Celebrity Videos - cleaned

[blueoystercult]

Fair points well made

My opinion:

1. Here is allowed too many hosts, most of them is unused so maybe better is to remove some hosts first and then add some new ones?

2. When ImageTwist will be removed/banned this board lose many uploaders; ok, they are posting many shitty images and mods like BOC, Yak or upnorth have many problems exactly with these guys but what we do when they are gone? Who will be active posters?

All you know how i hate these guys but we should choose what will be better for our board not for us..

TBH I know owner of imgcredit for few years, talked with him about his host circa 48h ago but i didnt promise to influence on any decisions here or at another boards.

For me this host may be allowed but i will not be angry when nothing will be changed here.

 

[JimmyKendal]

Warning Virus...

 

[blueoystercult]

Infraction for gesd23: Posted Duplicates

Post: Pointless duplictes
User: gesd23
Infraction: Posted Duplicates
Points: 1

Administrative Note:

Why you have just been infracted

Message to User:

Start at post #184 in the thread and work back.
Stills from under The Skin have been posted in every format and quality standard ad nauseum.
BOC

Original Post:

 

[blueoystercult]

OTB

 

[porncasting]

National portrait gallery

Click here>>Chelina Manuhutu

 

[brankob]

Rita Ora - Wearing a swimsuit in Miami - 12/28/15

 

[blueoystercult]

The robe is see-through, the bikini is visible, in places it flashes a bit more. If we delete this we clear out a lot already approved.
BOC

choppes has reported a post.

Reason:

How exactly does this post make the cut? She's fully clothed. WTF?

Post: Jessica Alba
Forum: Celebrity Pictures
Assigned Moderators: upnorth17, yakovitch, EvolutionSelene, blueoystercult

Posted by: gakon
Original Content:

vacation in Trancoso Brazil, December 17, 2015

​

 

[blueoystercult]

Another rules question

It's generally accepted that we only allow small/medium sized thumbs and that full sized images are proibitted. However as i have just discovered, there is no specific rule for this. The closest we have is
06a. Do NOT include more than one (1) hotlinked (full-size) image in any post.
This is now coming to a head with one poster and could potentially lead to massive problems since we now have a flotilla of cashwhores posting single images filtched from social media sites.
is it not time to specify acceptible thumb sizes in statute?
BOC

 

[blueoystercult]

Infraction for kinex88: POsting full sized images with no skin then debating their removal

Post: Oversized in every way
User: kinex88
Infraction: POsting full sized images with no skin then debating their removal
Points: 1

Administrative Note:

Why I'm infracting you

Message to User:

You were told politely about your mistake without penalty so you would not repeat it, then firmly, but you still thought it wise to be funny, twanging my last nerve.
Not on.
BOC

Original Post:

​

 

[blueoystercult]

Everything you wanted to do about crappy picture posts but were afraid to try

The robe is see-through, the bikini is visible, in places it flashes a bit more. If we delete this we clear out a lot already approved.
BOC

choppes has reported a post.

Reason:

How exactly does this post make the cut? She's fully clothed. WTF?

Post: Jessica Alba
Forum: Celebrity Pictures
Assigned Moderators: upnorth17, yakovitch, EvolutionSelene, blueoystercult

Posted by: gakon
Original Content:

vacation in Trancoso Brazil, December 17, 2015

​

 

[Fergar]

Miley Cyrus - MTV 2015 HD 1080p Oops! Boob



MP4 | 83.5 MB | 1920x1080 | 1 min. 10 seg.

Dead Link Removed/l1bzcaym
Dead Link Removed

 

[blueoystercult]

I take your point about previous posts very well indeed, but in my experience most people have been quite sensible about thumb sizes and don't put up a fight when they step outside boundaries and are asked nicely to keep it small and neat. What made me ask the question was the direct challenge and the assertion that there is no specific rule governing maximum thumb sizes. It didn't help my mood that the pictures in question were of Kim Kardashian. as if my day wasn't bad enough already.
These ideas spread like viruses specially from the click-thru cashwhores vying to draw attention to their posts. I'm already constantly having to fight againts "post stacking", where there are only one or two thmbs per row in a full gallery so that that post comes to dominate an entire page. Now imagine posts of full size embeds. Once one does it they will all try it and if there is nothing in governance to proibit or limit the action we can't stop it without becoming unreasonably dictatorial, a course I am loathe to follow.
As to the social media flood, in my view the only way to disuade it is to change the rule on hosts to curtail Imagetwist etc which,, if my understanding is correct, pay sall amounts for click-thru traffic. I did take barnik8's point well about the reduction in activity, but I can't help wondering if the current activity is what we want anyway. We have very good posters like Ghost and Friend26 who seek out quality to contribute and would almost certainly move seemlessly to imagebam or sharenxs, but they are often drowned out by the endless vomitoria of twitpics, snapchats, "adds" etc most of which we can't disallow because it meets established criteria. We may not be able to ban or disallow such posts but we can disincentivise them by curtiling profit motive. I suspect that by taking the emphasis off such posts to make those quality contributions currently lost in the cacophany more prominent we'll attract more quality posters, the real genre enthusiasts, to the board who may be reluctant to join the Kardashian-Cyrus-Thorne famewhore bandwagon currently being propagated.
It also occurs to me that I have been thinking about this far too much and that my 2016 resolution should be to get a life
BOC

 

[blueoystercult]

We probably should anyways.

