i have my partners pic in here, we dont like to show our faces to people in any site as we have friends that dont know we are nudists,me mostly wife home nudist,well i put hers on no head, showing everything eles,i put mine up and was deleted,so i put 2 more in and they were deleted ,mmmmmmmmm something not right,as you say guidlines ,there are not anythat are consistant.
talking of ass pics,what about a lady in here that has her ass pic and also showing her vagina in it from the back,also female leg spread i must admit she is showing her face but where do you draw the line,nothing offends me except idiots.
Under the photo guidelines, rule five clearly states; "As of 1/7/09 we are no longer approving pictures that contain only genitals,
If you choose not to show your face then you may not show your genitals".
That seems clear enough to me. It's your choice if you do not wish to show your face. You should not expect to show only the parts you want to show. You don't make the rules here.Apparently the person that made the rules decided that you should show all or nothing. If your wife's headless pic slipped past, then that is probably an error rather than an inconsistency.
I did notice that the pics you used as examples belonged to people you have listed as your friends. If those pics do not offend you, what are you complaining about? Those people showed their faces. That is the entire difference between them and you, as I see it.The oddest thing is that I've seen photos that have been uploaded quite recently that show genitalia, but which are cropped at the neck, or where the face has been blurred out. These were uploaded long after January 2009, yet they seem to have made it through.
I'm not offended by them, obviously (because then wouldn't I have to be offended at the ones that showed all that and faces too?), but it does seem strange that some photos are getting through that don't match the rules.
Another reason the need to allow some sort of moderator to handle those things when they're not. Never happen of course. PIP would get most of her pics deleted!
Her photos obviously must generate plenty of revenue for the site owners. There is no other logical explanation for them remaining, after all the years of flagging and complaints.
I have had several of my pictures removed as well. I'm well aware of the rules, and since they were all nude frontal pics I have to assume that the reason was that my penis wasn't completely flaccid. In no case were the pictures taken in sexual context. I could accept that (although I find those decisions somewhat arbitrary), but when I look at the "Gallery" shots it almost appears that completely different guidelines are applied there. Just on the first three pages (sorted by rating) one sees(as of December 5, 2019):
-a naked woman doing a spread-eagle in the snow
-a naked guy doing a spread-eagle on the beach showing, off his cock
-two naked guys with fluffed-up penises, showing off into the camera
-a nude couple walking on the beach kissing, with the guys penis being semi-erect
-a woman with shaved pubic area raising one leg, showing off her vulva into the camera
To be clear, Im not in any way personally offended by any of the above. None of them are explicitly sexual (and I find nothing reprehensible about somewhat suggestive or alluring pictures on a nudist website). But it seems to me that a different, and much harsher, standard is applied to actual personal pictures.
I also have to admit that so far I haven't fully understood the purpose of the Gallery--seems as if some of the pictures of women were actually posted by men, and many users seem to have deleted their profiles. Just eye candy?
n.b. (Dec. 7, 2019): I am still fairly new to this site, and learned more about how it works in the past few days. I have added numerous pictures to the Gallery since then and encountered no censorship or rejection. My comments above should be seen as somewhat uninformed and premature.
What would be useful would be a summary on how the Gallery works, what pictures should be posted there, that pictures are being reviewed and hence won't show up immediately (at least that's what I assume). And and explanation how tagging works (seems that this is done by the administrator, at least I can't see how a user could tag images).
I must disagree with your opinion that posting pix is futile and of reasonable moderation no longer existing. Many examples of varied pictures exist, some of which survive and others dont along with a somewhat wide variance of moderation; it is not perfect but does keep the group somewhat, albeit imperfectly, moving forward. Many folks I have observed are really testing the boundaries while others I think are collateral damage. Its not perfect by any means but given the most probable operating parameters is within reason. Keep reporting, keep flagging & hope for the best.
I have been highly critical of the seemingly arbitrary moderation. As I have thought about it further over the last few years, I have come around to the appreciation of how difficult a job it is. Its not perfect but its a valiant effort. There are clearly pictures throughout that violate the rules. They do not offend me but I get why some people do get upset. Some may have posted similar pictures but have them deleted for violating the rules. Others may be upset because nudism/naturism is supposed to be non-sexual or at least that is what we have to promote to try to win over the doubters. And I suppose the Mastercard police are ever present and ready to pounce should overt sexuality crop up on a site.
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!