Good points made against the filter, has really reduced the joy in a good interaction below the pics for me. Your explanation that comments take up disk space that you're paying for Chainer... really funny. Wonder how many comments equal the size of a 5 second clip on this site.
But maybe it's a good thing to reduce the attractivity of the GWM site, I feel like I spent to much time in here anyways... ;)
Personally, I'd rather not see someone like Eun-hee on the site. South Korean girls go above and beyond when it comes to photoshop and she's one of the most egregious examples. I think it's gross, but I'm also not so self-absorbed as to whine about it if the community feels differently. What makes you think the majority of people agree with you, though? It's so weird that you keep whining like a baby about minutiae when the content is free.
I don't mind if everyone disagreed with me on Eunhee, the point is the community should decide instead of a single person. If she never gets enough votes to make high score again, then so be it. If she does, then that should be fine too. The community should dictate these things. But ultimately, I agree it's not worth arguing over. It's weird you're upset over someone expressing their opinion.
You brought her back after people complained. But shortly after that, I believe you said you were "annoyed that she's back in the high score", so then you completely pulled her from the algorithm. So essentially, the community decided she deserved to be in the high score, and you said no. That's heavyhanded IMHO. I don't know what qualifies as being on the site, but when I search her name, only one photo comes up.
I'm not knocking the work that goes into developing and maintaining this site. My argument is only about the community aspect.
Personally, I'd rather not see someone like Eun-hee on the site. South Korean girls go above and beyond when it comes to photoshop and she's one of the most egregious examples. I think it's gross, but I'm also not so self-absorbed as to whine about it if the community feels differently. What makes you think the majority of people agree with you, though? It's so weird that you keep whining like a baby about minutiae when the content is free.
You do realize that due to the number of people that wanted her back on the site, I put in a decent amount of thought and hours of work into finding a way to make that happen? And that she's currently on the site? Like, of all the examples of heavyhandedness you could think of, you picked one that makes the opposite point of the one you are trying to make?
To those making arguments along the lines of "I have a right to express myself", for example, wollbern:
rob666:
Do you realize that I pay actual, real money for disk storage space for the site, and that your comments take up some of that space? Should you have the right to force me to spend money to store your comments in my database?
Regarding this comment by superiorgenetics:
Usually when someone complains about the filter I look up their pre-filter commenting history as well as their comments that were rejected by the filter (which I keep a record of) and I can attest to the fact that not once have I thought "Oh man, the filter is totally messing up here, having all these comments be on the site would definitely add interesting discussion to the site".
Yes, the filter occasionally rejects a comment that I would prefer it didn't, and even more frequently it approves comments that I would prefer to have rejected. But I have never seen a case where a significant portion of a user's comments are getting rejected and it is the filter that is completely off base.
You brought her back after people complained. But shortly after that, I believe you said you were "annoyed that she's back in the high score", so then you completely pulled her from the algorithm. So essentially, the community decided she deserved to be in the high score, and you said no. That's heavyhanded IMHO. I don't know what qualifies as being on the site, but when I search her name, only one photo comes up.
I'm not knocking the work that goes into developing and maintaining this site. My argument is only about the community aspect.
Honestly, I want to know what makes for a good comment on images. Barring questions about who she is, or if she's competing again, or whatever.
It's hard to exactly describe it, but one way of getting at it is, "Could bots have made these comments?" In other words, was there some amount of original thought put into them?
Here are some examples I just found of decent threads:
This discussion of muscular girls now vs. the past:
Specific comments referenceing parts of the video:
Doesn't matter that the community wants Eunhee on the site. The admin doesn't, so that's that.
You do realize that due to the number of people that wanted her back on the site, I put in a decent amount of thought and hours of work into finding a way to make that happen? And that she's currently on the site? Like, of all the examples of heavyhandedness you could think of, you picked one that makes the opposite point of the one you are trying to make?
To those making arguments along the lines of "I have a right to express myself", for example, wollbern:
I feel restricted in my freedom to form opinions
rob666:
No comment should ever be rejected. PERIOD!
Do you realize that I pay actual, real money for disk storage space for the site, and that your comments take up some of that space? Should you have the right to force me to spend money to store your comments in my database?
