3rd Stream Photo wrote:
somebody please help me figure this one out. I just had this removed from the POTD contest (no points given thankfully) for the usual “at least one mature image element” thing, with the suggestion that I post it in the 18+ POTD…can you imagine the laughs that would get?

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 95-big.jpg

I personally think there are many images that are mature by our site standards, but would probably not fare well in our 18+ image contest where gratuitous nudity tends to be rewarded with more votes. 

For anyone out there who is unsure, in the case of the image above, we can see the outfit is sheer, as we can see her panties through it.  But we cannot see any indication of her wearing a bra.  So if she moved her arm, her breast would be too visible.  Our site-wide mature image rules include nudity or sheer nudity that is blocked by an arm or leg or other body part.

I agree with the first statement you made. On the second one I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic. If she moved her arm we might see her breast? In a still image??

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
I agree with the first statement you made. On the second one I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic. If she moved her arm we might see her breast? In a still image??

I'm not being sarcastic.  We don't allow "hand bras" or "arm bras" or similar.  So if the mature element is being blocked from view by a body part, but we believe it would be visible behind the body part, then it is considered implied nudity and mature for the contest.

EG:
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/1 … 7afb7b.jpg
This is mature and not eligible for the regular POTD contest because she is not wearing a bra or other clothes covering her nipples, even though we cannot see her nipples because her arm blocks our view.  In your image, the model is wearing a sheer outfit.   It is the same sort of situation, though with sheer clothing instead of no clothing.

Erin Koski wrote:

I'm not being sarcastic.  We don't allow "hand bras" or "arm bras" or similar.  So if the mature element is being blocked from view by a body part, but we believe it would be visible behind the body part, then it is considered implied nudity and mature for the contest.

EG:
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/1 … 7afb7b.jpg
This is mature and not eligible for the regular POTD contest because she is not wearing a bra or other clothes covering her nipples, even though we cannot see her nipples because her arm blocks our view.  In your image, the model is wearing a sheer outfit.   It is the same sort of situation, though with sheer clothing instead of no clothing.

Yes, the naked model would show her nipple if she were posed in a different way, but she’s not. However, since she’s not wearing a top, and she’s covering her breasts on purpose with her arms, even though I   think it’s a stretch for a model website I get it. In my image though the model is simply posing, not purposely covering her breasts, the outfit appears to be much more sheer than it is, and there are sequins covering her breasts as well as other important parts. She is a large breasted woman and this “sheer” outfit in a different image doesn’t even show her cleavage because it’s not actually anywhere near fully sheer. I mean at this level of scrutiny it’s like we can see that she’s a female, strike one. She’s curvy and attractive, strike two. IF she were to take off her clothes, and IF she posed in an entirely different way, we MIGHT be able to see her nipples, STRIKE THREE!! In other words they can’t let my image into the competition because my model, dressed differently and posed differently, (which is the exact equivalent of an entirely different image) might show her nipples. I get you’re trying to help me understand, and I do sincerely appreciate it, but this is beyond ridiculous, especially when you look at todays beautiful POTD winner.

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
Yes, the naked model would show her nipple if she were posed in a different way, but she’s not. However, since she’s not wearing a top, and she’s covering her breasts on purpose with her arms, even though I   think it’s a stretch for a model website I get it. In my image though the model is simply posing, not purposely covering her breasts, the outfit appears to be much more sheer than it is, and there are sequins covering her breasts as well as other important parts. She is a large breasted woman and this “sheer” outfit in a different image doesn’t even show her cleavage because it’s not actually anywhere near fully sheer. I mean at this level of scrutiny it’s like we can see that she’s a female, strike one. She’s curvy and attractive, strike two. IF she were to take off her clothes, and IF she posed in an entirely different way, we MIGHT be able to see her nipples, STRIKE THREE!! In other words they can’t let my image into the competition because my model, dressed differently and posed differently, (which is the exact equivalent of an entirely different image) might show her nipples. I get you’re trying to help me understand, and I do sincerely appreciate it, but this is beyond ridiculous, especially when you look at todays beautiful POTD winner.

From our perspective it would not require her to change outfits for the image to be mature.  Her body type or appearance also did not matter, though you are right that being female does matter - as male nipples are not considered "mature" for the site.   If you disagree about the sheer nature of the outfit, please respond to the message you got, with a link to another image of the same outfit on the same model, that shows how not sheer it is from the front.  There is nothing wrong with asking for a decision to be reviewed.  Sometimes our decision changes with additional information. 

What we were able to see was a sheer outfit, a model not wearing a bra, and nipple blocked from view by arm.  That is why it was not allowed in the POTD contest.

