New upload rule

I think it is necessary, currently create a new rule that says, roughly:


Or, more precisely:


Some think that this "rule" is implicit in the sense of place, which is very clear and does not need to appear explicitly. But in fact many users do not respect it. I think the image is enough to prove it:



Obviously, this girl will be a runway model or just a normal woman, but not a Girl With Muscles. And there are many girls like this.

Surely going to happen that the rule is not respected. But I think that could have a little deterrent effect and would help to avoid having more and more girls like this in GWM.

Excuse me for my bad english.

This is not a "normal woman". The definition in the butt and the width of the shoulders should imply some muscle.

@DemoticLemur Your affirmations are ridiculous.

You can find many girls with similar bodies simply walking down the street. In fact my sister has a body, more or less, similar. If that's not be normal...

When you enter in a photo site, are looking to see things, not you come to deduce "implicit" things. In GWM, you come to see the muscles of the girls, and obviously, the girls must have muscles big enough to be seen with the naked eye.

In addition, the musculature "implicit" this girl is that of an ordinary skinny. For example, Gracyanne Barbosa, although nothing amazing, has a much better musculature.

It is nonsense that have girls without muscles in Girls With Muscles. That's why we propose this new rule of moderation.

People want to see different things on the site and the only practical way of handling this is to allow a wide range of pictures.

Right below this thread is one with the opposite request: "Please no more FBBs". If we made new rules to ban either FBBs or the more slightly muscular women, a large portion of the user base would be alienated while the rest of the users would only be marginally happier than before (as their preferences can be found on the site currently, anyway).

The site has decently good functionality to filter the pictures according to what you want to see. Use it.

@Chainer I say this with all due respect, but this girl is not a "slightly muscular girl", just is not a muscular girl, it's just a ordinary skinny.
You can not pretend, as we say in my country, cover the sun with a finger.

I think it is understandable than in  GWM there are rules against some FBB like René Toney too masculine, because they no longer look like girls, but also should have rules against girls who have nothing to muscles.

Is unjust that there are two rules that disadvantage the fbb and that there is no rule that controls the entry of skinny without muscle as this.

It seems reasonable to want to have an extensive catalog of girls, but in the sense that they all have muscles dirferentes sizes and shapes. If any girl is admitted, including muscular, you should rename the site and use a more general.

If by "filter system" you mean the tags, look at the girl I found whit "biceps":



I believe this saturation of random skinny and Brazilian big ass is not good for GWM. You can see my opinion in my post "What it is GWM".

It's not necessary to make a rule saying that women in the uploads must be visibly muscular. The name of the site implies that.

In the case of the picture you put above, we just disagree on whether she's muscular. I think she is; look at her abs and quads especially. I would expect that most people would agree with my assessment (and if that picture got to the site from the voting queue, it seems as though most people did).

By the way, when I am moderating the staff queue I regularly delete images of women who do not seem visibly muscular. But the woman in the picture above passes.

It is also implicit that if this site is for girls should not be admitted René Toney, and there is a rule that supports it. Is unjust that there is no a rule specifying that this site is for girls whit muscles and not for ordinary skinny.

The second girl, I put as an example of the unreliability of the tags. Yes, this girl has a decent quadriceps, but there's nothing biceps...

I think GWM is becoming saturated  of ordinary skinny and Brazilian big ass , and is not good. I've talked about this in my other post, but moderate is increasingly tedious. I remember once I had to give at least 20 times NO to a Brazilian big ass without any muscles... that eventually removes the desire to moderate.

Fair enough. I have added a rule to that effect: "Women in uploaded pictures must show at least some visible muscularity."

The voting queue is meant for filtering out subpar images from the site, so you should expect to find quite a few such images in there. (Thanks for your time and effort spent voting, of course.) I do think your standard for what "muscular" means is more strict than what a great deal of the userbase would agree with, but that's OK because lots of people vote in the queue, not just you.

As for tags, they are set by users and can often be wrong. If you find tags that are wrong please change them.

Thank you for listening to me. This will be very good for the site.

I do not think my opinion about what musuclar be "stricter", simply is consistent, if you go to a page like this, not you come to see ordinary women
or runway models... I think it's some common sense.

About the tags, I try to fix them.  Maybe they should put the tags separately when uploading the image.

By the way, recently I realized that the bold could be interpreted as being aggressive. That was not my intention, simply use to highlight the
most important ideas in the text.

o.0 How did you see width of shoulders in a darkened image with a black top?

But alas kakuzade  René Toney is on the website. So if the fans of extreme bodybuilders get  René Toney, I guess than fans of girls with less muscles should get theirs.