Spring cleaning?
I didn't set the benchmarks currently followed and I've tried previously to clarify or redefine them but without success.
What would you suggest?
BOC

 

[blueoystercult]

We probably should anyways.

Spring cleaning?
I didn't set the benchmarks currently followed and I've tried previously to clarify or redefine them but without success.
What would you suggest?
BOC

 

[blueoystercult]

My proposal: what about posts limit per day?

If people have quality stuff to share why curtail that when the real problem is the barrage of crap being flooded to make up a click-thru quota? If you strangle the cash incentive all you're left with are the posters who do it because they are enthusiasts of good pictures of great subjects. That should eliminate the endless regurgitation of Kardashians-Cyrus twitpics

 

[blueoystercult]

And so we come back to square one, and my original query on the possibility of establishing a maximum thumbnail size for image posts.

 

[blueoystercult]

Infraction for gesd23: Posted Duplicates

Post: Elena Anaya
User: gesd23
Infraction: Posted Duplicates
Points: 1

Administrative Note:

Why you have just been infracted

Message to User:

So many duplicates of multiple posts all on the same page as this one submission.
Baffling
Please read the forum rules again. CAREFULLY>
BOC

Original Post:

 

[blueoystercult]

I think we have to accept that social media content is a fact of life now. The question is where and how we draw lines.
I sent the following DM to LARI about his Kardashian flood a while back [this is a text copy, the original having been deleted to clear my message box]

Do we really need any more Kardashian pregnancy pictures? At this point she just looks like she's smuggling a family of pigs in a fishing net and is about as sexy. She's milking the whole thing for all it's worth but do we need galleries of it?
BOC

In Reply to your post add #610

To which he replied

From : -LARI-
To : blueoystercult
Date : 2015-11-08 14:03
Title : Re: Kim Kardashian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK. I respect that

I left the existing galleries alone and thankfully did not see another picture of Her Royal Bloatedness on the board, so the quiet word thing does work sometimes. Similarly when we had the hissy-fit post off about the Cyrus dildo costume I just deleted all of it and they shut up and resumed normal business. So sometimes the big stick works. That's part of the whole discretion thing
I don't think that banning imagetwist will be a panacea to endall ills, but I do think disincentivising the cashwhore posters as best we can will alleviate some of the problem at least. [On the subject of Friend26, I believe he posts much of what others post, to fit in and to supply what is wanted. He messages me often to let me know about problems or issues and seems genuinely to want to be a part of an online community. If the social media tat ebbed away his focus would be drawn to better quality.]
The imagetiwst issue came to a head for me this evening when trying to check this post
http://www.nudecelebforum.com/showpost.php?p=890075&postcount=29
Firefox on which I have installed a popup blocker and ad stopper, would not load it. Chrome which is add-on free, crashed on multiple attempts trying to load it. Finally I opened it in a sandboxed IE browser to be flooded with pop-ups and redirects. It took me nearly 30 minutes to get to the actual image so I replaced it in the post with the same image Dead Link Removed to the board's pimp and host service.
To my mind that experience is ridiculous. It is things like this as much as the tat posted by click-thru profiteers that makes me wonder if this is a hosting service we should be advocating. However, I don't know what the business model of the board is so can't comment beyond these observations.
None of this has anything to do with my primary query however, which is the establishment of a thumbnail parameter. Because different hosts have different sizes it would be hard to set a pixel dimension, but making it clear that small or moderate sized thumbs are preferred and full sized images unacceptable would seem to be a sensible addition to the rules/guidelines.
BOC

 

[blueoystercult]

That's been the problem all along, grey muddy water.
If we're talking now about retrospective clearing of posts like this to redefine the benchmarks of acceptable content though we have to have a starting point. Alternatively we could have a kind of amnesty on existing posts to leave content intact to a certain point but establish new benchmarks and post a forum announcement to make this clear
As an aside I'd also suggest bringing video and picture fora into line to make posting standards less confusing and also to eliminate the endless talk shows and weather reports that are TV tapioca. But that's just me.

 

[blueoystercult]

That's been the problem all along, grey muddy water.
If we're talking now about retrospective clearing of posts like this to redefine the benchmarks of acceptable content though we have to have a starting point. Alternatively we could have a kind of amnesty on existing posts to leave content intact to a certain point but establish new benchmarks and post a forum announcement to make this clear
As an aside I'd also suggest bringing video and picture fora into line to make posting standards less confusing and also to eliminate the endless talk shows and weather reports that are TV tapioca. But that's just me.