Drew Smith Photography wrote:
Oh my. I've just looked at the last few days winners.

JoJo - is there no 'steward's inquiry' when something wins POTD 18+ that just has to be vote rigging because nothing else could explain it?

Drew,  don't you mean some One and not something.  Surely that front seat was pretty comfy. lol

Millar Photographics wrote:
I hate to complain in this forum, but lately I have had quite a few shots disqualified in the POD competition. I use the 15 day checker, so that does not appear to be the issue. I entered a picture yesterday that should not have any reason to be disqualified but once again it is gone. It was in the 15 day checker before yesterday, after I entered it and now it is gone and not in the contest. Is there a problem here?

Your recent PotD disqualifications
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 03-big.jpg
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 76-big.jpg
both disqualified as M/18+

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 38-big.jpg
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/potd/ent … 70-big.jpg
both 15-day violations

The "15 day" rule is based on image entries in the contest - not on your entries of that image in the contest.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Does such a search function exist for the contests? It would be handy to have.

Nope

JoJo wrote:

Let’s take a look at your image. Realistically it can be seen in one of three ways.

The first way is (as you originally stated) a woman eating a banana.
There isn’t very much 18+ involved in a woman eating a banana. Tens of thousands of women do so every day with absolutely no sexual connotations.

The second way to look at this image is a woman suggestively eating a banana.
The problem is that as soon as you introduce the word suggestively into the equation AND the physical contact between the banana and the model’s tongue you progress to the third way of seeing this image.

The third way is a woman suggestively eating/falating a banana/phallic object. On MM this would fall into the category ‘explicit sexual content’ as the banana/phallic object is making physical contact with the model’s tongue.
An image of ‘explicit sexual content’ is not allowed on MM.

The root of the problem is that the model’s tongue is making contact with the banana.

I chose to disqualify your image of a woman eating a banana as ‘not 18+’ as the penalty for this is the simple disqualification of the image from the contest.

I chose not to disqualify your image of a woman suggestively eating/falating a banana/phallic object, the penalty would have been removal of the image from MM.

I give you the choice as to which ‘reason’ I should use to disqualify this image.

Cindy Lorraine wrote:

I saw a photo on MM where a woman is grabbing a man's you know what...isn't that sexually explicit content?

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
Lately there has been Alot of 18+ images were the male genital area doesnot seem very "flaccid". I don't know how most of these images pass through the subjective set criteria of what is considered flaccid.

If you see an image in the PotD18+M that, in your opinion, is not flaccid, please report it in CAM citing the URL of the entry.

After reviewing your recent disqualifications from the PotD18+M, which you apparently felt were of flaccid penises, maybe your opinion of what constitutes a flaccid penis is the problem.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
I've heard a number of  models and photographers complain about the contest, which in most cases, leaves little imagination in the artistic visualization of the human anatomy and ,the pictures with the most votes, focuses more on the measurements of the genital area.

Very likely so – it’s strange how fickle voters can be.
There are days when the best pic actually wins… but then there are days when the biggest penis pic wins.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
I believe there should be a more clear set of criteria explaining what flaccid is to the public and actually committing to  the rules.

And what would you suggest the wording of this “more clear set of criteria” be?

Cindy Lorraine wrote:
I saw a photo on MM where a woman is grabbing a man's you know what...isn't that sexually explicit content?

I have seen many pics on MM of one model grabbing another model's "you know what".
The vast majority are acceptable on MM.... but some are not.
Frankly, it depends on the pic.

JoJo wrote:

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
Lately there has been Alot of 18+ images were the male genital area doesnot seem very "flaccid". I don't know how most of these images pass through the subjective set criteria of what is considered flaccid.

If you see an image in the PotD18+M that, in your opinion, is not flaccid, please report it in CAM citing the URL of the entry.

After reviewing your recent disqualifications from the PotD18+M, which you apparently felt were of flaccid penises, maybe your opinion of what constitutes a flaccid penis is the problem.


Very likely so – it’s strange how fickle voters can be.
There are days when the best pic actually wins… but then there are days when the biggest penis pic wins.


And what would you suggest the wording of this “more clear set of criteria” be?

This requires human anatomy, when blood reaches the penis the main central vein, the main blood supply of the penis, is inflamed and clearly seen then its clearly not flaccid. But to be honest, sometimes common sense can tell you that the penis isn't flaccid.

Cindy Lorraine wrote:
Flaccid penises are not considered 18+ but erect penises are? And what about this thread talking about felating bananas? Is this thread 18+ or can anyone read it? I personally don't really care before people start attacking me, but I just think the rules are funny.

