Norton: How did this get past my radar, how the fuck did this get past my radar? I must not have been paying attention, I guess Rule 35 does take care of stuff eventually.
Odd combo though, wish it was in color.
craggle: no 'martyr card' intended, he asked and i explained the situation.
but since you want to get into it again: no, i was not 'merely asked to stop uploading non-porn'.
i was threatened with, and then given, a ban because, occasionally, among the loads of porn i, on a regular basis, spent hours uploading, i uploaded the occasional item that was porn but apparently not by some completely unwritten rules that you refuse to make official. you could have simply deleted the pictures you didn't want. or you could have asked politely and treated me as an adult and somebody who's, as i saw it anyway, going out of my way and doing the site a favor rather than somebody you were allowing the privilege of uploading.
instead, you first threatened me with, and then soon after gave me, a ban while i was trying to help the site. i told you before, there is no other way for me to take that: you made it very clear that my uploading was, apparently, 'more trouble than it was worth'. although i do not understand this decision (if you want your site to collect all porn, by WHATEVER definition or standards of porn you wish to use, you would not threaten to punish people who, occasionally upload ambiguous, borderline cases... or at the very least, you'd make those standards very clear and public, something i graciously offered to help you with, even after the insulting ban threat, and you declined... offer's still open, btw), but whether i'm right or wrong on that, i've complied and ceased causing said trouble to the site.
and for the most part, i've done that quietly. except for a brief exchange when i was ribbing you because you didn't seem to be upholding the non-porn rules you claimed were so important for everybody (a discrepancy that's since been corrected, to your credit), i think this is the first time i've mentioned anything publicly on the subject (aside from rather blame-free statements that i retired with no reference to why), and i still continue to help the site in other ways like tagging, reporting problems, etc, and occasionally even directing people's attention towards good pictures that i know are out there and should be here, but haven't been uploaded yet. personally, i think i've been remarkably civil about the whole thing, but if the only way to avoid 'playing the martyr card' in your eyes is to studiously avoid discussing something, even when it comes up in conversation, then i guess i've got no choice but to play it... not telling the truth isn't my style. but if you're sensitive about it, rest assured, unless somebody else asks me about why i won't upload, i don't plan on bringing it up unprompted.
1) because you explicitly said you would not change your uploading habits and
2) you made your own threat that you would not upload anything else if you were banned; I simply called you on it
Upload or don't upload. We don't exactly have a shortage of pics.
We generally don't pay much attention to the uploader when we delete pics.
But when the SAME NAME comes up over and over again for the same violation, we say something about it.
You claim the rules are unwritten, though we have stated them in threads enough times. Most people get the idea. Most of the time, the not-porns are uploaded by newbies. I didn't see many long-time users repeatedly uploading it.
craggle: 1) after you threatened to ban someone who was doing a lot of work trying to help the site, and demanded they do even more work or face a ban for uploading against a completely unwritten rule, yes, in the face of that insult, i decided i wasn't going to do any extra work while attempting to mind read what you will and won't allow because you're either too lazy or too scared to actually put some definitions in the rules. as i've said to you before, the ban threat was a slap in the face under those conditions. if you came to me like an adult, or even apologized after, i'd probably have tried to accomodate you no matter how retarded i felt the rules were (almost every single thing i ever uploaded that you've claimed was 'not porn' would not be allowed on air on US network tv... these were all clearly borderline cases, not violations on some completely well-defined standards of what counts as porn).
2) that was not a "threat", that was a statement of what i already said: if you're going to ban someone who's helping you out, then either you're a complete moron, or you've clearly made the decision that the uploads are more harm than good, and in the face of that decision, i'll stop uploading altogether, because frankly, the thought that the amount of work i put in on a regular basis collecting and uploading porn for this site was valued so little that it's even a question was depressing enough that i don't feel like adding a little more work to the load to meet your high standards, i'd rather just cut out my intrusive uploads. for it to be a "threat" you would have to acknowledge that my stopping my uploads would somehow be a detriment to you or the site, which you've never done.
but let me ask you directly: did you think my uploading was, on balance, causing more harm than good? if so, we're in agreement that i shouldn't be uploading and the statement that triggered your self-defense was a mere statement of fact about why i'm not doing it anymore, and your 'martyr card' crack was out of line. if not, then you should probably provide an alternative explanation to you being a moron for you banning somebody for whose uploads admittedly overall help the site, but apparently not helping quite enough for your tastes, and so you make the decision to replace that little bit of help with 0 uploads and 0 benefit. because that sounds pretty dumb to me.
unless you didn't ban me for that, and just banned me because i pissed you off in the argument via pms, which, fair enough, as i've said to you before, i realize i piss lots of people off. if that's the case, i don't even need an apology, just an acknowledgement that you're not going to ban me for violating unwritten rules by uploading borderline, but arguably still completely valid cases of porn (again, it's not like i ever uploaded a fully clothed pic with no nudity, unless there was also cum on the face or something, there was always clear porn content), while i'm helping the site, and i'd be willing to come out of retirement. there are a bunch of artists and a few characters and shows, who's new rule34 material isn't showing up here, because i seemed to be the only one who would go to the trouble of uploading them, and that does make me a little sad that they're not getting the exposure they deserve. but then, you feel you have no shortage of pics and don't care about whether i upload (kind of a shame that i seem to care about good 34 pics being here than an admin does though!), so saving your ego's probably more important to you than what i might offer. however, in that case, i'd suggest you extend the same "don't care" argument to what i say about the topic when it comes up in a discussion with another user, instead of getting defensive and starting another huge comment discussion. we've got enough of those, too.
and yes, the rules are unwritten unless they're in the rules. the actual rules. "oh they're in threads". that demands that everybody who uploads read every thread, which is retarded on the face of it. and even anyone who sees one of those definitions 90% of the time doesn't know for sure those are current rules or past rules or one random person's opinion at one point in time. if they're that clearly stated in the threads enough times, bite the bullet and put them somewhere in the actual fucking rules, since you think you've clearly written them out enough times. saves a lot of work and a lot of arguing. this entire thread, for example, would have been avoided.
