Which to me is problematic, especially if you consider the fact that Chantelle STILL has "Wam Patrol" tagged on her profile which brings up more questions than it answers. I thought her Mod privileges have been pulled.

There isn't a single "mod on / mod off" setting. As MM explained it to me there are a whole bunch of different "powers" that users can be given which enables them to do various things beyond what an ordinary user can do, but they're all different. Most mods as I understand it have the same powers, esp move / edit / delete posts, but there are other folk like the people running the various groups who have powers there but not over the entire site.

The profile tags are just cosmetic and can be given to anyone. To see who actually has moderator powers, look at their profile, if they're a mod it will say "Moderator" under their name.

Example: Mine (has mod status): https://umd.net/dungeonmasterone
Chantelle's (no longer a mod): https://umd.net/wamchantelle

Maybe ask people she has worked with-like Brooke Madison or something. I'd like to know bc the way "she" talked to me? While she was a moderator? Was appalling.

Also: you stated in the beginning since you filmed all the scenes that they were "yours"

Ummmm.if that was the case then I wouldn't be missing HUNDREDS of videos of Ariel that I filmed, under my roof, with my people.

Are you allowed to keep these videos to sell that were filmed by you? Bc that would interest me greatly.

There certainly are people still active on the site who know Chantelle or have worked with her. I'm guessing they don't want to get involved which is fair enough..

The way it usually works is:

When someone films something, the copyright belongs to the person operating the camera, UNLESS they were doing so as a job for someone else, in which case the copyright belongs to the person who paid them to film. So for instance, I film a scene, copyright is mine. CNN send a camerawoman to film a story, copyright belongs to CNN, not the camera operator.

BUT: Before a scene featuring a recognisable individual model can be sold, that model has to have signed a model release giving the producer of the scene permission to use their image commercially. No model release, no commercial use, regardless of copyright status.

That's why UMD requires that we all have signed model releases for every scene we shoot.

To sell anything, you need model release and the copyright, though the latter isn't usually an issue.

Okay, so I've put Chantelle's account into legacy mode, which means it's dormant and can't be used anymore. I've been trying to contact her but haven't gotten a response. Apparently she appointed Dazuk to help her with the account long ago, but at some point he ended up running the entire thing and we don't know exactly how or when that transition went down.

Some accounts are run as businesses, and that is acceptable even if the name of the business is a single female name. Relationships also change, so an account that was once run by a single person may now be run by multiple people or somebody else. The only time this is a problem is if we feel deliberately misled.

Everybody gave Dazuk the chance to explain things, but he would get defensive instead, even with me over inbox. Now he isn't responding at all, so his account will also go into legacy mode, at least until I can have a real talk with him. Ultimately this is on Chantelle. Everybody is responsible for their own account even if they gave their password to someone else. And if the original verified account holder is no longer reachable, the account needs to be shut down as per the TOS.

Our community has been very mature about this. Thank you! I think this is one of the only places where people actually speak in full sentences during a heated exchange and bring up real points, popular or not I want to respond to some things inline....


Mods can't see others' inbox messages or private info. Any user can potentially be made a mod, so restricting that info eliminates potential beaches of privacy. Mods also can't take action on their own ish, and if there was any fraud going on between accounts I'd see it because I personally review and dispatch every flag that comes through. We also have tons of logs and layers of notes to review if we need to.


I don't really have a problem with the idea of a moderator account being run by a couple as a team, but the particular way they handled this doesn't sit well with me.


Shady people come from everywhere and it's not our community's fault. We actually have a policy against that behavior unlike other sites, and we work together to enforce it. Think about it: This place is so peaceful that merely finding out that one account was potentially being run by someone else is a major thing!


And females with their profiles set to male! Nobody thinks of that but it's definitely a thing. UMD's raw user base is still nearly 50% female.


There's no rule against multiple people running an account. There are a lot of accounts here run by multiple people. So long as you're not deliberately misleading people in any way you're good.


No, there is not drama and bullshit "everywhere." The few times a year that somebody acts out of pocket, we deal with it and move on. And it always has to do with some outside relationship or business dealing that has nothing to do with this site or its community. I don't know why it's so popular to diagnose the problem as endemic to the site when it's clearly not. If a guy using a female account is too much drama then you might as well quit all social media because other sites don't even have a policy against it!


I'm right here I understand that it can get frustrating waiting for an update but I ask for your patience. Meanwhile you can ask me directly if you have a question, but otherwise you should know that I am working constantly on the backend. I may we waiting for one party to get back to me, I might be trying to mediate between people, I might be offloading an account or handling legacy subscriptions or settling payouts or dealing with a family emergency or doing any number of things.