The rules are not "funny", they are quite clear.
What is "funny" is the opinions of some that they attempt to apply to the rules.

Any image showing any portion of a penis is M/18+.
Any image showing a "non flaccid penis" is not permitted on MM.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
This requires human anatomy, when blood reaches the penis the main centrail vein, the main blood supply of the penis, is inflamed then its clearly not flaccid.

Actually, when blood is circulated to the penis (which happens every second of every day) by the arteries (not veins) supplying blood to the penis the tissue of the penis is oxygenated... as in any male with a heartbeat can attest.
This does not constitute engorgement.

An unengorged penis, in most cases, is considered flaccid.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
But to be honest, sometimes you can just plainly tell that the penis isn't flaccid.

... in your opinion.

JoJo wrote:

Actually, when blood is circulated to the penis (which happens every second of every day) by the arteries (not veins) supplying blood to the penis the tissue of the penis is oxygenated... as in any male with a heartbeat can attest.
This does not constitute engorgement.

An unengorged penis, in most cases, is considered flaccid.


... in your opinion.

http://www.healthline.com/human-body-ma … n-of-penis

The dorsal vein that travels through the shaft supplies and drains the penis with blood so that the sponge-like material soaks up the blood therefore making it harder. trust me i know about penises ive had one for 23 years

Also yes it common sense because if you were to physically see the person naked without mediated forms you would use common logic to know that "hey this person is getting a little excited."

JoJo wrote:

Actually, when blood is circulated to the penis (which happens every second of every day) by the arteries (not veins) supplying blood to the penis the tissue of the penis is oxygenated... as in any male with a heartbeat can attest.
This does not constitute engorgement.

An unengorged penis, in most cases, is considered flaccid.


... in your opinion.

By no means am I an expert on the male genitalia (nor desire to be).  In my opinion, there is a "big" difference between a flaccid penis and one that has been "worked a little" for a shoot.  If you want to see a flaccid penis just check out these same guys after jumping into a cold shower for a few minutes.  Now "that's a flaccid penile". 

Honestly though...I could care less about the size of ANY guys penis.  Not being disrespectful, but it's just not my gig.  So carry on fellas...expose those "flacid" units.

Regarding the 18+ female images, for me and in my humble opinion, it would be refreshing to see more artistic images which leave a bit to the immigration.  Let's be real, it's difficult to compete with a beautiful model with flapping yappers exposed right down to the......

As with vote stacking, the buddy system and down right cheats...  What ever happened to the day when we simply voted for our favorite "image" and NOT our favorite "person"?  Honestly...I can personally give a damn WHO the photographer or model is before I vote for ANY image in ANY forum.  Is this NOT about the photography?  If not, WHY not?

This said....I'd definitely vote for the SAME photographer or model day after day "IF" I sincerely felt that his or her image was my favorite in any of the contests.  (It is subjective) but you would have a difficult time convincing the majority that my vote was somehow jaded.

Again...just my opinion.

JAMES ROSS - 867-5309 wrote:

By no means am I an expert on the male genitalia (nor desire to be).  In my opinion, there is a "big" difference between a flaccid penis and one that has been "worked a little" for a shoot.  If you want to see a flaccid penis just check out these same guys after jumping into a cold shower for a few minutes.  Now "that's a flaccid penile". 

Honestly though...I could care less about the size of ANY guys penis.  Not being disrespectful, but it's just not my gig.  So carry on fellas...expose those "flacid" units.

Regarding the 18+ female images, for me and in my humble opinion, it would be refreshing to see more artistic images which leave a bit to the immigration.  Let's be real, it's difficult to compete with a beautiful model with flapping yappers exposed right down to the......

As with vote stacking, the buddy system and down right cheats...  What ever happened to the day when we simply voted for our favorite "image" and NOT our favorite "person"?  Honestly...I can personally give a damn WHO the photographer or model is before I vote for ANY image in ANY forum.  Is this NOT about the photography?  If not, WHY not?

This said....I'd definitely vote for the SAME photographer or model day after day "IF" I sincerely felt that his or her image was my favorite in any of the contests.  (It is subjective) but you would have a difficult time convincing the majority that my vote was somehow jaded.

Again...just my opinion.

Right!!! I vote for the female photo of the day and I see a lot of borderline pornography on there and the artist ones don't even have a chance.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
http://www.healthline.com/human-body-ma … n-of-penis

The dorsal vein that travels through the shaft supplies and drains the penis with blood so that the sponge-like material soaks up the blood therefore making it harder. trust me i know about penises ive had one for 23 years

Also yes it common sense because if you were to physically see the person naked without mediated forms you would use common logic to know that "hey this person is getting a little excited."

