to the mid section allowing the viewer to see a clear outline of the penis and testicles. So I ask you why then can a picture be allowed that clearly shows the outline of the breast and fully erect nipples seen through a purposely tight tank top be any different.
I CALL DISCRIMINATION.
I SMELL THE STANK OF WOMEN'S RIGHTS ABOVE MEN'S.
I AM FORMALLY ACCUSING THE SITE OF PREFERENCE TO HETERO RIGHTS SUPERSEDING GAYS.
My posted male torso got pulled for being too suggestive.
So should this female torso.
If on the other hand, body parts that are quite noticeable though apparel is allowed, then I can't wait to start posting cute boys in speedos with slightly or fully erect penises everywhere.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 22, 2020 12:29 PM MST
I'm curious. What is the justification for sending it on to JA instead of just pulling it. Where are you having difficulty understanding the rules here? Is there something you find acceptable and appropriate about her sexualized torso?
I site this publicly as an example of bias and discriminatory moderation.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 22, 2020 9:40 PM MST
I do not see a blantant violation of the TOS in the pict of the lady fully clothed and taking a selfie in a mirror. I have not been told it is against the rules. But I have reported it to JA explaining the complains. I do not delete based on what I like/dislike or agree/disagree with ...it is always based on the rules.
Swimsuits in general are allowed unless too sexual. I believe that was discussed last time we went through this.
Are you seriously saying to me that you don't see the sexual intent behind the pic of the woman? Not only was it the obvious purpose of the person taking the selfie to put her tits and nips on display but it was also posted by the answerMug member for that very reason. I seem to be smart enough to figure that out so I'm not sure what is so confounding to you.
As I said earlier I call discrimination and bias in addition to a severe lack of common sense application of TOS.
I thank you just the same for forwarding the pic to JA.
I have concrete input as to whether or not site moderation is conducted via means of personal opinion and moderators’ likes and dislikes, and my input does not favor the status quo. I have been on the receiving end of lopsided “adjudication” that clearly favored another member and left me facing the possibility of permanent banishment because of it. Administration and moderators can claim fairness and even-handedness all day long, I have the right to disagree with that assessment based purely on direct experience. ‘Nuff said. ___
Lady Ondine 