Erin Koski wrote:
From our perspective it would not require her to change outfits for the image to be mature.  Her body type or appearance also did not matter, though you are right that being female does matter - as male nipples are not considered "mature" for the site.   If you disagree about the sheer nature of the outfit, please respond to the message you got, with a link to another image of the same outfit on the same model, that shows how not sheer it is from the front.  There is nothing wrong with asking for a decision to be reviewed.  Sometimes our decision changes with additional information. 

What we were able to see was a sheer outfit, a model not wearing a bra, and nipple blocked from view by arm.  That is why it was not allowed in the POTD contest.

What a bunch of BS... you have been disqualified for what we can't see... what might be there... How do these people become moderators? Modifiers would be a more apt term...

What about a nipple blocked from view by a bra?

Erin Koski wrote:

From our perspective it would not require her to change outfits for the image to be mature.  Her body type or appearance also did not matter, though you are right that being female does matter - as male nipples are not considered "mature" for the site.   If you disagree about the sheer nature of the outfit, please respond to the message you got, with a link to another image of the same outfit on the same model, that shows how not sheer it is from the front.  There is nothing wrong with asking for a decision to be reviewed.  Sometimes our decision changes with additional information. 

What we were able to see was a sheer outfit, a model not wearing a bra, and nipple blocked from view by arm.  That is why it was not allowed in the POTD contest.

So this image that leaves you to assume the model is nude , less than sheer, and for all any of us knows there’s a nipple hiding out behind that arm, this image is perfectly fine (and to be completely fair it’s a wonderful image and it deserved to win) for the POTD competition? https://www.modelmayhem.com/contests/po … iew/767479 This image belongs in the competition but so does the one I posted and countless others.

What about a nipple blocked from view by a bra?

I bet you know the answer to this question already,  because lots of images in the contest include women wearing opaque bras or bikinis.

If the model is wearing standard, non-sheer clothing that covers the mature elements, it is fine.

A model with only suspenders covering her nipples or only a necktie covering her nipples would not be allowed.

A model wearing a bra or swimsuit that covers nipples and does not have too much breast showing is okay. What is too much?  If the bra is made of sheer material, but the nipple is covered by a small piece of opaque fabric or embroidery or similar,  is probably too much. Ask a moderator before submitting.

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
So this image that leaves you to assume the model is nude , less than sheer, and for all any of us knows there’s a nipple hiding out behind that arm, this image is perfectly fine (and to be completely fair it’s a wonderful image and it deserved to win) for the POTD competition? https://www.modelmayhem.com/contests/po … iew/767479 This image belongs in the competition but so does the one I posted and countless others.

If the model could reasonably be wearing a tube top over her nipples,  as in the image you've linked,  then it is okay. If it's borderline or you aren't sure,  please ask before submitting.

Erin Koski wrote:
If the model could reasonably be wearing a tube top over her nipples,  as in the image you've linked,  then it is okay. If it's borderline or you aren't sure,  please ask before submitting.

How can you be sure the model had a tube top on? And if it was borderline e or if I wasn’t sure I wouldn’t have submitted it period. And on the off chance I just missed something and submitted something that wasn’t allowed, and had received a reasonable explanation from a moderator I would have apologized and dropped the matter. None of those things have happened in the case of this submission or the explanations I’ve received. Now I’m wondering if I’m not being targeted for some reason as I just received an email that my 18+ submission was rejected and 5 points given because (due to recent changes in the rules) of too much emphasis on the genitals. It’s interesting how I could have placed “too much” emphasis on the model’s genitals when they were so completely in shadow you can barely tell they even show when zoomed in as close as you can get. https://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/ … 18-big.jpg

Erin Koski wrote:
Yes it's the same. We have been evaluating images the same way for about a year now.

The current rules have been in place about a year.

,

The debate about the forum rules is never ending in large part because the rules are far too vague. The idea that a nipple is hidden under an arm or whatever makes it mature is simply absurd. Nipples and genitals are covered in most picture = we know they are there. Does that suggest it is an implied nude? I have no issue at all with keeping salacious images behind a wall. But what I suspect many would like to understand is this notion that a nipple is lurking behind a piece of cloth or even protruding against the cloth making its presence known.

Yet what about the idea that violent images are not allowed or need to be marked Mature. On your site you have an image of a man with a pistol pointed at his head, clearly a suicide suggestion. It is not market Mature.  Why not? https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/36353432

Erin Koski wrote:
It wasn't required, but in an abundance of caution I've marked it M.

You considered what I wrote, gave it some thought and took what I think was the correct action. All this without a single snarky remark. Perhaps this is a good model of how this forum is at its best. Thank you.

There is no argument, if even one viewer of that image sees it as a suicide reference, then by simple definition it is  .  .  .  as an aside, one of the actors who portrayed the Joker character did indeed die under less than normal circumstances  .  .  .  what's that old adage about those who live in glass houses  .  .  .