and to counter that argument: because the actual rules on what exactly counts as porn were always unclear, over the years, i've publicly stated my own policy on what i upload, because i do have very clear guidelines in my mind on what does and doesn't cross into the porn territory (although rarely, just accidentally or because the picture is too good to resist, i will upload something that doesn't qualify), which is why i offered to help you codify your own. i posted these explanations publicly several times in response to anon or regular user questions about whether something was porn, on several pictures, in places where admin could easily see them and tell me i'm wrong on that, especially if they were also going to be deleting the pic attached to the discussion, and in fact i've explicitly invited them to do just that. none ever had, until you threatened a ban. not one that i ever saw. neither in a comment, nor a private message (and i've had private messages on other topics, so it's not like they're shy). in a few cases i believe i was even told my reasoning was correct, but my memory's not 100% clear on that... and hey maybe the unwritten rules changed over the years (as we know they have, twice, regarding the butt issue, which i'm leaving out - while 'ass isn't porn' was in place i did try to abide by it), but nobody informed me of those changes (that's the fucking problem with unwritten rules, written rules can merely be actually updated!). until, of course, you threatened to ban me. again, when that happened, i said "fuck that", decided i wasn't going to try to mind read, and just let you make the judgement about whether you thought my uploads were more harm than good (or whether you were going to be a moron, depending on your answer to my question). you made that decision and i've retired. end of story. if you ever change your mind, let me know.
jubilation_t_cornpone: First, to clear the record, you were not threatened with a permaban, just a temp ban. And even then, it was not a direct threat. I said "people have been banned for that", referring to continuing to upload certain stuff after being warned about it.
Balance? How in the hell to you calculate positive vs. negative impact on the site? So if you upload 20K pics and 10K have to be deleted, does that mean you are more valuable than someone who uploaded 15K pics that were all valid?
You go on and on about the effort you expend, but what about the effort involved in removing invalid uploads? That requires effort on the part of TWO people---the user who reports it and the admin who deletes it. So the bad pics are more detrimental that the good pics are beneficial. Not to mention that there is no benefit at all to dupes, because the pic is already on the site.
So yeah, I would prefer a user who uploads a substantial number of pics that STAY on the site to one that uploads a shitload, with a high percentage that are later deleted. The latter person may have a higher number of pics on the site, but the cost is effort on the part of other people. You crow about the effort YOU expend, but care nothing about the effort you cause.
Sure, checking for dupes is a lot of effort. But we aren't talking about dupes, we're talking about "not porn". There's no searching or comparing involved. It's self-contained within the pic.
You may think the rules are unclear, but we have been extremely consistent about visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn. All a person has to do to avoid non-porn violations completely is to NOT UPLOAD pics that don't have those. No fucking effort whatsoever.
I don't care whether you upload any more or not. This is for the readers of the thread, if any.
The_Elder_Troll: @jubilation_t_cornpone: Speaking of all this I apologize for constantly uploaded ABP's or DNP's I can never fucking find them, than I upload, and somebody else finds it on the site... Though I haven't uploaded any DNP's lately. Anyways in point being an apology.
jubilation_t_cornpone: No prob, DNP can be hard, especially when artists don't have a sig or it is just a symbol or someone has removed the sig entirely. In that case, you have to be able to recognize the style. That's comparatively easy with artists like innocenttazlet and RandomRandom, but much harder with many others.
We usually don't give people shit over DNP unless it is fucking obvious like drawn-sex or the other pay sites. It's mostly the newbies who do that, so we just send them a PM telling them to read the DNP list.
craggle: no, you're right, you didn't threaten with a 'permaban', but you still threatened with a ban (of unstated duration). i was doing the site a favor and out of the blue you said i might be punished for doing it. you didn't even say "people who have continued to do it after being repeatedly warned", you said "people have been banned". on the very first interaction we had on the subject, you threatened a ban. that's an insult and when people insult and threaten me, i'm not inclined to do extra work for them, sorry.
as for balance, the question isn't "is a person who uploads 20k and 10k are deleted more valuable than a person who uploads 15k and none are deleted". it's "is a person who uploads 20k valid pics and 10k are deleted more valuable than a person who uploads NOTHING." you made that decision (even though i'm sure the amount of my stuff that was deleted, at least for 'not porn' was very low comparitavely... i don't have actual statistics, but i can't imagine it's anywhere near there, maybe, at the absolute most, 1/5th deleted, but even that's stretching it, and ignore that the uploads that didn't get deleted probably also include a good couple hundred to a thousand pictures that probably would still not be on the site today if i didn't put them there myself), and so i reverted to what you told me was more valuable to the site: someone who uploaded nothing. do you or do you not agree with that assessment?
as for your 'wah wah it costs more work to delete the invalid pics', sure, probably it does, some (not twice as much... because the work a person does seeking out and uploading pictures is a lot more effort than one person clicking a report button, and one person quickly checking it and clicking a delete button), but i guess it all depends on your priorities. do you want a site that collects the most amount of porn possible? or a site that minimizes the amount of maintenence work you have to do? if the first, then you not only value someone who uploads a lot of valid stuff, even if some of it eventually gets deleted, but you also WANT people to not be afraid of uploading borderline cases, you don't WANT to threaten people who do so. you can ask them nicely, but not say "if you don't, you will be banned". because you the more border cases people upload, the more borderline cases on the "porn" side of the line you will have collected and available, and it's better to have a few not-porn cases accidentally lingering around than it is to have a great porn pic not here. in this model, the value of having a pic is way more than the work put in, the people who upload and the people who prune dupes and not porn are both each ultimately adding value to the site with their work, and i value that work on both ends, we're all working to make the site better, but you don't drive uploaders off with threats on borderline cases, because it's ALWAYS better to have a valid pic on the site than not have it. that's what i thought the attitude was before you steered me correct.
now, on the other hand, if you want to minimize your work, well, driving uploaders away with either insults or the fear of a ban (even just temporary) for violating unwritten rules will surely do that, good job! (good news, you can stop sucking up to artists threatening to go dnp... after all, having the pics aren't that important to you guys!... oh, wait, i guess it is a bit of extra work to enforce... yeah, my mistake, i see what you're thinking there. carry on.)