Regarding this comment by superiorgenetics:
I've never had a comment rejected and it's not like I'm writing essays. You guys who complain the loudest must be writing absolutely inane tripe to consistently have problems with the filter.
Usually when someone complains about the filter I look up their pre-filter commenting history as well as their comments that were rejected by the filter (which I keep a record of) and I can attest to the fact that not once have I thought "Oh man, the filter is totally messing up here, having all these comments be on the site would definitely add interesting discussion to the site".
Yes, the filter occasionally rejects a comment that I would prefer it didn't, and even more frequently it approves comments that I would prefer to have rejected. But I have never seen a case where a significant portion of a user's comments are getting rejected and it is the filter that is completely off base.
I’m not a woman and I still don’t want to be subjected to reading low quality filler comments.
I propose that anyone making a “this comment filter sucks” post should be required to include their comment that was filtered. I feel that context would explain many of the cases.
I haven't had anything filtered. But I generally don't leave comments unless I have a question or can answer one.
What's wrong with just ignoring people that only say "wow she's hot"?
Just speaking for myself, but I feel it would be more palatable if this were the only instance of a heavy-handed approach. Instead, it's just one of many.
Based on that, I would say it's better without the automated filter. What percentage of women are actually signing up and reading comments? Probably less than the number of members disappointed with the constant restrictions.
I am going to wade in here and hopefully not inflame things even more.
I rarely moderate comments, but when I do it is because certain contributors forget how to be civil. Commenting in a forum thread is one thing, while in image comments it should be treated as if you were speaking in front of the model in real life. If you were in their position you’d surely get annoyed at put downs and disrespectful commentary. Maybe to the point of walking away from the establishment that helps showcase them?
GWM tries balancing free comment with not letting it get out of hand, to the point of yet another model asking to not be associated with the site. In any private establishment there is notion of accepted behaviour.
I can appreciate the auto-comment moderation system has its flaws, but then again so does any moderation system, whether human or machine based.
One thing I’d ask you to consider is which is worse: no moderation, with risk of losing more models, or an imperfect moderation system that helps stem the loss of models.
I've never had a comment rejected and it's not like I'm writing essays. You guys who complain the loudest must be writing absolutely inane tripe to consistently have problems with the filter.
Then the filter must work related to people 🤔... or you've just been lucky so far 🤷🏼♂️🙋♂️😉
From a broader perspective, this is an interesting dynamic. Based on old comments, which I'm sure in part prompted this new filter, many people here enjoy being dominated and are generally submissive. I'm curious if that manifests itself outside of admiration for FBBs. If so, it would be hard to argue with the moderation style.
Or maybe half the community agrees with the decision?
The more I look at this, the more it seems that the critics are just utterly stupid. There are many, many, many different reasons to terminate a discussion that has got out of hand or is not going anywhere. But the critics usually consider zero reasons or one reason at best, conclude that there is no reason or that the only one they could imagine must be it and then start complaining.
Usually you should assume that any decision here has 50 % for it and 50 % against it, unless proven otherwise. Just like in American democracy, except that decisions made here are real.
But at least stop with the idiotic I did not get my way ergo there is no community. It's not the be-all and end-all of anything anyway. Eventually both stupid and smart communities get what they deserve.
It's a bit ironic to question other people's intellect while getting overly emotional and immature in response. To clarify in simpler terms, I specifically stated, "your thread has been sufficiently answered", for a reason. I'm not referring to situations where discussions were out of hand, OT, or becoming heated. I'm specifically referring to situations where mods have closed threads solely because they felt a sufficient answer has been given, or there was nothing left to discuss. Try not to cast stones when struggling with basic reading comprehension.
I've never had a comment rejected and it's not like I'm writing essays. You guys who complain the loudest must be writing absolutely inane tripe to consistently have problems with the filter.
Doesn't matter that the community wants Eunhee on the site. The admin doesn't, so that's that.
Or maybe half the community agrees with the decision?
Mods will decide if your thread has been sufficiently answered and will close it at their discretion.
The more I look at this, the more it seems that the critics are just utterly stupid. There are many, many, many different reasons to terminate a discussion that has got out of hand or is not going anywhere. But the critics usually consider zero reasons or one reason at best, conclude that there is no reason or that the only one they could imagine must be it and then start complaining.
