Working on overhaul of our moderation system

I am currently in the process of overhauling our moderation scoring and removal reasons to make it more fair and transparency in the process.


Deny and Removal Reasons:
These are the current deny and removal reasons we have:

Quote:

Duplicate
Watermarked / Marked
Professional / Celebrity
Bad Quality
Extreme / Gross
Underage
Altered / Photoshopped
Other

We're considering additional deletion reasons to further refine our moderation process. Would love to here what other reasons for for deny we should add.

The deny reasons will also be applied to uploaded images already live, now they only get deleted with no reason or a copyright label.



Making improvements to the user score system will also be a priority. Here's an overview of how it currently works:

Quote:

User Score, Upload Limit, and Priority:
Each member will have a user score, reflecting the quality of their uploads. The user score is calculated using the formula: 100 - (penalty points / number of uploads * 100).

Penalty points are assigned for various reasons:

Duplicate: 0
Watermarked: 2
Professional: 2
Underaged: 4
Gross/Extreme: 1
Bad Quality: 1
Altered/Photoshopped: 1
Other: 0

Based on their user score, members will be categorized into different groups, influencing their upload limit and queue priority:

Group 1 (Score 90 to 100): Queue limit: 1000
Group 2 (Score 70 to 89): Queue limit: 500
Group 3 (Score 50 to 69): Queue limit: 250
Group 4 (Score 40 to 49): Queue limit: 100
Group 5 (Score 20 to 39): Queue limit: 50
Group 6 (Score 0 to 19): Queue limit: 25

New users will start with a limit of 100 until they reach 100 uploads, after which their user score will determine their group placement.

Quote:

Originally posted by Diz-X

Would love to here what other reasons for for deny we should add.

ai-generated, should be given a penalty of 10 points minimum.

Quote:

Originally posted by realwilo

ai-generated, should be given a penalty of 10 points minimum.

The ai-generated falls under Altered/Photoshopped.

I want to balance the penalty points a bit, and the penalty points getting removed after a certain time. Maybe higher the upload limits.

I can't tell much about the upload limits but I can give some insight when it comes to the penalties and the reasons.

Even if some reasons can regroup different sub-reasons, I think we should actually split them to give a better feedback to users. For example many times, members don't understand why their pics got rejected as "photoshopped" even though the pic wasn't, because it was just cropped. So for that reason, I would actually split the "altered/photoshopped" into 3 reasons : "cropped" (picture has been cut) / "altered/photoshopped" (picture has been modified) / "AI" (picture is AI-generated)
I would also split the Underaged section into 3 : Underaged (obviously underaged girl) / Questionably aged (when we're not sure but reject to be safe) / Kid in background. The last 2 would have a lower penalty so it would prevent using underaged for the last 2 (with the big penalty) or "other" which doesn't give much info on the reason
Finally, I would add another reason (I think you mentioned it in another thread somewhere) : "Non consensual" which would regroup pics taken in a private setting where the woman can't have given her consent (sleeping / unconscious etc.) since those are straight up illegal

The end result would be something like this :
Duplicate : 0
Watermarked : 2
Pro : 1 (I would reduce the penalty for pros because nowadays most pros aren't that easy to spot since they're mostly onlyfans models)
Underaged : 4
Questionably aged : 2
Kid in background : 1
Gross/Extreme : 2 (bumping the penalty since those are pretty obvious, but rare anyways)
Bad quality : 1
Cropped : 1 (could also be 0 as it's very hard to know a pic has been cropped but people who mass upload cropped pics would have no penalty so maybe 1)
Altered/Photoshopped : 1
AI generated : 1 or 2
Non consensual : 2 or 3
Other : 0

Quote:

Originally posted by Diz-X

The deny reasons will also be applied to uploaded images already live, now they only get deleted with no reason or a copyright label.

That's a good change indeed!

what's the problem with cropping pics?
say, I've got a pic of my wife w/ my kid in the background. so I'm going to crop it.

Quote:

Originally posted by realwilo

what's the problem with cropping pics?
say, I've got a pic of my wife w/ my kid in the background. so I'm going to crop it.

If it's your own picture and you crop it (for whatever reason) before uploading it, that's fine, it would be considered "original".
The kind of cropping that isn't allowed is taking an existing picture off the internet and cropping it (usually to remove a watermark but not always). So it's an alteration of the original that is already on the internet and thus isn't allowed (otherwise you'd end up with many of the same picture cropped differently in the galleries, since the duplicate system won't detect them, on top of having lower quality pics since cropped stuff is usually lower quality due to the re-encoding after cropping).

Quote:

Originally posted by omuh

Finally, I would add another reason (I think you mentioned it in another thread somewhere) : "Non consensual" which would regroup pics taken in a private setting where the woman can't have given her consent (sleeping / unconscious etc.) since those are straight up illegal

For this reason, I would also recommend removing "creepshots" as part of the description of "candid, voyeur & creepshots", which is currently an accepted moderation option (and a babe forum section).

