FabSwingers.com > Forums > Fabswingers.com site feedback > Photo rules review please admin xx

Photo rules review please admin xx

Jump to: Newest in thread

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

As I've said before no consistency with what's allowed and what's not

As long as it's legal I cannot fa the life of me see what the problem is

I like fisting fa instance I can list it in my interests but a pic of it was blocked

I have two pics that show a close female friend and me but they were blocked because the other person was showing

When in reality even she can't tell it's her

I really feel that the photo rules need an overhaul

It's an adult site and we are all adults

If it's legal and can be listed in interests then why can we not show the pics?

" too rude" fa a swinging site? Come on admin loosen up

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *j_markCouple over a year ago
Forum Mod

Totteridge/Whetstone

We are reviewing if fisting pics will be accepted.

Others on your pictures is a privacy issue. You need to ensure faces are well blanked, then the pic will be accepted.

Admin x

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

suggested to reupload pics and try again, sorry admin...im not wasting more dongle allowance uploading pics I know to be within fab rules...1st complaint was dealt with swiftly thanks, then the same prob reoccurred.

I dont particualry like the aspect of admin not responding to individual photo enquiries... as for uploading the same pics...well i dont have them... they are still in my rejected list.

the problem isnt really about new upcoming pics..its about pics uploaded from possible 5mths ago or longer, suddenly becoming 'not me' in the pics or someones recogniseable in a pic (hardly likely- as a case of someone in white undies with my hand down her knickers)

are the pics being properly cross referenced...maybe its because i look quite light in some pics as opposed to others?-bbeing a darker variety of guy lol

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"We are reviewing if fisting pics will be accepted.

Others on your pictures is a privacy issue. You need to ensure faces are well blanked, then the pic will be accepted.

Admin x"

The faces were not even showing so I couldn't blank them

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

tats? jewlery ?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"tats? jewlery ?"

No and the strange thing is that one that was accepted had a tat on that I had forgot to cover xx

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *habsMan over a year ago

Fortress of Solitude, Middlesex

"tats? jewlery ?

No and the strange thing is that one that was accepted had a tat on that I had forgot to cover xx

I can understand (to an extent) a pic that there's doubt whether its the person or not, however when the picture is just "boobs" or "bum" or "back of the head", how does anyone know its really that person? I say all such pics be revoked until there's proof its the actual owner of the boobs.

PS: This is also the reason why I personally don't respond to "tit-pics" as attachments,.. yes, I know its a pair of tits - 99% or women have them.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

"tats? jewlery ?

No and the strange thing is that one that was accepted had a tat on that I had forgot to cover xx

Does that count for mens pics of bits too? In which case if Admin are going to personaly verify every picture on the site ( as that what would have to happen if you want pics verifed as the real person on the pic) then can I put myself up to checking out all the men in person who need their cock pics verified ?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *habsMan over a year ago

Fortress of Solitude, Middlesex

"tats? jewlery ?

No and the strange thing is that one that was accepted had a tat on that I had forgot to cover xx

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I have been through this lately about pictures uploaded over a year being rejected. Soapy dont question it just accept it hun, its safer that way.

say hi to the misses hun and paddy see ya soon

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

I think it should be first come first served, we were both first so looks like we are in with a chance

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *habsMan over a year ago

Fortress of Solitude, Middlesex

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

I think it should be first come first served, we were both first so looks like we are in with a chance

That's me in the shit - women don't look at my profile.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *iamondsmiles.Woman over a year ago

little house on the praire

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

I think it should be first come first served, we were both first so looks like we are in with a chance

That's me in the shit - women don't look at my profile."

no but they do send you pms

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *habsMan over a year ago

Fortress of Solitude, Middlesex

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

I think it should be first come first served, we were both first so looks like we are in with a chance

That's me in the shit - women don't look at my profile.

no but they do send you pms

Ah yes,.. about the research...?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

tasts i understand to a degree...jewelery...hmmm- maybe its a case of..making sure hubbies dont recognise cheating gfs/wives??? hehehehehehehhee

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *j_markCouple over a year ago
Forum Mod

Totteridge/Whetstone

"tats? jewlery ?

