Poll Replies (8)
|
Replies to the user poll above. |
| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
graymane (Suspended)
|
To me, the question immediately comes to mind:
How does one know if, indeed, the removal was actually at the model's request? And how would I know for sure if she had anything to do with it at all.
I know models do have enough muscle to be heard, and maybe influence changes, but despite her drawing appeal, she's still but a small spoke in a big wheel.
|
04-18-14 01:43am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
I'd be mildly to very disappointed, depending on what I already knew or at least wanted to know, unless the model didn't interest me at all.
|
04-18-14 04:36am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
pat362 (0)
|
I have never seen this so I can't comment.
|
04-18-14 08:54am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
LPee23 (0)
|
So, this is my poll, and this is an issue that I have been aware of at many sites, ranging from large networks to small operations. Webmasters are probably more aware of this issue than the average customer, because they get requests from models not infrequently for their shoots to be removed. I have mixed feelings about it, but most of the time I feel that it detracts from the entire site. As one example, I visited DDF's 1by-day.com and houseoftaboo.com recently, and found that a bunch of really nice shoots that I had once downloaded as free samples from TGP's were no longer available. Support basically said that they rotate some old shoots out, sometimes at the model's request, and sometimes for other reasons. Most of the time, I feel that it's like buying a used book with some pages missing when I learn that I am not getting everything that was once on the site. Most webmasters that I have talked with feel the same way, and push hard to keep their content up. At first, it might seem unfair to the models to keep their stuff online when they no longer want it there, but remember, they got paid for those shoots. How fair is it to webmasters and customers if the models do the shoots, get paid for them, and then make legal threats to have their shoots removed? This is a very complex issue though. There are a few sites that I would forgive for removing certain models' content. One is ALS, one of my favorite sites, who removed Ember's content out of consideration for her family after she passed away. The other is Abby Winters. I wouldn't take any points from them for removing a small number of models, because it's part of their identity that they are a model friendly site, and they would lose that distinction if they did otherwise. They still push hard to keep shoots up despite frivolous and trivial requests for removal, but they do offer models the opportunity to buy back their shoots, presumably for a significant amount of money, if their removal is very important to them. In these cases, it's a classy move to honor those requests, and you can't really fault the sites. Then again, this is a complicated issue, sites like 21sextury.com that seem to have never removed a shoot do stand out in their own way. One thing is for sure, if I learn that a model wanted her content removed, and I happen to have it already, I am definitely not deleting my personal copies. Maybe you could fault me for that, but I take extra pride in having something in my collection that has since become impossible to get again. How do you guys feel about this?
|
04-19-14 05:42pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
LPee23 (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - graymane :
I usually ask the webmasters if I know that I am missing something. They respond more often than not, and sometimes they are able to make content available on a one-time only basis by request, and other times they can't because of the model's wishes.
|
04-19-14 06:30pm
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Cybertoad (Disabled)
|
Never happened that I notice. Usually it solo models that close or stop updating. Never seen a model removed or asked removal
|
04-20-14 12:01am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
graymane (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #5 - LPee23 :
I have to commend you, LPee ......It certainly can't be said you don't go all-out defending your stance on matters about which you comment...... in this case your recent poll entry.
This is a welcome discovery. Keep up the good work!
|
04-20-14 03:40am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
LPee23 (0)
|
REPLY TO #6 - Cybertoad :
I should add that the place where this happens the most is on the amateur sites with user generated photos and videos, although that's not what I had in mind when I wrote the poll. While most of the stuff on this type of site like amateuralbum.net isn't high quality, there are occasionally great sets of really hot amateurs that get posted. I check frequently, because it's not uncommon for the users there to delete their own photos after a week or two, and many users delete their entire profile within a few years.
Models that have been removed by DDF include Jenny Noel and Julie Silver, as well as about 16 more that I can't name.
There are a small number of models from Abby Winters who have bought back their own shoots for removal. I don't want to dwell on that site too much here, because the topic of these models has already been beat to death on member forums, and Abby Winters is an excellent site despite this, but I will post their names just so that you guys can recognize it if you have one of these rarities. Alana, Jasmin, Jules, Kate, Louise, Mikaela (killed in terrorist attack in Bali), Nikita, Tammy, and Verity. You can't fault Abby Winters for this, they do try hard to keep their content up, and they are coming out with lots of great new stuff.
There was also Ember from ALS as I said before. I think there was a thread started on her topic, and people came out in supports of ALS's decision.
|
04-20-14 05:00am
Reply To Message
|
| *Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies. |
|
