Page #2
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5
New Comment Rating: 1 Similar topics: 1.The STAR CHAMBER 2.Sneaker Photo Update 3.Why does he keep visiting my page? 4.The perverse joy of getting a member deleted 5.Here's a thought regarding the infamous Star Chamber "message"... Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
And when you mention to the reporting member that they have offered no proof, they get irritated, like "what the what are you talkin' about"?
Evidence provided by the whistle-blower is a convenience; LACK OF SAID EVIDENCE DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE REPORT, NOR THE ALLEGED INFRACTION. Any member voting on the basis that no evidence was handed to them is in dereliction of their duties and should have their voting privileges revoked.
Any member voting without due diligence on their behalf is likewise misusing their privilege and should be prevented from having a say.
All reports determined to be valid should be elevated to the Admin for final arbitration and disposition.
In the instance I am referring, the whistle-blower CLAIMED that a male member was posting pictures of a female without her knowledge. That's a mighty big accusation and the whistle-blower only provided evidence after a series of back and forth messages.
He-said/she-said exchanges (esp. in private) can never be decided by users of the site; only the Admin would have the ability corroborate such a claim. Any such abuses should be reported to the Admin directly and exclusively his domain; the abuse panel is not an appropriate venue to vet such reports.
Admin should again have final adjudication as to the appropriate action.
Your concerns are valid, perhaps you should provide admin with your thoughts and concerns on the matters that need to be improved and do so via private message or post them here and perhaps he will make the appropriate changes.
I've said, here in this very thread and to the Admin directly, that abuse reports should not lead to immediate deletion but to a 'suspension' and review by the Admin. This action would, I feel, greatly reduce the issues that present themselves among voters on abuse reports.
But this does not exculpate voting members of the responsibility to properly research before voting, nor to recognize the limits of their abilities and responsibly pass along their duties, as warranted.
What I can say is that there seems to be a drop-off in referrals as well as members being deleted for some cockemamie reason. I'm not sure if that is because all the riff raff was previously deleted OR whether the panel members are or are not doing their due diligence.
You are correct in what you say,but it is too much to expect from your 'average member' most people don't live here...
Type: **** Images Member CA$HGOETTIN Reported by **** at 23,Aug 10:44 Rating: -2
Explanation: Member is looking for PAID sex...
Please note the reason/explanation of the referral is because the SYC member is "looking for PAID sex..."
If you visit the reported member's page, she states that she is a "cash princess" (whatever that means).
The voting is somewhat mixed only because the voting members don't know whether it is against the site guidelines to use SYD/SYC as an avenue to sell something, whether it be sex, dirty underwear, etc.
This is in part, a recent response to message exchanges between admin and I. He said; "Consider this site a free for all club or cafeteria and I'm just it's manager. When you go to drink coffee to Starbucks with your friends, you do not need a set of instructions, you just need a common sense. Well, at least I hope this is so... And if every visitor uses common sense you won't even see a manager. They appear only when there is some trouble or service problem. And that's how I would like to be here - only be called when there is a real problem...."
My common sense tells me that Craigslist would be more suited to meet the needs of a "cash princess" but I voted ABUSE HAS NO GROUND.
--------------------------------------- added after 12 hours
I was hoping that admin would comment on this.
If I see "the member sells used panties" in the complaint I just ignore it. If I see "the member spams with proposition to buy used panties" - I will verify and if I find more than a couple of such messages I will surely ban the account.
--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutes
As long as you don't Spam it. You can sell and advertise whatever the hell you want.
Also, a handy hint for folks who post their pics on multiple sites: If you are posting a pic of your junk here which you have previously posted on another site, crop the picture to eliminate that site's watermark before posting it on SYD. Trust me, that little measure will save you from a lot of hassle in the long run.
I can see what JustWill is saying but it's a shame if people have to go to these lengths to avoid the "web-derived-image" accusation!....whilst not denying there will be spurious accounts here, we are all adults so can we not be left to make our own minds up?....
Members who post here and elsewhere are all tarred with the same brush, it would seem! Grr!!
Second part ,I'm gonna have to disagree Will,just because of my personal views...I'm here to have a laugh,show my stuff ,chat with open minded people and all those pics with watermarks from other sites confuses things....
Cropping pics is not necessary if you are actually the person who owns the pics,also it's more likely that a pic has been taken from another site without that persons consent...
If you are on another site with the same pics,it's easy to show you are the account holder just log in and take a screenshot of your username on that site...
I would rather talk to genuine people.not just a fake,having images with watermarks from other sites just makes me stay away from those accounts...
I would rather the site is known for it's genuine members than all the crap to do with fakes....I can spot them,so it's not really a big deal for me...
But I'm just highlighting my own views on this.
I've heard there are some members who have received private messages sent with the intention of updating them on who's "bad".
Have they gone past their "sell by" date?
I'd really like to see THAT list.
They sound like the kind of folks I'd like to hang out with.
I wonder if the group received an updated message stating that there are actually 8 bad guys now?
