I'm definitely done with "UMD". There is censorship here, nothing else. I should change video names. The bondage video cannot be advertised in the forum because the models have ball gags. BALL GAGS... wtf? "Big" producers/female models are preferred. It's just exhausting and I don't waste my time for it.

Ok. Where may we find your videos?

Which is weird, because I've seen...even downloaded from several UMD stores that featured ball gags.

Goodbye

Wow, thank god. Someone who thinks the same as me as i have been here since 1998 & every post i make gets removed now. Even stating an opinion but other people can post anything or say anything.

The UMD has changed massively & not for the good.

I KNOW there have been many sets where ball gags are used. I know messygirl has a few including human garbage disposal types that have used ball gags. That can't be the reason your stuff was taken down or forced to be renamed... it just does not make sense.

Probably more to do with your simulated scat wam than a ballgag,

Exactly, I really doubt it was due to any of the BDSM elements. The models in the videos seem somewhat distressed as well.

First off, note that any delete can be appealed to MM - just message him asking for a second look. Mods can and do get things wrong and mod decisions can be and are changed.

Second, I wasn't involved in any of the decisions on these scenes, I saw the threads and have views but I left them for MM / other mods to handle. So speaking as someone non-involved.

Third, without revealing any internal info, there was as far as I saw, no connection between decisions taken re the toilet threads and the bondage one.

I had my suspicions about the bondage one because I know under UK law if someone is tightly bound in a bondage scene, then they must have either: a) no gag or b) one hand free, so that they can say/signal withdrawl of consent mid-scene if they need to. As far as I could see the scene in question had ball gags and both hands bound so wouldn't pass the UK rules - but it was produced in Germany and UMD is subject to US, not UK, rules, and someone else had already flagged the scene for attention when I spotted it, so I knew MM and the other mods would become aware of it. And at the end of the day here what matters are the biller rules, as they call the shots.

Regarding the toilet scenes, I suspect what happened there was a head-on collision between what is a very niche approach, and WAM scene history.

Back in the 90s, when an alt.sex.fetish group on USENET was first proposed, the original suggestion was alt.sex.fetish.sploshing. Which would have been fairly clear it was about custard, etc. However there was a rule you didn't name newsgroups after commercial entities and some felt "sploshing" was too close to "Splosh!" the magazine. So instead the more neutral name alt.sex.fetish.wet-and-messy was chosen. The unfortunate side-effect of which was that pee and scat fans often assumed it was meant for them. This tended to cause a heavy pushback from actual wammers whenever such a post appeared, there's a baked-in feeling amongst most wammers that "our" fetish is separate and different from scat and pee. Some would argue it's a fairly semantic difference, but in the real world it's how most people see it.

I will admit that personally, having a toilet, even a fake one, actively used in a scene, is an absolute guarenteed hard NO SALE, I see someone go near a toilet and I immediately think of pee and poop smells, which are an absolute and total turn-off. Which is why I stayed out of responding to those threads or taking any mod decisions on them. I can also understand why lots of people took it as an attempt to conflate scat and wam, with the fairly extreme response that then followed. However I try and operate on YKINMKBYKIOK (Your Kink Is Not My Kink But Your Kink Is OK) unless something is clearly violating UMD rules, and MM said that scene was within the rules as the description stated the substance was clay.

Honestly, all I know you for is complaining.

You put your version of the truth across knowing we won't hear the other side, but everyone here knows that scat, even simulated, is against the rules and we assume that is the actual truth. As mentioned, there are plenty of vids here with ball- gags so we all know that is also a lie.

Please. Just tell us the truth, without the anger. It would go a long way on this community.

Things have changed over the years, regulations on what can be shown have been put in place because of the whole visa/mastercard debacle. This is not UMD's fault, just something we have to roll with. Don't blame the site for external forces.

Good luck posting your vids elsewhere, there are plenty of sites to do that on.

Ball gags are okay as long as it's clear the model could speak if they wanted to. I'll review the scene again, and your post will be restored if it all checks out (the scene itself was never removed). An admin removed it due to the rather extreme look of the scene, as erring on the side of caution is one reason this site still exists. Any time you disagree with a decision, please contact me to review it. I know you're frustrated, but this is a living breathing site run by real humans who are doing our best to abide by these ever-changing rules ourselves!


Most of those messages were removed for repeatedly asking for sessions, and you were notified each time with an explanation. Instead of gagging you I eventually inboxed you personally in March to try and help you with the rules, but you never wrote me back. There are also a bunch of other flags on your account which I won't air publicly, but if you contact me privately I can send you the log, or we can otherwise have a talk. Thank you for being here so long


Actually, if the substance is just simulated it is allowed.

I have no idea why my last post was deleted. I thought it was basically peacekeeping and rules stuff like yours. But I don't want to bother MM because he gets more than enough forum drama these days -- people wanna fight! How about in the future, mods give at least a private explanation to deletees so we don't have to run to MM so often?
Thanks!

[screenshot]

I don't see any screenshot file uploaded with this one?

But you should have had a message with the reason for the delete, which is also displayed on the deleted post in the thread:

Useful post, but the controversy being referred to has been removed from this producer's thread. We don't want legit posts to be hijacked every time with a debate about the TOS, but the floor is always open to start a dedicated thread discussing this type of content.

The main issue was that was the actual promptional thread for the scene, whereas this one is a discussion on policy. MM's indicated he doesn't like threads being hijacked away from their original purpose, which is why he deleted all posts on that one that weren't related directly to the scene the OP was promoting.

Your message was actually great, but it was a reply to another message that was deleted. Sometimes when I have to delete a bunch of messages, I bypass the automatic notification that people would get. People tend to get really upset whenever their stuff is removed and they always inbox me to argue, and some days I don't have the time or wherewithal to get chewed out by a dozen people at once. But the message you would have gotten is always put up for public display in lieu of your deleted message.