You are fighting a loosing battle here

JoJo wrote:

You are fighting a loosing battle here

What qualitative proof do you have to support your claim? The dorsal vein supplies the blood suppley to the penis the arteries are the ones that supply the veins blood. And if you have to argue with the axioms of life then there is no hope for you. I'm done with arguing I got to go to work and get paid.

JoJo wrote:
You are fighting a loosing battle here

Ant Pinguino  wrote:
What qualitative proof do you have to support your claim? The dorsal vein supplies the blood suppley to the penis the arteries are the ones that supply the veins blood. And if you have to argue with the axioms of life then there is no hope for you. I'm done with arguing I got to go to work and get paid.

"What qualitative proof do you have to support your claim?"

Let's cut to the chase here...
Before you enter any more images in the PotD18+M I suggest you bring your opinion of what a flaccid penis is into line with what is acceptable on MM.
Your several recent disqualified submissions were by no means acceptable in the PotD18+M or on MM.

JoJo
Contest Admin.

JoJo wrote:

"What qualitative proof do you have to support your claim?"

Let's cut to the chase here...
Before you enter any more images in the PotD18+M I suggest you bring your opinion of what a flaccid penis is into line with what is acceptable on MM.
Your several recent disqualified submissions were by no means acceptable in the PotD18+M or on MM.

JoJo
Contest Admin.

Hell I was seeing if other people can enter their "flaccid" penis why can't I enter mines?

Yes I told you that every link I checked the dorsal vein provides the blood directly to the sponge-like part of the penis the artery supplies blood to the veins.

Lol also I gave you all a suggestion; if the main outer vein of the penis is inflamed then its considered a non-flaccid penis.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Artists tend to push the boundaries and administrators like JoJo often have to put the brakes on. No harm no foul.

This is true Stanley but it is also a source of some frustration to MM members that such inconsistency in "rulings" like this take place.  You may take it philosophically but given that MM does not notify us of a disqualification, or give us an opportunity to submit a different image, it can be seen by others as not being very "user friendly".

It may be an issue of resources - it seems that one person is responsible for moderating the contest (though I am not sure that "moderate" comes into it) - so mistakes and inconsistencies are bound to occur, even if they are not acknowledged.

Mark Leighton wrote:
This is true Stanley but it is also a source of some frustration to MM members that such inconsistency in "rulings" like this take place.  You may take it philosophically but given that MM does not notify us of a disqualification, or give us an opportunity to submit a different image, it can be seen by others as not being very "user friendly".

It may be an issue of resources - it seems that one person is responsible for moderating the contest (though I am not sure that "moderate" comes into it) - so mistakes and inconsistencies are bound to occur, even if they are not acknowledged.

Mark; Here’s a little experiment for you to try.

Take 3500 images from MM, some G-rated, some M/18+ and some “not permissible” and look through them. As you do sort them into 3 piles, the G-rated, the M/18+ and the “not permissible”.
Record which images went into which pile. Now, put these 3500 images away for a day.

Next day… take the same 3500 images out again, mix them up thoroughly and then sort through them again making the same 3 piles.

Now compare the record from yesterday with the 3 piles you made today.
Did you put all 3500 images into the same three piles?

You missed a few didn’t you

Is that because of your “inconsistency in rulings” or because you are human?

Well, guess what, I’m human – I have viewed 3500+/- pics from the contests every week for the past 4 years and put them into 3 piles in the best manner I am able.

If you want to apply mathematical precision to art you will surely fail.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
I can appreciate how difficult it is to fairly apply the rules especially when images are borderline. In at least two instances I have had an entry rejected and later that same image was acceptable. The other time my pic came in 2nd place but a few weeks later was DQd. JoJo explained that borderline images sometime fall on one side of rthe obrder and sometimes the other.

A year of so back she mentioned I think some standard used by BBC in the UK which deoended on comparison to some obscure landform on the west coast that resembles a penis. Something about "angle of the dangle". Maybe she will retell that story.

In any case having an absolute standard is pretty hard to accomplish. I content myself with the idea the contests are essentially a fun triviality and not woth making much fuss over.

"angle of the dangle":
Use Google maps to find Campbeltown on the Firth of Clyde in Scotland. Zoom out a bt so you can see Glasgow.
Look vaguely phallic?
Rumor has it that the BBC (British Broadcasting Corp) used this concept on internal memos to differentiate between flaccid and non flaccid penises.