and all of that leaves aside that if you had fucking published your rules, there'd be fewer people uploading whatever you considered not porn, and fewer people reporting both correctly (because the pics wouldn't exist to be reported) and incorrectly (because they don't have an incorrect view of what isn't allowed). if you had it listed in the rules somewhere i know i would have made every effort to follow it from the start. so you only have yourself to blame for the extra work on that front. stop being a bitch and blaming uploaders for not following rules that you REFUSE to put somewhere in the rules list because it makes you do more work. (or, let's be fair: it might not be you. maybe you don't have the authority to make the alteration, and any admin who does has been saying 'no' to it. if so, i'm truly sorry to you personally for the accusation, but everything i say still applies to the site in general and so nothing changes on my end)
and if your priority IS minimizing the amount of work you have to do over maximizing the amount of material you have, then it's another reason i'm not interested in devoting my effort to your cause. the second is a cause i support wholeheartedly, even if we disagreed on the definition of porn. i support it even enough to do the extra work. and yes, it IS a not insignificant bit of extra work, the way i do things, to inspect every pic separately at the time i upload it (often days or weeks after i collect it) and make sure it also meets your vague and unwritten rules instead of my own perfectly reasonable ones... because i'm still always going to collect based on my rules. maybe you handle your collecting in a different way that makes it 'no fucking effort whatsoever', but for me it's absolutely more effort, and i'm willing to go that extra mile for a site that values what i do, but you've made it clear you don't, so why bother? because what REALLY, objectively, takes no fucking effort whatsoever, no matter how it's done? not uploading anything at all. hey, guess what, that's where i am now thanks to you!
and whether admin have been consistent or not internally as to what counts as porn/not porn (and i respectfully disagree, you're nowhere near that, from what i've seen), you sure as fuck haven't been consistent in making it clear to the volunteers doing the work what the rules are, because, in fact, they're not rules. they easily could be rules. wouldn't take much. and when you don't put up the fucking rules but just enforce them invisibly and demand they pay close attention to what gets deleted and what doesn't, or spot the occasional comment you've made in a thread on that topic, you're making it more work for the uploaders... we don't see which pics get deleted and for what reasons, that happens invisibly to us. and so we keep doing work uploading what we think is porn never knowing that you disagree and are deleting it and making that work wasted, at least until you finally get fed up with a particular person and decide to warn them that a ban may be a-coming because we didn't read your minds and every comment thread, that they're going to be punished for violating unwritten rules, and then they're forced to wonder, what other unwritten rules might you punish for?
but right, you don't care whether anyone uploads pics, particularly not me, just as long as we don't make more work for you. so, to bring this back to that absolutely true statement i said to norton that you objected to:
the staff made it clear my uploads are not welcome here, and so i've retired from uploading. hope somebody else uploads the color version you're looking for, and the pics of the artists i've taken a special interest in posting over the years.
Thumper: "This is the way the fucking world ends. Look at this fucking shit we're in man. Not with a bang, but with a whimper. And with a whimper, I'm fucking splitting, Jack". -Dennis Hopper
craggle: ah, but they weren't invalid uploads, cornpone, considering they were porn and there are no rules saying otherwise. :)
and whether they were or not, your actions prove that you certainly don't VALUE any of the upload work very much at all, even when it's the best and porniest of porn.
norton: sorry to hear that. i'm reasonably sure that's where i got it from, so if it's not there, he probably deleted it himself. though, it occurs to me, did you check wwoec, or the wwoec forums? because they are two kind of different entities, a lot of artists don't update their actual wwoec sites very regularly, but post regularly to the artist threads on the forums (the_pitt, the cgi artist who does mostly comic heroes, is another such artist, i have a few pictures of his since i retired that i think haven't made it here either). if you were looking at the forums, also keep in mind that this was probably two or three months ago that he posted the colored version, so it might be a few pages back in the thread and you might have missed it because of that. if all of that doesn't help you find it, i think i've done all i can to point you towards it, sorry.
jubilation_t_cornpone: BTW, craggle, you owe me an apology. Before all of the ranting about the inadequacy of the rules, you ought to have fucking READ them first.
The current version of rule 8 is: "8. If there is under 1 full page of "real" porn of a character, then "soft" porn is allowed until there is enough "real" porn. By "soft", I mean ecchi, topless men, lots of cleavage, etc. Otherwise, visible genitals, visible female nipples, or hardcore penetration of orifices is required."
That was pretty close to what I told you in PM.
And no, I didn't add it just now. Decanter added it a few weeks ago. I don't know if it was in place when we had the PM argument, but it was sure as fuck in place when THIS argument started.
Maybe you should have CHECKED the rules before railing against the rules?
Anonymous4: Aww goddamnit.., I had already commissioned an artist to draw me a picture of a character holding her panties while an updraft blows her dress up. An imitation of "The Seven Year Itch", I was gonna post it here. We can clearly see the curvature of her ass and one buttcheek, but that's it, it's implied that she's exposed. If we show her tits and pussy, the whole feel of the picture will be off. Not only that, I'll have to tell him to trash the whole thing and start from scratch now!
craggle: fair enough, jubilation. if he added it weeks ago, then it wasn't before the initial argument, but it was before this one. and you could have pointed to it then, but instead you continued to refuse that it was needed.
now, when i started this particular argument, i had no NEED to read the uploading rules as they currently stood, since i'm no longer uploading. maybe, as an admin, YOU should have been aware enough about them to point it out straight away! i think this sudden discovery reflects a little more poorly on you than me! but lol, i mean that good naturedly, honestly, i'm actually pleased to see its in there. now, everything else i said still stands, because those rules weren't in place when the incident we were talking about happened.
and i beg to differ, because that's actually NOT the rules you told me, because you told me ass WAS allowed (as long as it was a full on shot "or maybe a bit of an angle", whatever that means"), and ass is not listed in this set of rules (nor is asshole, unless you consider it a genital, in which case, it's poorly worded). has the rule changed, or were you misinforming me? because if i followed what you told me back then, i'd be risking a ban under these rules! way to be "very consistent" in your application of the rules!
