Author Topic: Sites excluded isn't working? (Read 3440 times)

grsphoto · « **on:** June 11, 2013, 11:46 »

I just want to confirm that Excluding sites isn't working.

The reason I ask is, I plan on putting up a "pretty girl images" site ( tasteful -pg-13 type stuff) that other photographers ( rightly) won't want showing in their search. I don't want to put the site on-line until I know that people can exclude it first.

Glenn

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #1 on:** June 11, 2013, 13:23 »

Yup! Exclude works. Too much skin can affect google presence, taking you out of PG searches. If I include (even unwittingly) that content in my site, there it goes...

So yes, I made that a priority. Especially since my site's content with its robots and fictional stuff can attract young eyes.

jsfoto · « **Reply #2 on:** June 11, 2013, 13:49 »

This is an interesting point. I have some nudes online, but all nudity is covered so I hope no-one will be offended by these pictures. I could imagine to upload some tasteful nudes (not covered) in future ... I haven't done it yet because I do not want to offend anybody within or outside our network.
I could imagine that someone could implement the possibility to mark a picture as r-rated (as Shutterstock does it for example) and give the customers and other network members the possibility to decide whether these pictures should appear in the search or not. It would be great because not a whole portfolio would be excluded from search but only the r-rated images.

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #3 on:** June 11, 2013, 14:03 »

There are varying levels of tolerance among different people with different values...then you have all the search engine considerations as well, and a sort of "shared" reputation people have among network members.

Perhaps its time for people to start discussing a system for content rating. As you know, it should be a responsability of the person to rate their content, from g onward.

Then you will have those people who do not seem to care about the rights of their network members, who engage in spammy and obviously bad activity - so I invite people to start working out some community regulation as well.

I'm sure you can come up with something.

cascoly · « **Reply #4 on:** June 11, 2013, 14:07 »

Quote from: Leo on June 11, 2013, 13:23

Yup! Exclude works. Too much skin can affect google presence, taking you out of PG searches. If I include (even unwittingly) that content in my site, there it goes...

So yes, I made that a priority. Especially since my site's content with its robots and fictional stuff can attract young eyes.

as ir reported earlier exclude doesn't work in 2.4.1 -- I tyried to exclude test sites but after update & save all boxes were unchecked when I came back

-----
also can we have an option to include any other sites on a 'promote' search? as the list gets long it's a hassle to figure who's already on your list and who you want to add to promote
----
displaying the extended sites alphabetically would help a lot (even though www. sites would sort separately)

jsfoto · « **Reply #5 on:** June 11, 2013, 14:45 »

Quote from: Leo on June 11, 2013, 14:03

There are varying levels of tolerance among different people with different values...then you have all the search engine considerations as well, and a sort of "shared" reputation people have among network members.

Perhaps its time for people to start discussing a system for content rating. As you know, it should be a responsability of the person to rate their content, from g onward.

Then you will have those people who do not seem to care about the rights of their network members, who engage in spammy and obviously bad activity - so I invite people to start working out some community regulation as well.

I'm sure you can come up with something.

Yes, I see these varying levels of tolerance ... I'm quite open-minded, but sure I do not want to offend anybody. So I would be glad to hear what others think.

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #6 on:** June 11, 2013, 15:15 »

Unless we can have a filter when someone searches for a blue tit I think would rather they have a pretty little feathered bird appear.

At the moment the links are pretty loose - everyone links how they wish but it will only take one person to link to a suspect site (and I don't mean yours) and it could show up everywhere and once in the directory it is very difficult to get out of it without almost deleting your own site (as I found when I tried to stop my test site showing up)

Maybe those with the types of images you are talking about could link to each other and into the network but the network not link out to them - sort of creating a second circle ? Does that make sense?

Perhaps we could put some kind of rating warning within the symbiocards ?

ajt · « **Reply #7 on:** June 11, 2013, 15:37 »

Quote from: Tinny on June 11, 2013, 15:15

Perhaps we could put some kind of rating warning within the symbiocards ?

But what if someone has only few "that" pictures. Warning in symbiocard may exclude the whole portfolio. Maybe optional filter, excluding images with some keywords, like "nude", "nudity", "naked"?
Of course it will be not perfect, will exclude also this image:
http://www.clipartillustration.com/image/clipart-illustration-flesh-tone-human-factor-male-icon-running/

jsfoto · « **Reply #8 on:** June 11, 2013, 15:42 »

Glad you said you did not mean my site, really. Actually I would prefer not to upload anything what would kick my site to a "second circle", because there are lots of other photos in my portfolio, which I really would like to keep in the "first circle". This is why I would suggest the possibility to flag single images as r-rated when uploading and give every customer and network-member the possibility to decide whether r-rated photos should appear in the search or not. For customers it could be done with an optional check-box "show also r-rated images" beside the search, for network-members there could be a check-box "generally hide r-rated images in my search-results" in the network-settings.

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #9 on:** June 11, 2013, 16:03 »

That sounds a good option if someone could incorporate it. I have been trying to find what r rated images are , without much sucess just lots of r's. I assume the same as we use on a photraphy forum I am on , NSW -not safe for work. Something you might not be happy for everyone to see on your computer

jsfoto · « **Reply #10 on:** June 11, 2013, 17:25 »

Actually I can't really tell how r-rated is defined (the term is based on laws of American film industry if I got it right). As I understand it an image is r-rated when a person is nude and the nudity is not covered. Most agencies handle it like that: buttock is not r-rated but female nipples and of course frontal nudity in lower regions of the body are. This is the way I would prefer to handle it on my site, but if there should be an image which I did not flag as r-rated and network-members would suggest to do it for some comprehensible reason, I would of course be ready to flag this image r-rated.

grsphoto · « **Reply #11 on:** June 11, 2013, 20:38 »

I have been specifically thinking of putting my site in a second circle... and maybe even a third circle.

With Symbiostock it is so easy to set up multiple sites that my long term goal is to have several, and since the search works so well across many sites I think this could be a great thing to do.

Just off the top of my head I can think of:

Travelstock.glennspecht.com
Ecuadorimages.glennspecht.com
Beachphotos.glennspecht.com
Rainforestimages.glennspecht.com

Will this help or hinder me...don't know...I plan to find out... maybe.

Since it is so easy to set-up sites I think the entire site should be rated, and exclusion be possible.

Something I have also been thinking about is a way to exclude unwanted sites from the network as well.... basically a voted off the network system.

Simple rules:
.... you have to be on the network for 6 months before you have a vote.
..... you have to achieve 25 negative votes before being removed.
..... negative votes can be removed by the person who gave it.

Banishment would be for spam, unrated, or not properly rated content, or anything that disrupts the flow of searches and commerce across the network.

I think the number need has to be high, you have to piss a large number of oldtimers off to get banished.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Sites excluded isn't working? (Read 3440 times)

grsphoto

Leo Blanchette

jsfoto

Leo Blanchette

cascoly

jsfoto

Kerioak~Christine

ajt

jsfoto

Kerioak~Christine

jsfoto

grsphoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors