Forum
>
Announcements
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Comment likes/scores/recommendations could be a good way to sort comments by quality, rather than just chronologically.
My comment got blocked: "I'll always favorite some "Dirndl-muscle"! ;)"
I don't know if short comments are really so big a problem that you need to have a filter blocking them. I wouldn't make interaction with the community (like with comments) harder though, it will do more harm than good and discourage many people from posting comments. I feel the effect already.
You are completely correct.
> We all have to deal with rejection Cristina. It will make you a better person.π I haven't figured out how the filter works yet either...
haha so you think that's funny?! π€£
Did you get refused on your own pic?! Ouch! That is hilariit...hilarious and sh**. :-)
Chainer-
I am trying to simply post this: Image is from Patti's Instagram @pattiannie_ifbbpro
and it's being rejected. Does that not meet the criteria for some reason?
> How are you defining quality regarding commenting on this site? The definition seems arbitrary to me...
An easy way to approach the issue is to list as many comments as possible that are not quality comments. Then list as many as possible that are. Then draw the line somewhere in between.
Still people keep saying that the problem is offensiveness. My money is on some form of inanity instead. Inane comments outnumber offensive comments at least ten to one.
I remember fondly when I and the guys thought of Fight Club as an exploration into lost masculinity. Well, it kinda is. I later found out that it's an allegory of gay culture. But that's far more obvious in the book than in the movie.
Then the criteria for "quality" should be made explicit before people post. The definition of "quality" is still arbitrary. In fact, if any more of my comments get rejected I will stop using this site and transfer to a competitor. This kind of thing is far better regulated by a human being since we are all human beings using this website and are commenting, subjectively in response to images that have aesthetic appeal. How is that measurable by some clunky, AI bot?
I don't really understand this comment quality filter thing. Why can't we say 'wow amazing bod' or 'what a great flex' or 'fantastic backside'. I mean sometimes I make long insightful posts and sometimes I don't. But... who cares. Sometimes the little comments like 'fantastic peak' is great, because then I can search comments with the word 'peak' and find a great collection of peaked biceps. If a photo attracts a lot of short comments, it's because it's a good photo. So searching on the number of comments is also quite useful. However, when a photo attracts a lot of long comments, it's usually because someone said something political and a debate started. I would prefer to read the short comments rather than the politics, on this site. This site is nice because you can relax and say dumb stuff. As long as it isn't offensive to the people here, it serves a useful purpose.
I worry about the direction of site management lately. Trying to fix things that are not broken smacks of control issues. If you want to improve the site, add more tags, include the lady's name in photograph names, but don't introduce arbitrary algorithms that censor comments. Doing that sort of thing is very very difficult to do properly, even for Google. I can't see a situation where you won't create more harm than good.
I never realised the comments were a problem - there are not thousands of comments being made on each image, not even hundreds, in fact most posts don't have any comments at all and only a tiny fraction would have over 10 comments.
Reporting and removing offensive comments absolutely, but relying on algo hasn't got me sold.
Julian, you miss a point that most of us who post on this site are relatively intelligent. In addition to the endless comments about "wow," "what a woman," "what a flex;" the "dumb stuff" that you seem to like; I suspect that most of us can see and understand the pictures without being "coached"
At least one of the chronic time wasters is now getting more creative with some of his comments as a result of this dialogue.
"I worry about the direction of site management lately....." Well, I don't. This site began at the end of 2008 and is still here, unlike many other sites, particularly pay sites, that have been discontinued. GwM also remains as a free site. I came in around 2016, but have also talked with some here from the beginning.
I do see a problem, but it might not be the same everyone else sees. The nature of the algorithm is not disclosed in order that people would not start attempting to get around it.
At the same time I vaguely know that some people don't want to see any more boings. Some people talk about "too sexual" comments. I have talked about too self-absorbed comments instead.
I wouldn't see a problem in someone saying "whoa, her pelvic floor muscles are strong enough to smash any penis" if there were any truth to it. But at the same time I think it plain dumb when someone says that "she must be strong" or "she must be a fighter" when the question is if she really is or is not. That's most of the time not information on the person or the picture, but just a private fantasy.
At the same time I have noticed that some almost passable, almost descriptive, almost observant and almost neutral comments fail to make it. Maybe that is intentional.
Reporting and removing offensive comments absolutely, but relying on algo hasn't got me sold.
People would maybe do that if they knew what is officially considered offensive. Zero information content, zero effort, private fantasies, sexual innuendo, catcalls, masochistic fantasies or some combination of these?
It's either algorithm or manpower. And manpower will not do it if people either report far too few or far too many comments.
Your constant ellipses make me imagine that you talk like William Shatner.
The overuse of any special effect is bad. If by William Shatner you mean that he tries to make every single thing he says sound extremely important, with strained intonation and heavy, deeply meaningful pauses, then I agree.
Maybe even a few boings here and there would not have been that bad. But after the hundredth time one begins to wonder if maybe the site could offer a complimentary boing below every picture and ignore it when counting comments. And then allow every user to turn it off once it gets old.
Other than that, what the resident Shatner said seemed to me a cheap insult and totally irrelevant at that.
I mean sometimes I make long insightful posts and sometimes I don't. But... who cares.
Sometimes people disagree that a particular discussion should take place, instead of leaving it alone or just participating on the same level with others.
But it's a bit more rare to see a person participate in a discussion while denying that the discussion exists.
This site is nice because you can relax and say dumb stuff. As long as it isn't offensive to the people here, it serves a useful purpose.
To some people that is a contradiction. To some dumb is offensive. At least if it is avoidable.
Hey Zarkle,
I wasn't giving you stick (grief) by the way. Being lewd is not an issue for me as long as it's not inappropriate (vagueries I know).
But calling others idiots etc are definitely no-nos or at least should be in my opinion. My $0.02c.