Huh? We do a ton of moderating, including dealing with today's technology. Look at the entire synthetic tagging/flagging system I just put in. Very little of the moderation is shown publicly because we want to keep it wammy and peaceful, but it's a lot of work man.


Nothing is stopping you from communicating with a mod.


No, the moderators here are not employees or even affiliates so I don't treat them like that. They are volunteer community members who can do things like move posts and adjust gender tagging, yet have no obligations to do anything. I'm the only one running this show otherwise, so mods are an integral part of the community being able to run itself precisely because they ARE the community.


It's just a display tag that I can add to any user account but it doesn't have any power associated with it. Some non-mods have the tag. That said, her tag has since been removed as her whole account is in Legacy now. Like I said before, off-boarding is a process. If you have any doubts or questions, please just ask.

The whole point of my comment is that it appears you have people acting as moderators that you have never talked to on the phone. The only communication has been through emails or chats. You have no way of knowing who is running the account with moderator privileges who are supposed to be trusted by the community.

A phone conversation would not have prevented this situation or stopped Chantelle from having someone else run her account. And I'm not going to periodically call up UMD users just to check that they're really them. I do as much due diligence as I reasonably can, but phone checking people isn't on the menu. I've never asked you to trust anyone; Everybody should still use common sense and caution when dealing with any user, including moderators.

So maybe you can help and clarify what access and abilities a moderator has? It seems to be that we all might have a misunderstanding of what a Mod can and cannot do and their abilities closely mirror yours. Maybe if we all heard it from the horses mouth, some might be a lil less nervy about the whole scenario.

Thank you for asking! Every user account on UMD has around a dozen different abilities that I can switch on or off. They range from being able to move/delete forum posts, to being able to update the gender tag on photos, to moderating chat, to editing wiki entries. Switching on any one of these abilities (or having you host a Group) technically designates you as a "moderator" here.

Once you're a mod you can see flags as they come in (they're still anonymous) so that you even know there's something to moderate. Mods can see my notes after flags have been dispatched. There is an informational layer where mods can see internal notes, but we don't put private info there. Mods can also see and approve any pending pics if they want.

All of this is still on the end-user layer. I have an entirely separate backend that I live on, as well as several other layers of internal notes and logs that nobody else can access.

I'm not sure what "moderator" means on other sites, but here mods don't have access to sensitive information, inboxes, or financials. So there is no paperwork or background checks or zoom calls involved; I occasionally designate someone a mod if they've been here a long time flagging stuff and seem to understand the vibe. People and situations change tho, so we just roll with the punches.

In the rest of the internet a moderator is someone who is supposed to be trusted by the site owner. We now know that dazuk acting as Chantelle was not the case. We also now know that there is nothing stopping a mod from letting people use their accounts and that practice is acceptable. We also know that moderators do not carry an increased level of trust from the community as you have stated. Thank you for clearing all of this up.

Chantelle did have my trust as do all of my mods, but the trust was violated. I didn't knowingly let a person I don't trust have mod abilities.
Complex things happened in her relationship that's not our business nor any of our fault, we don't like how it was handled, and now we're washing our hands of all of it.


I'm not sure why you're twisting my words. I've said, "It's not feasible to try and enforce a single-user policy for every account, but it makes sense to require it for moderator accounts." This account sharing has never been an issue before, but I have learned from it and now a new rule is being worked into the TOS.


Don't forget it was my trust that was violated, too. If you disagree with UMD's onboarding policies then I'm sorry but that doesn't mean I operate with a complete lack of trust. You can see who I trust, and you can decide for yourself what that means to you.

In my experience i have dealt with both Chantelle & Darren & could easily tell who i was dealing with & knew i was'nt talking to Chantelle when Darren was replying.
Darren has bent over backwards to help me achieve the custom shoot i wanted with a wedding dress i sent them & i dont know what he is being criticised on here for now he & Chantelle have gone separate ways.

This debate that he pretends to be Chantelle is total bollocks as he has always talked to me as Darren & people are just getting cheesed off they can't talk to the model. In this case Chantelle.
In my opinion the model should have someone to talk on her behalf anyway as it protects them from being abused & customers saying inappropriate things & in my experience Darren has not once posed as Chantelle & think the accusations on here are ridiculous.

Widgy

Is Chantelle as computer illiterate as Darren made her out to be? This has nothing to do with wanting to talk to a model. This has to do with someone impersonating another user, namely a moderator on the forums. That has been the only issue from the start of this. He outright owned that he allowed people to think they were dealing with one person when in reality it was a team effort. Also that there was no way of knowing when it was really Chantelle as she is computer illiterate according to him.

I am glad that this is a learning experience for everyone thank you!

