Uploads

Whoever is the moderator (Phoenixhawk I suspect) that has been approving photos lately is sloppy. The quality of uploads have fallen duplicates have increased.

Something else I noticed, I uploaded and had approved some Kimberly Martin pics  a while back and now those same pics , enlarged and "retouched" by me appear under his name.....

Echo echo echo....I guess no response means somebody is in trouble? I don't care what happens, I just wanted to bring this to the attention of the "staff". I know for a fact I've uploaded some pics, they were approved, disappear and suddenly reappear under a mod. The Kim Martin pics I retouched (no morphing, just cleaning up) are the most recent that come to mind. All I want is a simple acknowledgment.

I'm not staff, but I highly doubt Phoenix is in trouble.

Also, and in all sincerity, this isn't meant to sound harsh as your contributions are undoubtedly highly valued to the community - but, that said - who really cares if you don't "receive credit" for your uploads?  Why does it matter?  You are neither the photographer, nor the model, nor the publisher/copyright holder, and there are no internal incentives, rewards, compensation, or recognition given to image posters (with the possible exception of stars etc - but those can be earned by commenting as well).  Personally, I feel the model deserves the lion's share, and the photographer deserves a bit.  The rest of us didn't do much other than search the web and click "Save Image As..."  I'm sure there is a perfectly logical technical reason for the discrepancy and why the images are listed under a mods name.  Similarly, Chainer is listed as having uploaded over 3,000 images personally, and precocious chap as he may be, I'm sure some of those fall in the same category as what your complaint/question pertains to.  Hopefully that addresses your concerns - you are not the victim of any ill-intentions conspiracy to deprive you of credit.

As for quality declines:  it's primarily contingent on what is uploaded, and what constitutes quality (i.e. aesthetics, in this case) is subjective and there is therefore a divergence of opinion.  Personally, I haven't noticed a marked decline and have seen many nice postings in recent weeks/days.  There may have been complaints as to why too many pictures were not being approved, and perhaps letting more get through is being done in response to that.  Inevitably, site staff is destined to get stuck in a Catch 22 situation - let in too little and hear complaints, or let in "too much" and hear complaints.  By the law of large numbers, I think truly exceptional images would actually go up in number by letting in more, although the average quality may decline due to more mediocre and the occasional lower quality upload.

Duplicates are addressed by either posting to the "duplicates" thread on the forum, to which mods are extremely responsive, and of course by the automated systems.  As human beings, you can hardly place blame on any individual for not having memorized close to 30,000 images - especially when they may not have approved the other duplicate copy in the first place and also because the photos tend to be of a similar nature in the first place.  To err is human and to forgive divine, right?  Innocent mistakes at the very worst.

I've found the operation of this site to be refreshingly equitable and responsible, especially in light of the  high degree of interactivity maintained.  My only hope is that now you see it that way too.  The above comments were intended solely to help give you reasonable assurances that you are not the victim of abuse or exploitation.

I do, however, have a question/concern for you:  Namely, why are you retouching images?  Again, you are not the photographer et al. so why alter the images (other than for fun, perhaps)?  Do we not have a right to see the image as you found it?  It's certainly not a big deal, but it definitely makes me curious.  There is no tag for this, and aside from professionally edited photos, I rather doubt anyone else is engaged in the practice.  Personally, I would prefer un-retouched images whenever possible.  Again, no offense intended, just some honest answers and an honest question.

http://forum.girlswithmuscle.com/index.php?topic=52.0 - this is where duplicate notices go.  hope that helps

lonnieg ...... mosty of us gather in the chat room, not much activity here in the forum, so it may be several days (or even weeks) before anyone even sees it

1st - Duplicates go in the above mentioned thread, or check to the report the image, drop by chat with the link's to both, and the duplicate will be removed. Whatever one of the two with the newest ID# gets deleted, pure and simple

2nd - You are currently the biggest offender of uploading duplicates & poor quality / undersized images.

3rd - We are currently averaging over 500 pictures a day and a large increase in traffic, nobody can honestly remember every pic out of hundreds of thousands of pictures.