SOS

Erin Koski wrote:
Yes it's the same. We have been evaluating images the same way for about a year now.

The current rules have been in place about a year.

Continuing to use a flawed system without upgrades (for whatever time period) seems a bit senseless now doesn't it!  The wonderful thing about the anonymity that the cyber universe provides, is that one's true identity and background are practically impenetrable, and creates a level playing field for discussion on a full range of topics, and by those with vastly differing experience levels  .  .  .  so, say one participant has curated art/design/photography exhibits nationally and internationally for many years in a wide variety of venues and situations, and has decades of experience traversing the intricacies involved in successfully navigating the culling process that's necessary to creating successful exhibits (auctions, showings, publications, etc .  .  .  ), and the other participant doesn't, does that mean there isn't any common ground?  Hopefully not, having these types of interactions is exactly what the forums should be about  .  .  .  now, when does that next Bowl game come on, I'm in need of some mindless entertainment  .  .  .

SOS

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
somebody please help me figure this one out. I just had this removed from the POTD contest (no points given thankfully) for the usual “at least one mature image element” thing, with the suggestion that I post it in the 18+ POTD…can you imagine the laughs that would get?

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 95-big.jpg

Don't feel too bad. I had this image removed because the mods claimed the top of her leotard was sheer:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/48217828

The model is a dance instructor and had supplied the leotard for the shoot herself. When I told her they were saying the top was sheer, she replied, "What’s that’s crazy lol it has a lining my students wear this style of leotard all the time." She sent photos, holding it up to a light to show it had a modesty panel lining in it, which I sent to the mods. They still wouldn't budge

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
somebody please help me figure this one out. I just had this removed from the POTD contest (no points given thankfully) for the usual “at least one mature image element” thing, with the suggestion that I post it in the 18+ POTD…can you imagine the laughs that would get?

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 95-big.jpg

In my observation,certain photographers get the Green Light with their photo submissions.
You have to be in the "Click"

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 97-big.jpg
I had this photo removed and was given point that led to a 30 day suspension.
And a photo was accepted with the imprint of the model's nipples showing in her top!
I have been a member her for 17 years.

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
somebody please help me figure this one out. I just had this removed from the POTD contest (no points given thankfully) for the usual “at least one mature image element” thing, with the suggestion that I post it in the 18+ POTD…can you imagine the laughs that would get?

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 95-big.jpg

Welcome to Christian Mingle

Images By TC wrote:
In my observation,certain photographers get the Green Light with their photo submissions.
You have to be in the "Click"

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 97-big.jpg
I had this photo removed and was given point that led to a 30 day suspension.
And a photo was accepted with the imprint of the model's nipples showing in her top!
I have been a member her for 17 years.

I could be wrong, and maybe one of the mods will chime in and either correct me or say I'm right, but I think your image was probably considered mature because of how much pubic area is showing (the bottoms appearing to be somewhat sheer), not the top. They've been pretty strict on that.

KenPhoto wrote:
I could be wrong, and maybe one of the mods will chime in an either correct me or say I'm right, but I think your image was probably considered mature because of how much pubic area is showing (the bottoms appearing to be somewhat sheer), not the top. They've been pretty strict on that.

I agree.  The image in question looks like a model wearing sheer lace panties, which show some pubic area through the lace.  We're strict on that.  Nipples poking up through cloth that is thick enough will be fine.  Thick enough means we cannot see any pigment through the cloth.  Most common DQs on this point are wet white cloth, but there are other fabrics that aren't white or wet but are thin enough some pigment is visible through the fabric. Those are considered mature also.

Dorola wrote:
No vag and no anus and they suspened me again. Did I break the rules?

https://www.modelmayhem.com/forums/post/983062

You don't include a link to the image you submitted, but if it's the one I just responded to you on, then it would be this rule:

*Back up or zoom out. Tightly framed images that show genitals won't be allowed.

Erin Koski wrote:
You don't include a link to the image you submitted, but if it's the one I just responded to you on, then it would be this rule:

*Back up or zoom out. Tightly framed images that show genitals won't be allowed.

I challenge you to show me where genitals are in my photo, When you allow this photo

https://www.modelmayhem.com/contests/po … iew/388401

that clearly shows the models genital and reject my photo that doesn't show them, you are unnecessarily biased.

Dorola wrote:
I challenge you to show me where genitals are in my photo, When you allow this photo

https://www.modelmayhem.com/contests/po … iew/388401

that clearly shows the models genital and reject my photo that doesn't show them, you are unnecessarily biased.

The image you've linked (which was allowed) was backed up more than your image.  Feel free to submit an image where the model takes up this much of the composition, and not more.

Your image included labia visible.