They can run it how they want, but the way its run really makes the community aspect of the site almost pointless.
Usually you should assume that any decision here has 50 % for it and 50 % against it, unless proven otherwise. Just like in American democracy, except that decisions made here are real.
But at least stop with the idiotic I did not get my way ergo there is no community. It's not the be-all and end-all of anything anyway. Eventually both stupid and smart communities get what they deserve.
LectricBoogaloo said:
I mean, it's just people sounding off about their love of muscular women.
It's either this sounding off or meaningful discussion. Like I have said elsewhere, if you are looking for fighters or armwrestlers and search in the comments, 90 % of your hits are someone's fantasies and 10 % at most are information on the person in the picture.
Also, they do not love muscular women, neither any other thing in reality. They love something that's completely in their imagination and I see no reason why they should circulate that love through the comments.
I'm replying in part to Zarkle's misinterpretation about what I said. I'm genuinely not interested in participating anymore, so I'll briefly restate what I meant as an attempt at clarity and then I'm done. I would not comment at all if I thought that Chainer's intentions were bad, because then my comment could serve no productive purpose.
I think that Chainer's intentions are good. I just think that the solution is misguided. I liked it better before when I thought that nobody took the comments that seriously and offensive comments just got reported and removed when necessary. Knowing that Chainer and the mods take comments that seriously just makes me not want to comment at all. I mean, it's just people sounding off about their love of muscular women. Combined with being attacked by mods in forums, and even one angry private message from a mod when I had not done anything wrong or even communicated with him, these things left me disappointed and killed my desire to participate.
It is what it is. I'm sure the site will do just fine without my participation. So you'll have one less person saying things like, "I thought that Heather Policky was the GOAT for quads until I saw Julia Caceres." No biggy. I'll still visit GWM daily. Take care. :o)
The mod and admin team decides everything, to the point it's extremely overbearing. Mods will decide if your thread has been sufficiently answered and will close it at their discretion. It's not up to you if you're satisfied with the answer or have more to discuss. Doesn't matter that the community wants Eunhee on the site. The admin doesn't, so that's that. They can run it how they want, but the way its run really makes the community aspect of the site almost pointless.
But, take the good with the bad. The bad community is worth the organized photos/videos the site offers. Until a competitor comes along anyway. I just find it funny that the moderators have enough time to shut down discussions, (inaccurately) spot people who have had work done and remove them, remove people who they suspect to be misgendered, remove transgenders, remove photoshopped images, etc, but getting underaged children off the site is too much to ask.
Sadly, anytime someone speaks out against the filter, they get attacked and I insulted yet again.
If only they were speaking out against it, like some brave freedom fighters or whistleblowers, telling everyone how the filter emperor has no clothes, leading us merry men in the name of the king against the evil mod of Nottingham.
Instead of that we see tantrums, lots of whining and all kinds of false accusations. Saying this like it is is no attack or insult.
None of these brave souls ever offer any real alternative. Though they might simply realize that the decision is not up to them and that there are perfectly good reasons for the filter. Also if they found the reasons to be beyond their pay grade, they should especially refrain from making too much useless noise.
wollbern said:
It is an unbelievable paternalism from the mods and absolute censorship...
It is an unbelievable paternalism from the mods and absolute censorship to only allow certain comments...I feel restricted in my freedom to form opinions...that has nothing to do with the actual purpose of this site, to have fun and his Expressing joy and reading other comments from fans, but also criticizing when it is appropriate, but factual and constructive...especially since, through this censorship or (filter), the attractiveness of the site suffers greatly... I think, this site is absolutely no fun anymore, for the user and me...😶😤
I still love looking at images, but the site's no fun anymore now that I know how judgmental the mods and Chainer are.
—I prefer strawberry ice cream to chocolate ice cream.
—Why are you so judgmental against chocolate ice cream?
—Yeah! How dare you attack chocolate ice cream that way?
—Indeed! Why all this hate against chocolate ice cream?
—You would probably hunt down and destroy all chocolate ice cream if you could.