Have you even read this thread? It is a fact, confirmed eventually by Dazuk himself, that he would write messages and sign them as Chantelle!

He engaged in conversations with my wife pretending to be Chantelle, signing of as her, and never revealing himself.

Even after he and Chantelle separated he wrote to my wife, again lying and pretending to be Chantelle, and recommending his own services!

As everyone here has clearly stated time and time again, it's fine for a profile to be run as a couple, or as a business partnership, but if that happens, the account owner is morally obliged to be open and honest about their setup.

Dazuk did not, he pretended to be Chantelle and as a result my wife shared personal and confidential information with him, thinking she was talking to another woman.

He has been deceptive, plain and simple.

So no the claims here are not "bollocks" nor "ridiculous" and you are out of order for saying so.

It would be fine for you to just say that your experience with him was good, but do not dismiss the experiences of others.

The facts speak for themselves.

I am sure your experience has been great. I am happy it was! Truly! I am sure there are many others who can say the same. This isn't about that. It is about the lack of transparency to the extent that even the site owner didn't know who he brought on board as a mod. If you don't see the potential problem there, then I honestly can't help you


Has nothing to do with it. People break up all the time. Again, it's people not knowing who they are dealing with. If it is one person. fine. If it is a group of people, fine. There needs to be some communication of who you are talking to. Even in most RP forums it is required that you disclose your alts to prevent this confusion.



Yeah, considering one of the leading complaints in this thread is from a model (Flora) who found out just a few short days ago that she was talking to Daz this whole time, I can assure you that is totally false. Again, and I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand, a simple header at the top of the profile stating that it is a couple's acct would have removed any confusion from the field of play.



I don't disagree with this. Yes, female models have to endure shit most men on here will never fully understand nor encapsulate. It makes sense. Simple solution is state that Messages can be answered by more than one party on their profile. My gripe isn't that Daz was using her account. My gripe isn't even that he was answering messages on her behalf. My gripe is he was using her account, no one knew about it and a model disclosed personal details about herself that she never would to a male producer exposing a huge breach in trust. THAT is the problem.

Would it be fair to suggest that the current limitations of business accounts on here (which requires password/login sharing) is potentially contributing to this?

I feel as if an individual account (store owner) should be able to start a business page on here and add other users to their team with rights-management options - eg upload photos to the business page, post on behalf of the business to the forums, upload store content, reply to messages from the business account etc

I know this won't be a quick or easy fix but in my eyes it's the only proper way to try and ensure a similar thing does not/is not happening is to facilitate a full business account which is allowed to share access .

I'm not saying it will stop 100% of the issues and given the deception by Daz in this instance potentially would not have done. However what this will ensure is that when shared accounts are being used. It will also go hand in hand with the updated TOS changes you have made/are making and if you have given a legitimate process which is then not followed it gives stronger grounds to take swift action in future without the need for further delay

Nice idea, but such granularity is really out of the scope of a site like UMD. Maybe when we're way bigger Even if we had such features it would have no impact on a situation where someone was being purposely misleading. If the account holder is honest then they shouldn't make who's running it a wishy-washy secret.

I have helped you with Vidown catalog work in the past and have offered to do it again, but you haven't talked to me in months. Drop me an email when you get a chance.

At Vidown, we prefer that all parties accessing a store account have their own vendor account in the system. Then they can be a partner on a store and not have access to the main vendor's account or any of their information. Your previous collaborations were all "full access" for both parties, but now we have an optional "webmaster" configuration where they only see the catalog systems and have no access to sales data or payment details.

As others have mentioned, If you pushed the record button on the camera and there was no signed, dated, and witnessed "work for hire" contract in place, then you hold the entirety of the copyright for all that video footage. That's legally indisputable.

The issue for most people in your situation is that copyright is only a third of the requirements for selling videos (the legal Triumvirate ). Another third is a signed, dated, and witnessed model release that covers all possible eventualities and all present, past, and future as-yet-unknown formats and technologies. Not having that in-hand is a huge liability risk for everyone involved.

The last third primarily applies to sexual scenarios and "lascivious nudity" and that's USC 2257 required information. It hasn't been enforced in a decade, but that could change at any time, so it's still required by virtually every US-based store system.

Sorry for the late reply, but as well as dealing with our break up, I have been talking to Derek in the background about the whole situation.
Though I did say seven days ago that I was writing on behalf of Chantelle while she was sitting next to me, I need to clarify this a little bit more it seems.

Unfortunately the relationship between Chantelle and myself ended, but at the time we were still trying to work things out. getting together sitting down and chatting about not only our life, but how we were going to move forward with this site due to the fact that I owned around 90% of the content on here.
I've been shooting for Chantelle now for over 10 years so we were sitting there, discussing ways that she could continue to use all the scenes under an open license allowing her to still have a presence on here without the need for the day-to-day running of the site.
I'm sure Derek will also confirm this as we had a few conversations about trying to operate the site in this way.