MatureModelMM wrote:
Erin, I would like to hear your thoughts as well, based upon the fact that I had one rejected yesterday, which was framed very similar to the photo linked as reference in the post just above this, so I'm curious as well how that one got in when mine didn't.

Here's the one they disallowed, saying it was "too close" but you can't see anything which should be considered offensive, in my opinion.  Even if the photo was taken from a further distance it wouldn't change what is visible and what isn't.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/47802995

Your image is very borderline for closeness.  What we're going to look at here is how close is the top of the image to the top of your head, and how close is the bottom of the image to your crotch.  We would allow an image where the viewpoint was backed up a little more.   

While I agree backing up won't show less than what's already visible, the argument could be made that I could take a close-up of your crotch and that would not be showing any more than what's already visible in this image, but of course we have to have some cut-off for how close is a disqualification and how pulled back is allowable. Your image is close to the line, but a little too tightly cropped.

Erin Koski wrote:

Your image is very borderline for closeness.  What we're going to look at here is how close is the top of the image to the top of your head, and how close is the bottom of the image to your crotch.  We would allow an image where the viewpoint was backed up a little more.   

While I agree backing up won't show less than what's already visible, the argument could be made that I could take a close-up of your crotch and that would not be showing any more than what's already visible in this image, but of course we have to have some cut-off for how close is a disqualification and how pulled back is allowable. Your image is close to the line, but a little too tightly cropped.

I want to know who in the administration of this site that I can contact to get this situation reviewed from a higher level. I have the highest regard for the site implementing the changes a year ago and even suggested it much earlier. However, I believe that you have become over-zelous. I've even had avatars taken down (as mature content) that were easily accepted on Facebook and Instagram. There is something broken here.

Dorola wrote:
I want to know who in the administration of this site that I can contact to get this situation reviewed from a higher level. I have the highest regard for the site implementing the changes a year ago and even suggested it much earlier. However, I believe that you have become over-zelous. I've even had avatars taken down (as mature content) that were easily accepted on Facebook and Instagram. There is something broken here.

It's a frequent complaint that images that are allowed on FB or IG or some other social media site are considered mature on Model Mayhem. That is not going to change unless Google changes its requirements for Model Mayhem's app to remain in the Google Play store.  Our over-zealous approach is specifically due to their requirements.  And we 100% understand these other social media apps are also in their store, but this were the requirements given to Model Mayhem and what we're going to abide by.  We already tried to get something more lenient and we did not succeed. 

Feel free to use our Contact a Moderator and request someone else to discuss it with you, but they are going to have the same information.

Erin Koski wrote:

3rd Stream Photo wrote:
I agree with the first statement you made. On the second one I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic. If she moved her arm we might see her breast? In a still image??

I'm not being sarcastic.  We don't allow "hand bras" or "arm bras" or similar.  So if the mature element is being blocked from view by a body part, but we believe it would be visible behind the body part, then it is considered implied nudity and mature for the contest.



Don't ya hate it when your own words come back ta bite ya in the butt  .  .  .

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 74-big.jpg

.  .  .  beautiful image, very deserving to win the contest, but  .  .  .

SOS

sospix wrote:
Don't ya hate it when your own words come back ta bite ya in the butt  .  .  .

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 74-big.jpg

.  .  .  beautiful image, very deserving to win the contest, but  .  .  .

SOS

I kind of wondered about that one as well. I agree it's a great photo, but it's difficult to know for sure where the model's areola begins, thus not knowing if she's covering it with her arms or if her dress is covering it. I've had similar images rejected because of that exact reason.

It also looks to me (and admit I could be wrong) that the dress goes below the model's left breast. Thus if she removed her arms the left breast would be fully exposed. But don't take this as me wanting the image removed from the contest. I actually think we should give all images similar to this the benefit of the doubt.

KenPhoto wrote:
I actually think we should give all images similar to this the benefit of the doubt.

There in lies a large part of the problem with the subjective evaluation of these images. rather than afford images that are on the edge the benefit of the doubt, the default method is in the negative, ie: we're not certain, so it is removed and the member that submitted it is penalized. Rather than, we're not sure so we will allow it with a warning..

This image submission is a perfect example of the "what we think we see" so it's out process;
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 95-big.jpg
The justification for removal, "we can see the outfit is sheer, as we can see her panties through it.  But we cannot see any indication of her wearing a bra.  So if she moved her arm, her breast would be too visible."

However if you look at her ankle she has a tattoo, and where the tattoo disappears under her outfit at the ankle there is no ink visible through the supposed sheer material. Were her arm to be moved nothing would be seen, the bodysuit is opaque, the color is beige or tan, sometimes referred to as nude. This image is an example of one that should have been given the benefit of the doubt, but that's not how the moderation for this contest works. It's also one of the reasons there are so many complaints and the number of entries has continued to dwindle, members just get fed up and walk away.