Quote:

Originally posted by omuh

I would also split the Underaged section into 3 : Underaged (obviously underaged girl) / Questionably aged (when we're not sure but reject to be safe) / Kid in background. The last 2 would have a lower penalty so it would prevent using underaged for the last 2 (with the big penalty) or "other" which doesn't give much info on the reason

I agree with the addition of "underage in background" as some are easily missed when uploading and are genuine mistakes.

I worry that having 2 options describing the main focus of the photo as "obvious" or "questionable" isn't going to change things much, as this is still a subjective opinion.
IMO, it doesn't matter if I think they are "obviously" underaged or "possibly" underaged - they fall into the same category. What I think is "obvious" might look like a 22 year old to another moderator. And what I think is "questionable" might look like a 12 year old to another moderator.
We have long said that we will get some of these decisions wrong, but for safety, we need to be careful. Unfortunately some young looking 20-year olds will be rejected, sure, but there are so many photos being uploaded each day that do we really need to risk it?
There is also the suggestion of underage rejections going into another "pending decision" queue, and once an agreed-upon number of moderators vote the image as being too young in their opinion, it is officially rejected. I have no idea how difficult this would be to implement, but if it's easy enough, I think this would be a good way to approach it. If 3 (or whatever number we decide) separate moderators believe an image is underage, then it's a tough one for the uploader to argue 🤷‍♂️ (could also use a similar approach for "bad quality" I guess...)

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

For this reason, I would also recommend removing "creepshots" as part of the description of "candid, voyeur & creepshots", which is currently an accepted moderation option (and a babe forum section).

Before you add "non-consensual" you better think about all those beach pics where the women are unaware their photos are being taken. Granted, they are in a public setting, but those photos are still 'non-consensual' as far as being posted online.

I guess it depends on what the rules are in a specific region. It used to be that images taken in a public space (such as a beach) were legal (doesn't mean it's morally right of course), which I believe is why Instagram, Reddit, Flickr etc. are full of such images. Whereas I believe the term "creepshot" (and what omuh was referring to earlier) suggest those images of women in a private setting, or when they are asleep/unconscious etc.

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

I guess it depends on what the rules are in a specific region. It used to be that images taken in a public space (such as a beach) were legal (doesn't mean it's morally right of course), which I believe is why Instagram, Reddit, Flickr etc. are full of such images. Whereas I believe the term "creepshot" (and what omuh was referring to earlier) suggest those images of women in a private setting, or when they are asleep/unconscious etc.

Creep shots fall under the category of non-consensual as does any photo taken where the person is not aware they are being photographed. Newspapers have to get a release before posting anyone's photo. I'm sure it's different on the internet, but adding a category of 'non-consensual' could leave this site open to problems.

Again, depends on the region/country. The United States has different rules/regulations to the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Thailand etc. I agree that "creepshots" is basically a way of "non consent", which is why I don't think using that terminology is beneficial movng forward. But I do believe there are differing rules when it comes to taking photos of a woman in a bikini on a beach, or a woman flashing at mardi gras, or woman showing cleavage in the crowd of a sporting event (just random examples here), than to a woman getting changed in her bedroom at home, or a naked woman passed out/asleep on her sofa (some more random examples). All of which are not really consenting to their photos being taken, but if you're in public it's tricky to argue you don't want to be seen.

As he is the owner of the WBW, I would look to Diz for guidance on what is allowed moving forward.

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

I agree with the addition of "underage in background" as some are easily missed when uploading and are genuine mistakes.

I worry that having 2 options describing the main focus of the photo as "obvious" or "questionable" isn't going to change things much, as this is still a subjective opinion.
IMO, it doesn't matter if I think they are "obviously" underaged or "possibly" underaged - they fall into the same category. What I think is "obvious" might look like a 22 year old to another moderator. And what I think is "questionable" might look like a 12 year old to another moderator.
We have long said that we will get some of these decisions wrong, but for safety, we need to be careful. Unfortunately some young looking 20-year olds will be rejected, sure, but there are so many photos being uploaded each day that do we really need to risk it?
There is also the suggestion of underage rejections going into another "pending decision" queue, and once an agreed-upon number of moderators vote the image as being too young in their opinion, it is officially rejected. I have no idea how difficult this would be to implement, but if it's easy enough, I think this would be a good way to approach it. If 3 (or whatever number we decide) separate moderators believe an image is underage, then it's a tough one for the uploader to argue 🤷‍♂️ (could also use a similar approach for "bad quality" I guess...)

Yeah I agree a consensus system would be nice, but that involves developement time and ressources. Other than that, I was thinking about the "questionably aged" addition because it avoids giving the biggest penalty for something that isn't obvious (as you said, someone might look 20 to someone but 17 to someone else and that would fall into the questionably aged category, rather than a straight up underage penalty for something more obvious.
Currently, some will use the "other" reason to reject those, but that then doesn't give info to the uploader.

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Sentinel

I guess it depends on what the rules are in a specific region. It used to be that images taken in a public space (such as a beach) were legal (doesn't mean it's morally right of course), which I believe is why Instagram, Reddit, Flickr etc. are full of such images. Whereas I believe the term "creepshot" (and what omuh was referring to earlier) suggest those images of women in a private setting, or when they are asleep/unconscious etc.