furthermore, "nipples" is very ambiguous, because some people consider the aereola part of the nipple (areola alone usually counts as 'not allowed to show nipples' for broadcast tv in the USA), and others don't, so would a visible aereola count, or not? i'd always assumed it had, and never in all the years i'd uploaded had anybody tell me otherwise, but apparently some of the ones you deleted and accused me of failed on that basis.
furthermore the "hardcore penetration" part is silly and redundant, if you can SEE hardcore penetration, then you can see genitals (unless a finger penetrating a mouth counts, but i doubt that). cum on face gets left out from this description, unless that's no longer allowed, but i know it ONCE was, maybe it changed recently but again, kind of puts the lie to the "we've always been consistent" bullshit.
finally, i'd suggest that it's a little poorly placed: the rule itself starts by talking about things that are not porn but can upload if there are few pictures of a particular character... that's what the rule is about. since the rules of what actually IS porn is a bit more fundamental to the site and important to uploaders than the "not porn you're allowed to upload in certain cases", that should be the focus of the rule, or it should get its own rule, particularly since you guys intend to be nazi enough about your definition to occasionally pass out bans over it. as is, it reads like a footnote, easy to skip over especially if you're not planning to upload 'ecchi' stuff.
it needs refining (and, i've actually thought about this significantly when i made the offer to help on that score, i actually do think i can word it in a way that is both brief enough that you can expect people to read it and clear enough that there's not much doubt about what's allowed). but it's a good first step. i still think the rules of what you allow are too narrow and leave out a lot of great stuff that doesn't have any better home than rule34 (and don't use "this is a porn site not a racy site" as an excuse for that because you have rules allowing things that aren't even close to porn in some instances and what actually IS "porn" is always subjective... many places wouldn't consider female nipples 'porn' at all, so unless you're ready to remove all those pictures, admit you're using a very loose definition already and that what you are allowing/disallowing is arbitrary whim), but if that's what the site owners want, that's their choice.
all that being said, i'll still give you that apology:
during this argument i've complained to you about things that were no longer the case (although the rules are inadequately clear and so some of what i said still applies). i apologize for that, unreservedly and unashamedly. i'm certain that it wasn't there during our initial argument, but in the event i'm somehow wrong on that, i'll apologize even more abjectly (and even meekly resume uploading pictures on that basis... unfortunately i think it's going to be almost impossible to prove because there's been so much bad faith that if you suddenly produced evidence i'd have to suspect a trick as being more likely than my own recollections being faulty).
you ever feel you owe me any apology for threatening me with a ban and treating me like all the work i've done over the years had no value to you? doubt it. but it'd be a welcome change.
jubilation_t_cornpone: I'm not really sure of the timetable. I thought the rule was modified weeks ago, Decanter says it was months ago. So the rule may have been present while you were uploading, it may not have been. There's no way of knowing the exact dates involved. There is a "date of last modification" for the rules page, but rules 31 and 32 have been added recently, wiping out the date of the change to rule 8.
Yes, I knew about the clarification of porn in rule 8, having seen it soon after it was done, but I had forgotten about it. Decanter reminded me that we already have a rule for that.
As far as bare-ass-only, we're currently in discussion about that. What I told you was what titanium told me when I first signed on. So that may be added back in.
Since you have said several times you want to write the rules in your image, feel free to send email to make your case. We will at least look at it. No promises on implementing any of it.
Yeah, "visible penetration" and "visible genitalia" is redundant, but who cares? It's not WRONG, just awkward phrasing.
And yes, we need to change it to "genitalia/asshole". Like I said, we are discussing it.
Technically, nipple and areola are two different things. People usually say nipple for both together, but the actual definition of areola is "a ring of color, as around the human nipple". Or "any small circular area, such as the pigmented ring around the human nipple or the inflamed area surrounding a pimple". In other words, around it, not part of it. So the rule does NOT say areola-only qualifies. We may amend it to allow that, we may not.
"way to be "very consistent" in your application of the rules" "puts the lie to the "we've always been consistent" bullshit"
If you reread what I actually said, it was "we have been extremely consistent about visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn". Are you saying we were inconsistent about that? Especially given that nipples and areola are not the same thing? We may have been a little inconsistent about areola, but not about the actual nipples.
The description of porn was placed where it was because that particular rule is already has a description of what is allowed in the relaxed rules for rare characters.
It seems silly to have a rule for "don't upload stuff that is not porn", since that's inherent in the definition of rule34. It's implied that everything on here should be porn.
The detailed description of what is porn and not porn will be placed in the FAQ, not the rules.
Sure, I'm sorry I upset you. For the life of me, I never expected that you would be so sensitive about this. We temp-ban people all the time (two or three days the first time) and I don't think I've ever gotten so much melodrama. Any at all, really. Most people say: "okay, I won't do that again". Which of course was the point of the temp ban.
Not to mention that you didn't actually get a ban, just an indirect hint of one.
How you got the idea that I didn't value the thousands of good uploads is beyond me.
craggle: that's not REALLY an apology, btw. "i'm sorry i upset you" is kind of a fake-apology admitting no actual wrongdoing on your part, and kind of what i expected from you. but it's better than nothing, i guess.
and i still think you don't value the uploaders very highly if you'll threaten to ban someone for helping you a great deal but having a few not-porns on borderline cases. try it out in everyday life, find somebody who does you a favor on a regular basis out of the goodness of their heart, pick on one little bit of that help that inconveniences you and punish them for it. they'll think the same thing, that you're ungrateful and don't value what they're doing. "sure, you've been buying me dinner every week now, but you have garlic breath afterwards so stay the fuck away from me the rest of the day."