Mark Leighton wrote:
Jojo, since I periodically cannot even get my own two entries in the right competition and when I do they can fall foul of the rules, I think it is a safe bet I would fail that test miserably.

Hence the 2nd paragraph of my post, it is not a personal attack or criticism but a criticism of the system MM is using to manage the contests, ascerbated by the lack of notification of a disqualification.

Given the numbers you quote, it is to your credit that there are not far more of us throwing our toys out the pram about this.  That does not mean though, that the system could not be improved.

Hey, I am not faulting you

The system we have on MM is what it is - I do the best with that

Someday, when (and if) I will get some sort of utility in the back-end of the contests I will be able to do a more complete (and more accurate) job.

Till then I just soldier on

Stanley L Moore wrote:
A year of so back she mentioned I think some standard used by BBC in the UK which deoended on comparison to some obscure landform on the west coast that resembles a penis. Something about "angle of the dangle". Maybe she will retell that story.

In any case having an absolute standard is pretty hard to accomplish. I content myself with the idea the contests are essentially a fun triviality and not woth making much fuss over.

Stanley, you are referring to the "Mull of Kintyre" test.  I think this is said to have been used by the BBFC (British Board of Film Censors) from about 1992.  It is far from a perfect "guide" as it does not take into consideration movement, for example.  However, I don't think there is a clear way to determine what is flaccid and what is not.

Of course, that is only one of the rules that have to be considered.

I just find it amazing that there is not a better system for monitoring the contest entries. It may be fun but I am not sure that the fun should lie in seeing when a particular image makes the cut and doesn't!

And suggesting something could be better is now "making a fuss"??

Mark Leighton wrote:
Stanley, you are referring to the "Mull of Kintyre" test.  I think this is said to have been used by the BBFC (British Board of Film Censors) from about 1992.  It is far from a perfect "guide" as it does not take into consideration movement, for example.  However, I don't think there is a clear way to determine what is flaccid and what is not.

Of course, that is only one of the rules that have to be considered.

I just find it amazing that there is not a better system for monitoring the contest entries. It may be fun but I am not sure that the fun should lie in seeing when a particular image makes the cut and doesn't!

And suggesting something could be better is now "making a fuss"??

I was not directing that "fuss" remark to you specifically. Of course making suggestions is not making a fuss. Rather I was thinking of some previous exchanges in this very long thread, especially before the split in M/F. Some of these were quite heated all out of proportion to the importance of the contests themselves.

I just don't worry about getting DQd because there seems to be no way to avoid it from time to time. For my part the best suggestion is to do away with the "flaccid" rule altogether. But of course MM will never do that, no doubt for good economic reasons.

Ant Pinguino  wrote:

What qualitative proof do you have to support your claim? The dorsal vein supplies the blood suppley to the penis the arteries are the ones that supply the veins blood. And if you have to argue with the axioms of life then there is no hope for you. I'm done with arguing I got to go to work and get paid.

I would say the amount of people entering and voting in the contest that do not share your view would support it.   Just because not everyone reads this thread and takes the time to chime in doesn't mean, a white knight is needed to tell us that a slightly blood-filled penis is bad, because someone doesn't consider that as "artistic" as the photo that they wanted to win.

I think Jojo does a great job in a very hostile environment.   Let's let her do her job as she sees fit and just deal with it.   

Instead of ignoring the fact that she took the time to address your concerns.

Quartzmine Photo wrote:
Leaving flaccid penii on the table for a moment, here are the first and last place entries in the 11/29/13 POTD 18+ F contest:

First
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/ … 69-big.jpg

Last:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/contests/po … view/11329

What is it about the first place entry that makes it of clearly superior quality compared to the last place? I could as easily argue the case that the anchor shot should have won. Foir one thing, the last place model has a head.

We know, of course that all votes are cast strictly on merit.

Discuss if you like.

My immediate impressions:
First place image: creative lighting, thoughtful composition
Last place image: awkward pose, god-awful shoes, dead expression

I voted, but I didn't vote for either of them.

Quartzmine Photo wrote:
What is it about the first place entry that makes it of clearly superior quality compared to the last place? I could as easily argue the case that the anchor shot should have won. Foir one thing, the last place model has a head.

... and isn't it strange that ANY images, with the exception of one, would have received any votes.
Everyone should see just how far superior one of the images is and everyone should have voted just for that image.

How boring life would be if everyone had the same tastes.