4th - http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/images/imgpage.html?imgid=8980 was posted in chat uploaded by the user "Phoenix" which prompted my google fu, and resulted in the upload of a batch of pictures of the lovely Kimberly Martin obtained from http://www.modelmayhem.com/pics.php?id=201078 and another site. So your "retouching" is not only fictitious but a complete & total bold faced lie. And of the batch I uploaded only 2 came back already existing and after the upload only 1 was found to be a duplicate.

5th- I approve based on criteria not setup by me, Nothing from Images of Venus (no matter how great it looks) No Over-Roided SheMales (if it looks too much like a guy its getting canned) No contest pictures (only a few of those get approved and none by me) No orange skin, (This one I'm kinda loose on as long as its a decent picture.) Nobody that appears to be under 14 (Total Judgment call, and I try to avoid these as much as possible)  

Lastly - Someone points out something that is wrong, copy, etc. I'm more than happy to correct it. But nothing gets deleted without proof of the original post. If you know of duplicates do something about them, it can't be delete if nobody else knows about it.  

I may have been haste in my accusations and for that I appologize. I took a petty tact. It's not about who receives credit, it's about honesty. I just want to know what happened to the pics that I RETOUCHED and uploaded, but then they were removed.

As for "retouching", my definition is taking a high quality(high kB), yet small pic and enlarging it, then softening it so it does not look pixelated. I have NEVER ONCE morphered or intentionally uploaded a morphed photo.

PROVE IT
Well, I'm not lying. I don't get my jollies from making something like this up. That is an absurd accusation.
Thank you, good to know

Lets attempt to go down the list.

Yea you did, and fired right back so I'd call us even.

As for proving it, I don't really have to and that was simply based on what I had seen when I went through the queue of 5000+ images when I started modding, and considering all images not approved are deleted what would you like a screenshot of the queue with your imaged check for deny? I mean I can do so, but i fail to see how it would prove anything. Your name comes to mind with a few others based on my limited experience modding here. Alot of people do it, its not intentional I'm sure. But alot of your images that I have done the approve / deny on where in fact too small, or very low res, and a fair number of yours that I had approved in that original monster batch then had to be deleted because they bypassed the duplicate checking script.

As for "retouching" there is no way to enlarge a picture without degrading the quality of the image.
Yes you can take a high rez picture, make it bigger and it still be viewable, but at a lesser quality and half on the board have a cow if anyone touches the image. (even if its something as simple as modifying the background.) while I never claimed you personally morphed a image. It was a comment based on what I had seen up until that point.

Why would you make something like this up? No clue, and it really doesn't matter. You said "Something else I noticed, I uploaded and had approved some Kimberly Martin pics  a while back and now those same pics , enlarged and "retouched" by me appear under his name....."

Someone linked this thread in chat I responded because you asked and because you accused me of claiming your pictures as my own, I knew for a fact where I had gotten the pictures, and knew that off the entire batch, only like 2 images where caught by the script and blocked, and after tagging them all with her name, none had a duplicate. If you had any of those images they had to be removed by someone before that date.  

Typically when I upload its part of my collection gathered from who knows where, or someone uploads a girl I happen to like, TL put a name to the image and I turn on the google foo, dig up a handful of images and upload them to the board. But what I do know for a fact is TL linked the image of her in GWM chat, I goggled her, got the website (which i linked somewhere in my post)  and then uploaded all the ones I thought were good. Now I know that website is not hosting your "retouched" images. So were does the magical "retouching" come from if the images are straight off that website?

Also, resizing, cropping or altering a image in any way from original bypasses the script that checks for duplicate images. Which is what results in duplicates being posted. And unless you have everyone of the 31k+ images memorized your not going to know if its a dup or not, TL does a pretty good job of letting us know if a image is a dup. And I'm more than happy to delete them if anyone tells me any image is a dup and has a link to the original.
However in the event of dups, the newest image is deleted regardless of who posts it, (I've deleted some of chainers and my own) but in the event that the uploaded "dup" is a higher quality image then the original is deleted.

I'm sure I'm missing some part of my argument but I gotta get to work,

So long, and thanks for all the fish.
Phoenixhawk