Can someone tell me?
When newbies see an inappropriate random photo on the home page, they conclude that erection shots are OK. In truth they are NOT OK. The photo should have been disapproved by the site owner. This situation is further evidence that the site owner is stretched thin, so that he doesn't have time to do what he should.
When newbies see an inappropriate random photo on the home page, they conclude that erection shots are OK. In truth they are NOT OK. The photo should have been disapproved by the site owner. This situation is further evidence that the site owner is stretched thin, so that he doesn't have time to do what he should.
What I really couldn't understand was that I went to the profile and only one perfectly acceptable photo was there. I then assumed that the photo was in the site system somewhere and the profiled subject had no control over is use. For this reason, I didn't flag the profile and sought expert advice.
What I really couldn't understand was that I went to the profile and only one perfectly acceptable photo was there. I then assumed that the photo was in the site system somewhere and the profiled subject had no control over is use. For this reason, I didn't flag the profile and sought expert advice.
I'd tend to agree, as the evidence would suggest.......
What I really couldn't understand was that I went to the profile and only one perfectly acceptable photo was there. I then assumed that the photo was in the site system somewhere and the profiled subject had no control over is use. For this reason, I didn't flag the profile and sought expert advice.
I'd tend to agree, as the evidence would suggest.......
Sorry, but that's BS. The ONLY way the picture ended up in the gallery is if the OWNER OF THE PROFILE uploaded it to the gallery. Gallery pics do not have to be in one's profile.
HOWEVER it is possible the photo was uploaded by a newbie ( at the time ) who didn't know any better, and although they may ( I've no way to know, of course ) wish to now remove it, they can't ?
We will all agree that such photo content should never make it to the gallery in the first place, but once there......
On the other hand, flagging the profile *should* call it to the attention of the admin, who also should immediately remove it. Whether or not he also chooses to admonish or remove the profile of the original poster is ( in my mind ) another matter. One left to whether or not this particular member has a record of other transgressions.
For me, if I had unknowingly commited a breach of etiquite early on, I'd appreciate the opportunity to correct such transgression and learn from the mistake. Now, if one does not learn, *then* stronger measures are called for.
Of course, I'm known as one who is extremely tollerant of misteaks, yet not at all tollerant of incompetence, or stupidity. If the same mistake is repeated, then I tend to come down hard. The first time, though.... ( as far as I know the first time )
Please do not take my comment as condoning the photo. I do not, by any stretch of imagination.
My intollerance is not so much for the mistake ( assuming it was a mistake ) but for allowing it to remain.
There should be ( perhaps there is now, perhaps not ? ) an "approval" process before anything makes it to the gallery, but we all know that the site develops ad-hoc, so some things must be handled in the breach.
Further, there are FAR too many "random" gallery photos that do appear, and that are clearly copyright another site, taken from somewhere the poster has no ( apparent ) authority to reuse. I'd be very surprised that releases are on file for all of the photos lifted from elsewhere.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!