(and i did actually get a ban, remember? although as i said before, i suspect that was more because i pissed you off, which, fair enough).
and imho, it is more important to focus a rule around the definition of porn because you're apparently willing to ban somebody for not following that rule, and anything with those consequences deserves top billing. you'll never punish somebody for _not_ uploading ecchi (maybe falsely reporting it, i guess). that's a "as a special bonus, we'll ALSO allow ecchi" exception to the rules, not a rule itself. although the phrase 'rule 8' is probably too engrained in site culture to expect a major change on that score. but honestly, faq or 'actual rules' doesn't matter to me, i've always said that i think that definition needs to be SOMEWHERE, easily accessible that everyone can look at at any time they have a question on it, particularly if you're actually going to ban somebody because they're breaking what is, by its very nature, going to be an ambiguous standard.
as for areola vs nipple - again, technical usage vs common usage will always be a problem (particularly when you mix them up and use both types for different parts of your definition). i'm not saying you actually have to use areola (though my preference is that you do), but you should make it clear, because a lot of people will say "nipple" when they mean "the whole nipple and areola put together", particularly when talking about what they look like. a lot of people aren't even aware there's a separate word for areola!
but yeah, i might take you up on that and write something up, now that you're not discarding the notion out of hand like you were before. i'll even use capital letters when i do! (and, in case you were unclear on that, it wasn't so much that i wanted to 'write the rules', which implies some decision making on my part, i actually was always offering to help you write _up_ YOUR version of what was acceptible, not just mine, to reduce confusion that lead to the argument in the first place... although i might do both as a compare-and-contrast exercise)
as for your quibbling about "visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn" being consistent - i don't think that point was ever in dispute, so it seemed like the only reason to bring it up is if you're trying to say "we've been extremely consistent that it takes AT LEAST visible female nipples or genetalia".
but you know what, since we seem to be on a slightly more amiable basis at the moment, i'll let it slide and just chalk it up to a misunderstanding, and i apologize for harping on it if it wasn't really what you meant.
Anonymous5: I won't, but I've got a shit ton of popcorn if anyone wants some. Honestly one part of me says they should, but another says they shouldn't haha. Its funny seeing these long ass debates after a hard days of work and long searches for porn XD
Anonymous9: none of the "art" posted in this shithole website is even worth, even the good ones are shit quality lol.
this is more of a coming here to laugh at bad shit xD
- Reply
Odd combo though, wish it was in color.
i believe satyq posts on the wwoec forum if somebody else wants to track it down (or any of the others that may have been missed).
- Reply
but since you want to get into it again: no, i was not 'merely asked to stop uploading non-porn'.
i was threatened with, and then given, a ban because, occasionally, among the loads of porn i, on a regular basis, spent hours uploading, i uploaded the occasional item that was porn but apparently not by some completely unwritten rules that you refuse to make official. you could have simply deleted the pictures you didn't want. or you could have asked politely and treated me as an adult and somebody who's, as i saw it anyway, going out of my way and doing the site a favor rather than somebody you were allowing the privilege of uploading.
instead, you first threatened me with, and then soon after gave me, a ban while i was trying to help the site. i told you before, there is no other way for me to take that: you made it very clear that my uploading was, apparently, 'more trouble than it was worth'. although i do not understand this decision (if you want your site to collect all porn, by WHATEVER definition or standards of porn you wish to use, you would not threaten to punish people who, occasionally upload ambiguous, borderline cases... or at the very least, you'd make those standards very clear and public, something i graciously offered to help you with, even after the insulting ban threat, and you declined... offer's still open, btw), but whether i'm right or wrong on that, i've complied and ceased causing said trouble to the site.
and for the most part, i've done that quietly. except for a brief exchange when i was ribbing you because you didn't seem to be upholding the non-porn rules you claimed were so important for everybody (a discrepancy that's since been corrected, to your credit), i think this is the first time i've mentioned anything publicly on the subject (aside from rather blame-free statements that i retired with no reference to why), and i still continue to help the site in other ways like tagging, reporting problems, etc, and occasionally even directing people's attention towards good pictures that i know are out there and should be here, but haven't been uploaded yet. personally, i think i've been remarkably civil about the whole thing, but if the only way to avoid 'playing the martyr card' in your eyes is to studiously avoid discussing something, even when it comes up in conversation, then i guess i've got no choice but to play it... not telling the truth isn't my style. but if you're sensitive about it, rest assured, unless somebody else asks me about why i won't upload, i don't plan on bringing it up unprompted.
I'm surprised you don't have ulcers from all the shit you eat all day.
- Reply
1) because you explicitly said you would not change your uploading habits and
2) you made your own threat that you would not upload anything else if you were banned; I simply called you on it
Upload or don't upload. We don't exactly have a shortage of pics.
We generally don't pay much attention to the uploader when we delete pics.
But when the SAME NAME comes up over and over again for the same violation, we say something about it.
You claim the rules are unwritten, though we have stated them in threads enough times. Most people get the idea. Most of the time, the not-porns are uploaded by newbies. I didn't see many long-time users repeatedly uploading it.
2) that was not a "threat", that was a statement of what i already said: if you're going to ban someone who's helping you out, then either you're a complete moron, or you've clearly made the decision that the uploads are more harm than good, and in the face of that decision, i'll stop uploading altogether, because frankly, the thought that the amount of work i put in on a regular basis collecting and uploading porn for this site was valued so little that it's even a question was depressing enough that i don't feel like adding a little more work to the load to meet your high standards, i'd rather just cut out my intrusive uploads. for it to be a "threat" you would have to acknowledge that my stopping my uploads would somehow be a detriment to you or the site, which you've never done.
but let me ask you directly: did you think my uploading was, on balance, causing more harm than good? if so, we're in agreement that i shouldn't be uploading and the statement that triggered your self-defense was a mere statement of fact about why i'm not doing it anymore, and your 'martyr card' crack was out of line. if not, then you should probably provide an alternative explanation to you being a moron for you banning somebody for whose uploads admittedly overall help the site, but apparently not helping quite enough for your tastes, and so you make the decision to replace that little bit of help with 0 uploads and 0 benefit. because that sounds pretty dumb to me.
unless you didn't ban me for that, and just banned me because i pissed you off in the argument via pms, which, fair enough, as i've said to you before, i realize i piss lots of people off. if that's the case, i don't even need an apology, just an acknowledgement that you're not going to ban me for violating unwritten rules by uploading borderline, but arguably still completely valid cases of porn (again, it's not like i ever uploaded a fully clothed pic with no nudity, unless there was also cum on the face or something, there was always clear porn content), while i'm helping the site, and i'd be willing to come out of retirement. there are a bunch of artists and a few characters and shows, who's new rule34 material isn't showing up here, because i seemed to be the only one who would go to the trouble of uploading them, and that does make me a little sad that they're not getting the exposure they deserve. but then, you feel you have no shortage of pics and don't care about whether i upload (kind of a shame that i seem to care about good 34 pics being here than an admin does though!), so saving your ego's probably more important to you than what i might offer. however, in that case, i'd suggest you extend the same "don't care" argument to what i say about the topic when it comes up in a discussion with another user, instead of getting defensive and starting another huge comment discussion. we've got enough of those, too.