Creepshot usually involves any pic taken without the person being aware of it, so that would include public ones too and technically those would be non consensual too. So maybe instead just add the "unconscious" mention to "gross/extreme" to make it "gross/extreme/unconscious" and have it penalty 2 (since all those are pretty obvious anyway).

Netherlands you are allowed to film on public street without consensus.

Quote:

Originally posted by Diz-X

Netherlands you are allowed to film on public street without consensus.

I think it's like that in most places. You can't legally take a picture up a woman's dress without her knowing, even if she's in public, but generally no expectation of privacy if you're just plainly in public. It's probably a good item to clarify what's meant by non-consensual.

Quote:

Originally posted by dariusslay

I think it's like that in most places. You can't legally take a picture up a woman's dress without her knowing, even if she's in public, but generally no expectation of privacy if you're just plainly in public. It's probably a good item to clarify what's meant by non-consensual.

Seems like people have problems with the creepshot / voyeur category. I am willing to remove the 14k+ images if this is the community wants this.

It's great to see you listening Diz-X. I winge, I also suggest

Moderating principles

Consistent - across moderators, should be applied identically, limited judgement. Eliminate subjectivity as best as you can
Predictable - those who submit should know what passes/what doesn’t
Transparent - it should be obviously/clear why something is rejected
Easy - gets more great content onto the site, faster
Prioritised - allows easier things / trusted members to go through quicker, focusing mod effort of new / sketchier things
Safe - keeps wow and members safe from bad / illegal things

Changes to rules
1. Make ‘pro / model’ definitions absolute and not subjective - are they on OF? does their instagram profile list a modelling / influencer agency. Do they have more than 20k instagram followers. If yes, reject as a ‘pro’, if not, approve. There is WAY too much subjectivity here (8 pictures accepted, 2 denied as ‘pro’ etc etc)
2. Eliminate ‘cropping’ as a rejection - removing a watermark of a non-copyrighted pic from another site should go through. Making a picture look better by removing unnecessary boundaries is better for the site. Cropping out children should be ok. If the worry is more duplicates on the site, then change the image comparison algorithm to include fuzzy instead of identical matches
3. Specify other - what are the categories for this?
4. Be more specific with 'bad quality' - if she's attractive but more pixellated, do members care?

Changes to the process
1. Make it easier to get to Group 1 - either drop off points after a period of time, or reduce the bar to get to Group 1
2. Insent users to find bad pictures - successfully reported photos should reduce a member’s reject points. Conversely, the uploader of a user-reported photo that’s removed should have reject points added to their profile (ie live log deletions count against your rejects)
3. Apply your DMCA policy . You say the uploader will be notified and that “The copyright owner’s name will be published on WhatBoysWant in place of the disabled content”. Does this happen? I’ve never seen it
4. Tell users how to look for rule-breaking photos - “if you can’t find it on Google Lens / Yandex, it’s probably fine… if they have more than 20k IG followers, it’s probably fine”.
5. Allow me to 'buy' higher priority on submissions - I'd pay (via bitcoin) the ability for my submissions to be reviewed faster (same day / next day?)

THE BIG IDEA - let users really decide, get moderators out of the way.
- the job of moderators is to keep the site legal. There are only 3 types of fault here: child pornography, unauthorised capture, copyright.
- you then want to have a minimum picture quality (resolution) - fine, develop heuristics that the computers can run.
- you want to avoid duplicates. do you care? improve fuzzy matching on images, but don't remove things because I crop it to make it a better photo
- you then want quality. then approve more, and delete after 30 days images that score less than a 7.
- the response to this is 'well some people like different things'. You would then be wise to see, for paying users, what are they are rating highly. And get more of that content onto the site so you can make a living.

This removes the issue of "we can't find enough mods", because you don't need mods to apply subjective rules inconsistently that piss off people who upload content that is rated highly. For example, of my 793 photo uploads, 54 score less than an 8. I think I know whatboyswant, and you've heard my frustrations elsewhere.
PS bold tags don't seem to work

Quote:

Originally posted by strictguy

Before you add "non-consensual" you better think about all those beach pics where the women are unaware their photos are being taken. Granted, they are in a public setting, but those photos are still 'non-consensual' as far as being posted online.

what about pics taken fully consensual, but first of all taken for "private use" only? I'm pretty sure, the woman never accepted to be displayed online afterwards!

let's face it, we're all pervs here and we basically don't care about right or wrong! and we love to see naked women - most of all I love to see naked women in situations, they don't know I can see them naked!

btw, great to see you in a solution-oriented conversation, @strictguy!

Quote:

Originally posted by realwilo

let's face it, we're all pervs here and we basically don't care about right or wrong! and we love to see naked women
-most of all I love to see naked women in situations, they don't know I can see them naked!

there is no right and wrong, there is Law( that governs free countries) and transparency( content freely displayed, accessed or Reported).
wbwcom is a documentation of human sexuality( videos) and an Instagram with nudity -the full spicy flavour. free the nipple! send nudes not nukes
if you are a pervert, your problem. on this thread, your post is off-topic.

I don't understand why lots of pics uploaded and taken by me are rejected with the mencion "Copyrigted"