I've sometimes wondered if an actual human makes these decisions or if they just have some software that scans photos for the ammount of "fleshtones" and then rejects the photos on that basis.
If you have a photo editing program you could shift the color balance in the blue direction and see if the picture gets rejected that way. My guess is that Facebook's software won't think it is porn anymore!
I've had that same thought myself-- they must have software that scans automatically. Consistently, it has happened so quickly too....At this point, however, I have reposted the picture, plus the fb message, a few times, so I am certain they are watching me. i.e.:
Oh Dear! They certainly have made a mountain out of this molehill!
My guess is that no actual human at FB has seen the photo yet, that all of these actions have been taken automatically by the software.
I was being facetious in calling the photo 'porn' ~that is what the software at FB is thinking it is. However, with the black stars added over crucial areas, it makes it look like some cheesey ad for a porn site! lol
If LJ censors, it must only be for egregious violations. I belong to several LJ communities which feature gay soft-porn images.
If you have a photo editing program you could shift the color balance in the blue direction and see if the picture gets rejected that way. My guess is that Facebook's software won't think it is porn anymore!
Reply
( ... )
Reply
( ... )
Reply
i must say one more thing, resto-- it's not "doll porn"; it's love!
Reply
My guess is that no actual human at FB has seen the photo yet, that all of these actions have been taken automatically by the software.
I was being facetious in calling the photo 'porn' ~that is what the software at FB is thinking it is. However, with the black stars added over crucial areas, it makes it look like some cheesey ad for a porn site! lol
If LJ censors, it must only be for egregious violations. I belong to several LJ communities which feature gay soft-porn images.
Reply
Leave a comment