and yes, the rules are unwritten unless they're in the rules. the actual rules. "oh they're in threads". that demands that everybody who uploads read every thread, which is retarded on the face of it. and even anyone who sees one of those definitions 90% of the time doesn't know for sure those are current rules or past rules or one random person's opinion at one point in time. if they're that clearly stated in the threads enough times, bite the bullet and put them somewhere in the actual fucking rules, since you think you've clearly written them out enough times. saves a lot of work and a lot of arguing. this entire thread, for example, would have been avoided.
and to counter that argument: because the actual rules on what exactly counts as porn were always unclear, over the years, i've publicly stated my own policy on what i upload, because i do have very clear guidelines in my mind on what does and doesn't cross into the porn territory (although rarely, just accidentally or because the picture is too good to resist, i will upload something that doesn't qualify), which is why i offered to help you codify your own. i posted these explanations publicly several times in response to anon or regular user questions about whether something was porn, on several pictures, in places where admin could easily see them and tell me i'm wrong on that, especially if they were also going to be deleting the pic attached to the discussion, and in fact i've explicitly invited them to do just that. none ever had, until you threatened a ban. not one that i ever saw. neither in a comment, nor a private message (and i've had private messages on other topics, so it's not like they're shy). in a few cases i believe i was even told my reasoning was correct, but my memory's not 100% clear on that... and hey maybe the unwritten rules changed over the years (as we know they have, twice, regarding the butt issue, which i'm leaving out - while 'ass isn't porn' was in place i did try to abide by it), but nobody informed me of those changes (that's the fucking problem with unwritten rules, written rules can merely be actually updated!). until, of course, you threatened to ban me. again, when that happened, i said "fuck that", decided i wasn't going to try to mind read, and just let you make the judgement about whether you thought my uploads were more harm than good (or whether you were going to be a moron, depending on your answer to my question). you made that decision and i've retired. end of story. if you ever change your mind, let me know.
- Reply
Balance? How in the hell to you calculate positive vs. negative impact on the site? So if you upload 20K pics and 10K have to be deleted, does that mean you are more valuable than someone who uploaded 15K pics that were all valid?
You go on and on about the effort you expend, but what about the effort involved in removing invalid uploads? That requires effort on the part of TWO people---the user who reports it and the admin who deletes it. So the bad pics are more detrimental that the good pics are beneficial. Not to mention that there is no benefit at all to dupes, because the pic is already on the site.
So yeah, I would prefer a user who uploads a substantial number of pics that STAY on the site to one that uploads a shitload, with a high percentage that are later deleted. The latter person may have a higher number of pics on the site, but the cost is effort on the part of other people. You crow about the effort YOU expend, but care nothing about the effort you cause.
Sure, checking for dupes is a lot of effort. But we aren't talking about dupes, we're talking about "not porn". There's no searching or comparing involved. It's self-contained within the pic.
You may think the rules are unclear, but we have been extremely consistent about visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn. All a person has to do to avoid non-porn violations completely is to NOT UPLOAD pics that don't have those. No fucking effort whatsoever.
I don't care whether you upload any more or not. This is for the readers of the thread, if any.
- Reply
- Reply
We usually don't give people shit over DNP unless it is fucking obvious like drawn-sex or the other pay sites. It's mostly the newbies who do that, so we just send them a PM telling them to read the DNP list.
- Reply
as for balance, the question isn't "is a person who uploads 20k and 10k are deleted more valuable than a person who uploads 15k and none are deleted". it's "is a person who uploads 20k valid pics and 10k are deleted more valuable than a person who uploads NOTHING." you made that decision (even though i'm sure the amount of my stuff that was deleted, at least for 'not porn' was very low comparitavely... i don't have actual statistics, but i can't imagine it's anywhere near there, maybe, at the absolute most, 1/5th deleted, but even that's stretching it, and ignore that the uploads that didn't get deleted probably also include a good couple hundred to a thousand pictures that probably would still not be on the site today if i didn't put them there myself), and so i reverted to what you told me was more valuable to the site: someone who uploaded nothing. do you or do you not agree with that assessment?
as for your 'wah wah it costs more work to delete the invalid pics', sure, probably it does, some (not twice as much... because the work a person does seeking out and uploading pictures is a lot more effort than one person clicking a report button, and one person quickly checking it and clicking a delete button), but i guess it all depends on your priorities. do you want a site that collects the most amount of porn possible? or a site that minimizes the amount of maintenence work you have to do? if the first, then you not only value someone who uploads a lot of valid stuff, even if some of it eventually gets deleted, but you also WANT people to not be afraid of uploading borderline cases, you don't WANT to threaten people who do so. you can ask them nicely, but not say "if you don't, you will be banned". because you the more border cases people upload, the more borderline cases on the "porn" side of the line you will have collected and available, and it's better to have a few not-porn cases accidentally lingering around than it is to have a great porn pic not here. in this model, the value of having a pic is way more than the work put in, the people who upload and the people who prune dupes and not porn are both each ultimately adding value to the site with their work, and i value that work on both ends, we're all working to make the site better, but you don't drive uploaders off with threats on borderline cases, because it's ALWAYS better to have a valid pic on the site than not have it. that's what i thought the attitude was before you steered me correct.
now, on the other hand, if you want to minimize your work, well, driving uploaders away with either insults or the fear of a ban (even just temporary) for violating unwritten rules will surely do that, good job! (good news, you can stop sucking up to artists threatening to go dnp... after all, having the pics aren't that important to you guys!... oh, wait, i guess it is a bit of extra work to enforce... yeah, my mistake, i see what you're thinking there. carry on.)