Number of members whom **** has blacklisted: 8
Just because you can no longer see when people explain why you are an
Over the many years that I've been a member, there has been a good amount of dialog and concern over Photoshop pictures. Do you have an opinion on Photoshop? Where is line drawn? How different OR is there any difference in the member(s) who enhances their "goodies" versus the member who inserts their face(?) and uses the body of another?
Type: Copyright/Stolen Member Gayboy122 Reported by **** at 29,Feb 20:27 Rating: 3
Violating Images:
Explanation: This is undoubtedly copyrighted material. I recognize several on the men in this photo, in particular Langdon Conrad, standing, second from right.
ABUSE HAS NO GROUND 29,Feb 23:01 By **** No comment presented
DELETE THIS MEMBER 01,Mar 00:13 By ****
internet pix, booo
DELETE THIS MEMBER 01,Mar 00:25 By ****
all over the net
DELETE THIS MEMBER 01,Mar 05:21 By **** No comment presented
DELETE THIS MEMBER 01,Mar 05:42 By eduard99
Where is bella?
I decided to send eduard99 the following private message;
Mar 1, 06:24 bella!: No need for you to be concerned about where I am at, continue to send gifts and messages of adoration to the fake profiles, the men posing as women.
Poor eduard99's feelings must be very, very tender because ol' eduard99 blacklisted me. What's the matter eduard99, did you get all hurty about spending 100 points and then sending the roses to a fake profile? What's the matter, you can dish it out but can't take it?
WTH!?#@?! Surely you've noticed the member who enjoys being naked and posts pictures of themself with their only friends, their beloved dogs. How is it that "they" are able to justify that their pictures are appropriate but the other member's pictures are not?
🐝🐝🐝
Spot the difference ????????
This is the fast track scenario, a brand new SYC member uploads 4 pictures and 1 picture was found by you-know-who on the Internet. You-know-who posts a message on the member's wall requesting that she removes "web derived" picture as that is against site guidelines. The member reads the message, deletes the picture in question, yet you-know-who's cronies still vote to delete. WTF!? What does it take to make these numb nuts happy?
Type: Copyright/Stolen Member **** Reported by **** at 19,Feb 09:31 Rating: -2
Explanation: hello, i've ask of this member to remove a comment he posted under his own name about myself, ask of him to remove nicely no action on his part has been done. this will fall under defamation of character, i've download and took photo shots of his page. need for him to remove all in all not just deducting points as punishment, i like it on here now i'm not feeling cormfortable. really don't want to take legal action on this matter
ABUSE HAS NO GROUND 19,Feb 10:10 By ****;
There was a message written by woopeeweed420 on his profile page alluding to 176, I wrote to him suggesting he deletes it which has been done so problem solved.
Well, well, well.....you-know-who actually wrote for "more details". WHY does you-know-who feel [s]he needs more information for something that is not a matter for the panel to consider AND WHY was the comment edited to remove the fact that s[he] contacted the reporting member for "more details"?
--------------------------------------- added after 10 minutes
Yes, the URL is visible however it is a private picture so we cannot fully grasp the intent of the sender without seeing the conversation. I have attached a portion of the conversation between the two members, they were apparently role playing, he asked her for her name and a face pic. She obliged and when asked whether that was "her", she said yes. Jan 9, 20:30 the_hard_0ne: well...the text structure kinda crashed. is there any better wa to forward you a copy of the conversation? Jan 9, 20:29 the_hard_0ne: Jan 9, 20:18 dirtyandwet: No. What? Jan 9, 20:17 the_hard_0ne: no Jan 9, 20:17 dirtyandwet: Hello Jan 9, 20:04 dirtyandwet: Yes Jan 9, 20:03 the_hard_0ne: and this is you on this pic? ****** so yes, the member did represent an internet picture as being her.
Policing private conversations and uploads is admin's responsibility....no one else's...
--------------------------------------- added after 14 minutes
Didn't you get pissy with John for policing private pictures ?????? oh the irony....you are the female version of John...
I always like your emoticon responses to me,shows I hit a nerve...
--------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
I find it funny how you make no comment in this thread when you are the one leading the way to push for deletion on the panel...hmmm...
My vote to delete was based on admin's guidelines;
If the abuse is not grave please try to convince the member to delete the pics in question before deleting him entirely Last phrase is meant for profiles posting internet porn as internet porn, i.e. who do not pretend to be people on those photos or friends of those people. It is NOT meant for accounts that start their life on the site posting internet porn pretending it's them.
The last sentence, "It is NOT meant for accounts that start their life on the site posting internet porn pretending it's them." is why my vote was to delete. Did dirtyandwet really "post" the picture, no, it was a private picture. Did [s]he "pretend" it was her, yes.
I recognize that sometimes I get it right and sometimes, not but in this instance, I stand behind my vote.
Policing private messages and uploads is what you just did...
Does admins guidelines cover private uploads ?if you stand behind your vote you should be banned from voting on the panel for what you just did...
Admin doesn't censor private correspondence so what gives you the right to do it ? you get so pissy when John does exactly what you just did,and I would call him out on it too,so I am doing it to you in fairness....it was a horseshit call in my view....
New Comment Go to top