No and the strange thing is that one that was accepted had a tat on that I had forgot to cover xx

The ones we see that are rejected have faces. They are not full on but privacy has not been protected. If you blank the face completely it makes it easier for the mods and they will be accepted.

Admin x

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *j_markCouple over a year ago
Forum Mod

Totteridge/Whetstone

Just as an overall comment to this thread. We have 4,000+ pics uploaded and reviewed each day and most are fine and accepted. Photos are reviewed because a) it keeps the site safe for users, b) it ensures that laws are complied with, c) it ensures privacy is protected and d) it helps stop fakes and stupid stuff being uploaded.

When it is borderline e.g. faces partially shown, it makes it easier for the mods and in the end for you, if faces are completely blanked. We think this also matters for reasons of privacy.

Very few photos a day are retrospectively rejected but we do have a simple set of rules for photos and we think these are pretty reasonable. Most of the times problems occur that are borderline e.g. faces are partially visible and the photo will be rejected and the uploader will complain. The best bet is to ensure photos are not borderline.

We have taken advice in the past that certain photos are safer not to have on here for the protection of the user uploading them - believe it or not but we're not prudes and we're not stuck up but we want to ensure users are not exposing themselves to breaking any laws.

Hope this helps clarify where we're at.

Admin x

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *habsMan over a year ago

Fortress of Solitude, Middlesex

What about a single (black) male with a photo on his (public) gallery of 2 (white) females playing (and no one else in shot, not even the profile owner) ?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What about a single (black) male with a photo on his (public) gallery of 2 (white) females playing (and no one else in shot, not even the profile owner) ?"

That shouldnt be on, the profile holder should be in the pic too.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ex mad 2Woman over a year ago

kidderminster

Didn't help me when I asked Admin to take off some pics clearly showing my face on someone else's profile! Double standards

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *yrdwomanWoman over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

Sounds like a plan - I can nominate myself to "research" the females?

I think it should be first come first served, we were both first so looks like we are in with a chance

That's me in the shit - women don't look at my profile."

Lies!!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eaven17Man over a year ago

Preston

Admin.. Who is reviewing the photos lately?

I have had previously approved photos that have now been rejected even though others in the photos have had parts of their faces blurred or covered in some way.

Example: Two people in the photo, One is receiving oral and taking the photo, the other is giving the oral and by letting you take the photo has given permission.

Your rejection rules either say that one of person's in the photo is identifiable and the photo needs to be edited (which it was, blurred) Or that You are not in this photo. But I am as I'm receiving the oral and taking the photo!

You see profiles with 3-6 people in then and no faces have been covered al all.

So whoever is reviewing these photos lately need to get a grasp of what people are doing in them and how much editing is actually possible or do we all have to wear bags on out heads to save us the trouble of spending 20 minutes at a time to edit photos enough to only a bed or chair is visible?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *j_markCouple over a year ago
Forum Mod

Totteridge/Whetstone

"Admin.. Who is reviewing the photos lately?

I have had previously approved photos that have now been rejected even though others in the photos have had parts of their faces blurred or covered in some way.

Example: Two people in the photo, One is receiving oral and taking the photo, the other is giving the oral and by letting you take the photo has given permission.

You see profiles with 3-6 people in then and no faces have been covered al all.

If you think the photo is OK by the photo rules just use CONTACT link at bottom of homepage to request a re-review. Sometimes there is a judgement to be made, if it is a privacy one e.g. faces not properly blanked of "others" then we'll err on the site of caution.

If you see photos on the site you think break rules please use report and we'll re-review them.

Over 100,000 photos are added each week. Given each one has to be looked at by a human, there's obviously the potential for mistakes. We're committed to correcting these whenever we're alerted to them

Admin x

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *lem-H-FandangoMan over a year ago

salisbury

I still don't understand face pics being removed for "not being clear". That's the whole point! I don't want a clear photo in my public gallery! This isn't crimewatch!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eady and Willing 9Man over a year ago

Wherever the party is @

It's very common. I had a picture up for weeks..months even until one day it was rejected for the reason. The other persons face was visablie to them. It bloody wasn't as she even said like the new picture but yet admin could tell who it was. Another was a body picture of me who a member must be reported to admin and said it was from the internet. Yeah like I need to take pictures from the net. And do what. Meet someone who then says Oh,thays not you. #EpicFail

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)