There is yet another word people use without knowing what it means and what it implies. In other words, that the mods and Chainer are acting out of an evil sentiment. You simply can not reason with anyone who reduces things down to sentiments. And false accusations.
It must be the seventh wonder of the Internet and a testament to the power of these bodies how so many have managed to get off here without having ever grown a pair. Maybe their secret was to announce it every time? And now it's ruined.
What would it look like if you were fairly judged by strangers? Your wording implies you would welcome that.
But I assume you simply dislike the idea of anyone being told what to do. That is, you hate rules in general, not just evil rules.
Maybe this was their goal all along? Sadly, anytime someone speaks out against the filter, they get attacked and I insulted yet again.
There it is, the ominous “they”; in this case, of course, not so ominous, they are the evil admins and the evil admins are them. What is ominous about them are their motives, you might know their names, but what about their reasons, their nature? They are, after all, suppressing you and not even taking your ~whiny complaints~ brave resistance seriously, instead these scheming creatures attack and insult you.
So, you conclude, evil they must be. Luckily this narrows the set of possible reasons down, though you can of course no longer take their explanation at face value. Reading Bulldog‘s reflections, you find yourself nodding along in a max of anger and sadness, then, in the last sentence, an idea starts to form in your head… What if this was their goal along?
Seriously, what goal due you attribute?
To make you stop commenting? Well, if you are unable to pass the quality threshold than yes, that was the goal but this is hardly new as this was the filters expressed goal.
I am trying to think of any other goal the filter could have had, but non of them, I am afraid, make sense. So could you please expand on the goal behind the filter as well as your use of they (as it sounds somewhat conspiratorial).
Edit: Dear mods, if you feel me taking the piss is inappropriate, feel so free to remove this infantile comment. I won’t be mad, I just struggle to take this kind of criticism seriously
Log in |
Register
Good points made against the filter, has really reduced the joy in a good interaction below the pics for me. Your explanation that comments take up disk space that you're paying for Chainer... really funny. Wonder how many comments equal the size of a 5 second clip on this site.
But maybe it's a good thing to reduce the attractivity of the GWM site, I feel like I spent to much time in here anyways... ;)
If the comment function is causing so much contention, why even have it at all? Save your server space.
Thanks, I thought it was Eunhee, that's my mistake.
I don't mind if everyone disagreed with me on Eunhee, the point is the community should decide instead of a single person. If she never gets enough votes to make high score again, then so be it. If she does, then that should be fine too. The community should dictate these things. But ultimately, I agree it's not worth arguing over. It's weird you're upset over someone expressing their opinion.
https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/images/?name=...
Personally, I'd rather not see someone like Eun-hee on the site. South Korean girls go above and beyond when it comes to photoshop and she's one of the most egregious examples. I think it's gross, but I'm also not so self-absorbed as to whine about it if the community feels differently. What makes you think the majority of people agree with you, though? It's so weird that you keep whining like a baby about minutiae when the content is free.
You brought her back after people complained. But shortly after that, I believe you said you were "annoyed that she's back in the high score", so then you completely pulled her from the algorithm. So essentially, the community decided she deserved to be in the high score, and you said no. That's heavyhanded IMHO. I don't know what qualifies as being on the site, but when I search her name, only one photo comes up.
I'm not knocking the work that goes into developing and maintaining this site. My argument is only about the community aspect.
It's hard to exactly describe it, but one way of getting at it is, "Could bots have made these comments?" In other words, was there some amount of original thought put into them?
Here are some examples I just found of decent threads:
This discussion of muscular girls now vs. the past:
Specific comments referenceing parts of the video:
Mildly amusing comments about her dress:
Tall1:
You do realize that due to the number of people that wanted her back on the site, I put in a decent amount of thought and hours of work into finding a way to make that happen? And that she's currently on the site? Like, of all the examples of heavyhandedness you could think of, you picked one that makes the opposite point of the one you are trying to make?
To those making arguments along the lines of "I have a right to express myself", for example, wollbern:
rob666:
Do you realize that I pay actual, real money for disk storage space for the site, and that your comments take up some of that space? Should you have the right to force me to spend money to store your comments in my database?