and all of that leaves aside that if you had fucking published your rules, there'd be fewer people uploading whatever you considered not porn, and fewer people reporting both correctly (because the pics wouldn't exist to be reported) and incorrectly (because they don't have an incorrect view of what isn't allowed). if you had it listed in the rules somewhere i know i would have made every effort to follow it from the start. so you only have yourself to blame for the extra work on that front. stop being a bitch and blaming uploaders for not following rules that you REFUSE to put somewhere in the rules list because it makes you do more work. (or, let's be fair: it might not be you. maybe you don't have the authority to make the alteration, and any admin who does has been saying 'no' to it. if so, i'm truly sorry to you personally for the accusation, but everything i say still applies to the site in general and so nothing changes on my end)
and if your priority IS minimizing the amount of work you have to do over maximizing the amount of material you have, then it's another reason i'm not interested in devoting my effort to your cause. the second is a cause i support wholeheartedly, even if we disagreed on the definition of porn. i support it even enough to do the extra work. and yes, it IS a not insignificant bit of extra work, the way i do things, to inspect every pic separately at the time i upload it (often days or weeks after i collect it) and make sure it also meets your vague and unwritten rules instead of my own perfectly reasonable ones... because i'm still always going to collect based on my rules. maybe you handle your collecting in a different way that makes it 'no fucking effort whatsoever', but for me it's absolutely more effort, and i'm willing to go that extra mile for a site that values what i do, but you've made it clear you don't, so why bother? because what REALLY, objectively, takes no fucking effort whatsoever, no matter how it's done? not uploading anything at all. hey, guess what, that's where i am now thanks to you!
and whether admin have been consistent or not internally as to what counts as porn/not porn (and i respectfully disagree, you're nowhere near that, from what i've seen), you sure as fuck haven't been consistent in making it clear to the volunteers doing the work what the rules are, because, in fact, they're not rules. they easily could be rules. wouldn't take much. and when you don't put up the fucking rules but just enforce them invisibly and demand they pay close attention to what gets deleted and what doesn't, or spot the occasional comment you've made in a thread on that topic, you're making it more work for the uploaders... we don't see which pics get deleted and for what reasons, that happens invisibly to us. and so we keep doing work uploading what we think is porn never knowing that you disagree and are deleting it and making that work wasted, at least until you finally get fed up with a particular person and decide to warn them that a ban may be a-coming because we didn't read your minds and every comment thread, that they're going to be punished for violating unwritten rules, and then they're forced to wonder, what other unwritten rules might you punish for?
but right, you don't care whether anyone uploads pics, particularly not me, just as long as we don't make more work for you. so, to bring this back to that absolutely true statement i said to norton that you objected to:
the staff made it clear my uploads are not welcome here, and so i've retired from uploading. hope somebody else uploads the color version you're looking for, and the pics of the artists i've taken a special interest in posting over the years.
- Reply
- Reply
and whether they were or not, your actions prove that you certainly don't VALUE any of the upload work very much at all, even when it's the best and porniest of porn.
norton: sorry to hear that. i'm reasonably sure that's where i got it from, so if it's not there, he probably deleted it himself. though, it occurs to me, did you check wwoec, or the wwoec forums? because they are two kind of different entities, a lot of artists don't update their actual wwoec sites very regularly, but post regularly to the artist threads on the forums (the_pitt, the cgi artist who does mostly comic heroes, is another such artist, i have a few pictures of his since i retired that i think haven't made it here either). if you were looking at the forums, also keep in mind that this was probably two or three months ago that he posted the colored version, so it might be a few pages back in the thread and you might have missed it because of that. if all of that doesn't help you find it, i think i've done all i can to point you towards it, sorry.
- Reply
The current version of rule 8 is: "8. If there is under 1 full page of "real" porn of a character, then "soft" porn is allowed until there is enough "real" porn. By "soft", I mean ecchi, topless men, lots of cleavage, etc. Otherwise, visible genitals, visible female nipples, or hardcore penetration of orifices is required."
That was pretty close to what I told you in PM.
And no, I didn't add it just now. Decanter added it a few weeks ago. I don't know if it was in place when we had the PM argument, but it was sure as fuck in place when THIS argument started.
Maybe you should have CHECKED the rules before railing against the rules?
- Reply
now, when i started this particular argument, i had no NEED to read the uploading rules as they currently stood, since i'm no longer uploading. maybe, as an admin, YOU should have been aware enough about them to point it out straight away! i think this sudden discovery reflects a little more poorly on you than me! but lol, i mean that good naturedly, honestly, i'm actually pleased to see its in there. now, everything else i said still stands, because those rules weren't in place when the incident we were talking about happened.
and i beg to differ, because that's actually NOT the rules you told me, because you told me ass WAS allowed (as long as it was a full on shot "or maybe a bit of an angle", whatever that means"), and ass is not listed in this set of rules (nor is asshole, unless you consider it a genital, in which case, it's poorly worded). has the rule changed, or were you misinforming me? because if i followed what you told me back then, i'd be risking a ban under these rules! way to be "very consistent" in your application of the rules!
furthermore, "nipples" is very ambiguous, because some people consider the aereola part of the nipple (areola alone usually counts as 'not allowed to show nipples' for broadcast tv in the USA), and others don't, so would a visible aereola count, or not? i'd always assumed it had, and never in all the years i'd uploaded had anybody tell me otherwise, but apparently some of the ones you deleted and accused me of failed on that basis.
furthermore the "hardcore penetration" part is silly and redundant, if you can SEE hardcore penetration, then you can see genitals (unless a finger penetrating a mouth counts, but i doubt that). cum on face gets left out from this description, unless that's no longer allowed, but i know it ONCE was, maybe it changed recently but again, kind of puts the lie to the "we've always been consistent" bullshit.
finally, i'd suggest that it's a little poorly placed: the rule itself starts by talking about things that are not porn but can upload if there are few pictures of a particular character... that's what the rule is about. since the rules of what actually IS porn is a bit more fundamental to the site and important to uploaders than the "not porn you're allowed to upload in certain cases", that should be the focus of the rule, or it should get its own rule, particularly since you guys intend to be nazi enough about your definition to occasionally pass out bans over it. as is, it reads like a footnote, easy to skip over especially if you're not planning to upload 'ecchi' stuff.
