Irrelevant pictures and movies.

Why irrelevant pictures and movies are tolerated on GWM, I mean showing women and girls without a sufficient muscularity?
Sometimes there is no muscular hypertrophy at all!
I'm sick of "lift and carry" or martial arts (etc.) here without a remarquable muscularity, it should not be tolerated on this website.

Then report them.

I do want to have some number of women who look merely very athletic rather than necessarily muscular on the site to accommodate a range of tastes. However there is a limit to this, both in the (lack of) amount of muscle on display and the number of these pics that's OK to have.

With 800,000 images and 8 moderators it is impossible that these photos are not "tolerated".

What worries me is that since the "Direct to site" option was implemented, pretty faces, big asses (and often flaccid) and fake boobs are getting much higher scores than they deserve. It's a problem because they take away the place of other better girls in the "High Score Today" section. This is very unfair for those of us who upload better photos because we lose visibility. There must be very few users to go beyond the Home and perform more specific searches.

I delete about 10 pictures a day that get direct uploaded that I don't think belong on the site. Also, when an image is deleted from the site this way the uploader is penalized so they will not be able to upload as many pictures shortly afterward. I actually think the direct uploads are generally pretty good, and it requires much less work to maintain than the upload queue.


"Better photos" is very subjective and just because you think a picture is "better" doesn't mean everyone, or even most people, will agree.

What's your username on the main site? You complain regularly on the forums about the uploads, but I don't recall seeing any direct uploads under your name.

I have had several accounts over time but now my name is tuabuela007. Anyway, a few months ago I do not upload new photos to the site due to time constraints.

About the score, I want to say that it was a very wise decision to replace the old score system of 0/10. The new system is much fairer. A clear example is Natalia Trukhina. Before, because of the zero-bombers, she was never in the "high scores". Now it is always. And on the other hand, many skinny women with high scores are no longer seen.

The "direct uploads" was also a good decision, but as a negative consequence I see more skinny with high scores. Although, much better than with 0/10. I do not want to give specific examples... but right now there is a photo with +150 that clearly has been obtained by fake tits and a round ass...

I don't think it's reasonable, objectively, to look at the top score list and conclude that there is not enough muscle to display.

Yes, some of the pictures may not be to your tastes but ultimately that is something you have to accept.

I finally figured out how to upload pictures earlier this year, when the web site design changed over. I view the ability to directly upload as both an honor and responsibility. Yes, I do tend to upload stuff I like, but no skinny beach chicks with fake "enhancements" or anorexic runway models. I also try to find models that I think others will like. Posting as shav6789.

I'm sorry, but I think there are certain images that go beyond the "subjective". It is evident that there are overrated images. Some examples:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

450+ for an image with almost no muscles is something crazy.

But as I said above the problem is the "High Score Today". Very few users should see the "High Score (all time)". The "Direct to site" was a good idea, but it has its disadvantages.