Quote:
Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
We have a sponsor X submitting you a request to report all affiliates you trace that use the keyword "young sex" in their sites. Ok? Your scripts find let's say 15 violators which you report in detailed back to the sponsor.
Do you share with the rest members of your service the specific violators of the TOS of the sponsor X or not?
...some text deleted...
How fair is it to have a sponsor program that might cancel your account for a such keyword violation (im not reffering to CECASH,it's a hypothetical case) while in the past the SAME sponsor decided to add "girls fucking animals"?
The "girls fucking animals" is a real case that happened few months ago and made me look like a fool towards the SE representative when I told him none major adult sponsor is stupid enough to do such thing. Of course I was wrong.
|
I deleted part of your text, but do agree with all of your points.
One major factor for which sniffy differentiates itself from other solutions, is that it is not based on KEYWORDS. Your post was referring to using keywords to segment and tag websites, and potentially leading to problems.
There are plenty of scripts that scan for keywords and will give these kinds of false-positive results are pointing out.
in sniffy's case, the website will be judged by many levels of testing, the most important being the actual validation of the image. I think that using keyword searches is a good first level check, but that just helps to focus your attention and priorities, rather than as THE solution to use.
So if sniffy finds CP images, and the reviewers deem the image is CP (ASACP guidelines, etc), then it's CP on the site! There are no false-positives in this approach. I do see there is a potential gray area about what is "CP", but as long as the guidelines are followed, then that keeps things atleast predictable.
Sniffy would simply tell the sponsor that a URL in their program has CP. The sponsor will check it out for themselves, using the facts that sniffy created, then make their judgement whether to warn the webmaster, or turn them into ASACP.
That's all that sniffy gives to the sponsor. So if the sponsor wants to rail a webmaster for having CP, it's not because of sniffy, it's because when the sponsor went to take a look, they saw the CP themselves, and took whatever course of action they deemed necessary.
so, sniffy isn't a cop, it's not policing, policing means enforcement, sniffy doesn't enforce, it informs.
-dj