At the time we were sitting there together, a message came through from a user to which I read it out to Chantelle, and she gave her reply the only problem with it seems to be the fact that I typed that reply for her unfortunately she has never had great computer skills and never denied that.
I remember seeing a comment a couple of days ago, stating something like if she has these problems why is she in a dangerous situation in the mud?
Fortunately, for most here, her dyslexia and problems using computers doesn't really affect what she does so wasn't really sure what the point was of that conversation.

Getting back to the actual event. I can confirm that, yes, I typed to have her reply, but the whole message was from her, it's something I hadn't denied from the start it's how we operated for a long time And we're very clear on this with most people we spoke to.

If it was from Chantelle, it was always signed from Chantelle. If it was from me, it was generally the more day-to-day replies regarding setting up custom requests etc rather than answering personal messages if I replied to you as myself, it was always signed as either D or Daz. No point before has that raised any concerns as I was trying to be as transparent as possible.
Unfortunately it seems that at some point, this is now been lost in translation because not everyone knew about Chantelle's condition which is understandable, but I can tell you now neither Chantelle or myself set out to deceive anyone at any point
With regards to the moderator privilege, I can only apologise to Derek as again we did not sit out to undermine him or the site. It was just the fact that we were so used to running this site together rather than as a single person.
I have replied to Derek on many occasions as myself, including signing stuff as myself, and can record a certain situation about a year ago where I actually dealt with something as a mod and signed it off as my own name to him as I felt the situation needed to be dealt with from higher above. No point. Do I feel that either myself or Chantelle have tried to fool anyone?
I understand the upset this may have calls and I can only apologise both myself and Chantelle have been on this site since the beginning myself under a previous username originally I then left and came back a couple of years later
Hopefully I've now explained myself enough and will continue speaking to Derek in the background rather than making any further public statements on this matter as I believe I have covered everything or everyone's questions.
There is no point we literally reading through the form and picking out every single part of what people have said as it will just be a game of tennis going backwards and forwards for weeks to come
Chantelle and I are still doing okay and talking and up until a couple of days ago, even considered the possibility of having a so-called dormant profile with just her scenes on it that could be uploaded for everyone to enjoy without any interactions from either of us in the future. I'm sure Derek will decide on that one in the days to come

Mostly Flora, Chantelle and I are still talking and we both like to apologise for any misconception you may have had about the message she replied to. Hopefully the explanation will give you some reassurance that yes I saw the message and replied to it but it was a female point of view that you were getting the reply to from Chantelle herself And I was merely the person on the keyboard and didn't mean to call you any distress or alarm. I hope now we can all be at peace with this and move forward

Just want to say thank you for your kind words and support. It's nice to know at least someone we have helped has stepped up to confirm how transparent we were and at no point you felt you were being deceived in anyway.

Dazuk, until we hear from Chantelle we have no way of knowing if anything you say is true. We are still only getting one side oif the story. You can claim you signed things all you want. At the end of the day MM did not know it was a team account. That should have been clearly stated and it was not. Odd that you comment on things right after your account is moved to a different status by Derek.

i DID ask you, you turd!

imma email you bc i swear on god I emailed you begging to put vids up on the site for me. maybe we got our emails crossed. i have luckily started a new email that is JUST for customs and my business. The other one was attached to every single thing in my life. lol!

lets talk soon! ill email you today! whew bc I am behind so bad on my updates on vidown....where people are getting peeeeed off.

love ya, brother! talk soon and thankyou!

I can't speak for Chantelle on whether she wants to make a comment or not. Obviously she would need to login on someone else's computer to do so, and that means trusting someone in confiding in what was a fetish, but not how many outside of our world knew about, unfortunately, even if she writes something, I'm sure people will still say it's me writing it or somebody else because obviously she's not great with computers.

With regards to why I made a post today I was waiting for messmaster to change my status, it's because I also have other things I'm doing including running my own business, so don't come on here every day And I have been speaking to Messmaster in the background as well

I have given my reasons and made my apologies if anyone thought we would be in underhanded.
We all learned from our mistakes, and the site will also learn from these and many more issues to come in the future It's the only way you can improve things after an event has happened

You win the internet for today

I'm dead.

Also:

"FYI: while this profile is a way to communicate with Chantelle, note that messages and replies are dictated to and entered by Daz. Don't send anything you intend to be for Chantelle's eyes only."

Would have been the best way to handle this proactively. Live and learn. I do feel sincerely bad for Flora though.