Regarding this comment by superiorgenetics:
Usually when someone complains about the filter I look up their pre-filter commenting history as well as their comments that were rejected by the filter (which I keep a record of) and I can attest to the fact that not once have I thought "Oh man, the filter is totally messing up here, having all these comments be on the site would definitely add interesting discussion to the site".
Yes, the filter occasionally rejects a comment that I would prefer it didn't, and even more frequently it approves comments that I would prefer to have rejected. But I have never seen a case where a significant portion of a user's comments are getting rejected and it is the filter that is completely off base.
Honestly, I want to know what makes for a good comment on images. Barring questions about who she is, or if she's competing again, or whatever.
I haven't had anything filtered. But I generally don't leave comments unless I have a question or can answer one.
What's wrong with just ignoring people that only say "wow she's hot"?
Just speaking for myself, but I feel it would be more palatable if this were the only instance of a heavy-handed approach. Instead, it's just one of many.
Based on that, I would say it's better without the automated filter. What percentage of women are actually signing up and reading comments? Probably less than the number of members disappointed with the constant restrictions.
I am going to wade in here and hopefully not inflame things even more.
I rarely moderate comments, but when I do it is because certain contributors forget how to be civil. Commenting in a forum thread is one thing, while in image comments it should be treated as if you were speaking in front of the model in real life. If you were in their position you’d surely get annoyed at put downs and disrespectful commentary. Maybe to the point of walking away from the establishment that helps showcase them?
GWM tries balancing free comment with not letting it get out of hand, to the point of yet another model asking to not be associated with the site. In any private establishment there is notion of accepted behaviour.
I can appreciate the auto-comment moderation system has its flaws, but then again so does any moderation system, whether human or machine based.
One thing I’d ask you to consider is which is worse: no moderation, with risk of losing more models, or an imperfect moderation system that helps stem the loss of models.
Then the filter must work related to people 🤔... or you've just been lucky so far 🤷🏼♂️🙋♂️😉
From a broader perspective, this is an interesting dynamic. Based on old comments, which I'm sure in part prompted this new filter, many people here enjoy being dominated and are generally submissive. I'm curious if that manifests itself outside of admiration for FBBs. If so, it would be hard to argue with the moderation style.
It's a bit ironic to question other people's intellect while getting overly emotional and immature in response. To clarify in simpler terms, I specifically stated, "your thread has been sufficiently answered", for a reason. I'm not referring to situations where discussions were out of hand, OT, or becoming heated. I'm specifically referring to situations where mods have closed threads solely because they felt a sufficient answer has been given, or there was nothing left to discuss. Try not to cast stones when struggling with basic reading comprehension.
I've never had a comment rejected and it's not like I'm writing essays. You guys who complain the loudest must be writing absolutely inane tripe to consistently have problems with the filter.
Tall1 wrote:
Or maybe half the community agrees with the decision?
The more I look at this, the more it seems that the critics are just utterly stupid. There are many, many, many different reasons to terminate a discussion that has got out of hand or is not going anywhere. But the critics usually consider zero reasons or one reason at best, conclude that there is no reason or that the only one they could imagine must be it and then start complaining.
Usually you should assume that any decision here has 50 % for it and 50 % against it, unless proven otherwise. Just like in American democracy, except that decisions made here are real.
But at least stop with the idiotic I did not get my way ergo there is no community. It's not the be-all and end-all of anything anyway. Eventually both stupid and smart communities get what they deserve.
LectricBoogaloo said:
It's either this sounding off or meaningful discussion. Like I have said elsewhere, if you are looking for fighters or armwrestlers and search in the comments, 90 % of your hits are someone's fantasies and 10 % at most are information on the person in the picture.
Also, they do not love muscular women, neither any other thing in reality. They love something that's completely in their imagination and I see no reason why they should circulate that love through the comments.
I'm replying in part to Zarkle's misinterpretation about what I said. I'm genuinely not interested in participating anymore, so I'll briefly restate what I meant as an attempt at clarity and then I'm done. I would not comment at all if I thought that Chainer's intentions were bad, because then my comment could serve no productive purpose.