it needs refining (and, i've actually thought about this significantly when i made the offer to help on that score, i actually do think i can word it in a way that is both brief enough that you can expect people to read it and clear enough that there's not much doubt about what's allowed). but it's a good first step. i still think the rules of what you allow are too narrow and leave out a lot of great stuff that doesn't have any better home than rule34 (and don't use "this is a porn site not a racy site" as an excuse for that because you have rules allowing things that aren't even close to porn in some instances and what actually IS "porn" is always subjective... many places wouldn't consider female nipples 'porn' at all, so unless you're ready to remove all those pictures, admit you're using a very loose definition already and that what you are allowing/disallowing is arbitrary whim), but if that's what the site owners want, that's their choice.
all that being said, i'll still give you that apology:
during this argument i've complained to you about things that were no longer the case (although the rules are inadequately clear and so some of what i said still applies). i apologize for that, unreservedly and unashamedly. i'm certain that it wasn't there during our initial argument, but in the event i'm somehow wrong on that, i'll apologize even more abjectly (and even meekly resume uploading pictures on that basis... unfortunately i think it's going to be almost impossible to prove because there's been so much bad faith that if you suddenly produced evidence i'd have to suspect a trick as being more likely than my own recollections being faulty).
you ever feel you owe me any apology for threatening me with a ban and treating me like all the work i've done over the years had no value to you? doubt it. but it'd be a welcome change.
- Reply
Without spaces.
testing..testing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePFgb1leLEM
- Reply
Yes, I knew about the clarification of porn in rule 8, having seen it soon after it was done, but I had forgotten about it. Decanter reminded me that we already have a rule for that.
As far as bare-ass-only, we're currently in discussion about that. What I told you was what titanium told me when I first signed on. So that may be added back in.
Since you have said several times you want to write the rules in your image, feel free to send email to make your case. We will at least look at it. No promises on implementing any of it.
Yeah, "visible penetration" and "visible genitalia" is redundant, but who cares? It's not WRONG, just awkward phrasing.
And yes, we need to change it to "genitalia/asshole". Like I said, we are discussing it.
Technically, nipple and areola are two different things. People usually say nipple for both together, but the actual definition of areola is "a ring of color, as around the human nipple". Or "any small circular area, such as the pigmented ring around the human nipple or the inflamed area surrounding a pimple". In other words, around it, not part of it. So the rule does NOT say areola-only qualifies. We may amend it to allow that, we may not.
"way to be "very consistent" in your application of the rules" "puts the lie to the "we've always been consistent" bullshit"
If you reread what I actually said, it was "we have been extremely consistent about visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn". Are you saying we were inconsistent about that? Especially given that nipples and areola are not the same thing? We may have been a little inconsistent about areola, but not about the actual nipples.
The description of porn was placed where it was because that particular rule is already has a description of what is allowed in the relaxed rules for rare characters.
It seems silly to have a rule for "don't upload stuff that is not porn", since that's inherent in the definition of rule34. It's implied that everything on here should be porn.
The detailed description of what is porn and not porn will be placed in the FAQ, not the rules.
Sure, I'm sorry I upset you. For the life of me, I never expected that you would be so sensitive about this. We temp-ban people all the time (two or three days the first time) and I don't think I've ever gotten so much melodrama. Any at all, really. Most people say: "okay, I won't do that again". Which of course was the point of the temp ban.
Not to mention that you didn't actually get a ban, just an indirect hint of one.
How you got the idea that I didn't value the thousands of good uploads is beyond me.
and i still think you don't value the uploaders very highly if you'll threaten to ban someone for helping you a great deal but having a few not-porns on borderline cases. try it out in everyday life, find somebody who does you a favor on a regular basis out of the goodness of their heart, pick on one little bit of that help that inconveniences you and punish them for it. they'll think the same thing, that you're ungrateful and don't value what they're doing. "sure, you've been buying me dinner every week now, but you have garlic breath afterwards so stay the fuck away from me the rest of the day."
(and i did actually get a ban, remember? although as i said before, i suspect that was more because i pissed you off, which, fair enough).
and imho, it is more important to focus a rule around the definition of porn because you're apparently willing to ban somebody for not following that rule, and anything with those consequences deserves top billing. you'll never punish somebody for _not_ uploading ecchi (maybe falsely reporting it, i guess). that's a "as a special bonus, we'll ALSO allow ecchi" exception to the rules, not a rule itself. although the phrase 'rule 8' is probably too engrained in site culture to expect a major change on that score. but honestly, faq or 'actual rules' doesn't matter to me, i've always said that i think that definition needs to be SOMEWHERE, easily accessible that everyone can look at at any time they have a question on it, particularly if you're actually going to ban somebody because they're breaking what is, by its very nature, going to be an ambiguous standard.
as for areola vs nipple - again, technical usage vs common usage will always be a problem (particularly when you mix them up and use both types for different parts of your definition). i'm not saying you actually have to use areola (though my preference is that you do), but you should make it clear, because a lot of people will say "nipple" when they mean "the whole nipple and areola put together", particularly when talking about what they look like. a lot of people aren't even aware there's a separate word for areola!
but yeah, i might take you up on that and write something up, now that you're not discarding the notion out of hand like you were before. i'll even use capital letters when i do! (and, in case you were unclear on that, it wasn't so much that i wanted to 'write the rules', which implies some decision making on my part, i actually was always offering to help you write _up_ YOUR version of what was acceptible, not just mine, to reduce confusion that lead to the argument in the first place... although i might do both as a compare-and-contrast exercise)
as for your quibbling about "visible female nipples or genetalia of either gender qualifying as porn" being consistent - i don't think that point was ever in dispute, so it seemed like the only reason to bring it up is if you're trying to say "we've been extremely consistent that it takes AT LEAST visible female nipples or genetalia".
but you know what, since we seem to be on a slightly more amiable basis at the moment, i'll let it slide and just chalk it up to a misunderstanding, and i apologize for harping on it if it wasn't really what you meant.
- Reply
barely any comments about the pic itself
- Reply
this is more of a coming here to laugh at bad shit xD