I think that Chainer's intentions are good. I just think that the solution is misguided. I liked it better before when I thought that nobody took the comments that seriously and offensive comments just got reported and removed when necessary. Knowing that Chainer and the mods take comments that seriously just makes me not want to comment at all. I mean, it's just people sounding off about their love of muscular women. Combined with being attacked by mods in forums, and even one angry private message from a mod when I had not done anything wrong or even communicated with him, these things left me disappointed and killed my desire to participate.
It is what it is. I'm sure the site will do just fine without my participation. So you'll have one less person saying things like, "I thought that Heather Policky was the GOAT for quads until I saw Julia Caceres." No biggy. I'll still visit GWM daily. Take care. :o)
The mod and admin team decides everything, to the point it's extremely overbearing. Mods will decide if your thread has been sufficiently answered and will close it at their discretion. It's not up to you if you're satisfied with the answer or have more to discuss. Doesn't matter that the community wants Eunhee on the site. The admin doesn't, so that's that. They can run it how they want, but the way its run really makes the community aspect of the site almost pointless.
But, take the good with the bad. The bad community is worth the organized photos/videos the site offers. Until a competitor comes along anyway. I just find it funny that the moderators have enough time to shut down discussions, (inaccurately) spot people who have had work done and remove them, remove people who they suspect to be misgendered, remove transgenders, remove photoshopped images, etc, but getting underaged children off the site is too much to ask.
luvembuff said:
If only they were speaking out against it, like some brave freedom fighters or whistleblowers, telling everyone how the filter emperor has no clothes, leading us merry men in the name of the king against the evil mod of Nottingham.
Instead of that we see tantrums, lots of whining and all kinds of false accusations. Saying this like it is is no attack or insult.
None of these brave souls ever offer any real alternative. Though they might simply realize that the decision is not up to them and that there are perfectly good reasons for the filter. Also if they found the reasons to be beyond their pay grade, they should especially refrain from making too much useless noise.
wollbern said:
You must be parodying something.
It is an unbelievable paternalism from the mods and absolute censorship to only allow certain comments...I feel restricted in my freedom to form opinions...that has nothing to do with the actual purpose of this site, to have fun and his Expressing joy and reading other comments from fans, but also criticizing when it is appropriate, but factual and constructive...especially since, through this censorship or (filter), the attractiveness of the site suffers greatly... I think, this site is absolutely no fun anymore, for the user and me...😶😤
—I prefer strawberry ice cream to chocolate ice cream.
—Why are you so judgmental against chocolate ice cream?
—Yeah! How dare you attack chocolate ice cream that way?
—Indeed! Why all this hate against chocolate ice cream?
—You would probably hunt down and destroy all chocolate ice cream if you could.
There is yet another word people use without knowing what it means and what it implies. In other words, that the mods and Chainer are acting out of an evil sentiment. You simply can not reason with anyone who reduces things down to sentiments. And false accusations.
It must be the seventh wonder of the Internet and a testament to the power of these bodies how so many have managed to get off here without having ever grown a pair. Maybe their secret was to announce it every time? And now it's ruined.
What would it look like if you were fairly judged by strangers? Your wording implies you would welcome that.
But I assume you simply dislike the idea of anyone being told what to do. That is, you hate rules in general, not just evil rules.
There it is, the ominous “they”; in this case, of course, not so ominous, they are the evil admins and the evil admins are them. What is ominous about them are their motives, you might know their names, but what about their reasons, their nature? They are, after all, suppressing you and not even taking your ~whiny complaints~ brave resistance seriously, instead these scheming creatures attack and insult you. So, you conclude, evil they must be. Luckily this narrows the set of possible reasons down, though you can of course no longer take their explanation at face value. Reading Bulldog‘s reflections, you find yourself nodding along in a max of anger and sadness, then, in the last sentence, an idea starts to form in your head… What if this was their goal along?
Seriously, what goal due you attribute? To make you stop commenting? Well, if you are unable to pass the quality threshold than yes, that was the goal but this is hardly new as this was the filters expressed goal. I am trying to think of any other goal the filter could have had, but non of them, I am afraid, make sense. So could you please expand on the goal behind the filter as well as your use of they (as it sounds somewhat conspiratorial).
Edit: Dear mods, if you feel me taking the piss is inappropriate, feel so free to remove this infantile comment. I won’t be mad, I just struggle to take this kind of criticism seriously