Wetlook World Forum

I can understand your speculation and assumptions, but your assumptions are not correct. Where you speculate...

>The problem with the WamBank is working on a "first come, first served" basis.

1) That is totally incorrect. We do NOT have a policy of "first come, first served". We have been rejecting hundreds of clips so far that had the Wamtec Gold or WetinRed or ECgunge or Acthung Wetkook markings on them. Our moderators have worked very hard to confirm with people to get them for confirm to us that they made the clips themselves. We have also rejected numerous clips that have mainstream site website addresses or logos too.

2) We have also been rejecting dozens of suspicious clips that are a red-flag to us....i.e clips that have a DIVX logo...but the file is in wmv format...which is an obvious clue that that this is a recycled or converted file. We have also been rejecting all clips that look heavility pixelated with artifacts...which is a red flag that somebody took a clip from a low quality sub-standard video site like Youtube and they have converted that file.

>So for instance: JW made a clip. gave it to us for free. Than someone uploaded JW's clip as his, got ANOTHER free clip for not his work

>and a few days later JW has his own clip rejected.

We received an accusatory and baseless message from JW...and he made broad claims and presented us with no facts at all. He could not point us to one single video on our site that he claimed was his. He did not present us with any facts that showed that the file was the same file as he made. ..because he had made his files in AVI format...and because we also had some of those same scene as a WMV clips he made the totally ludicrous claim that those wmv clips must have been re-edited from his AVI clips. We conducted an investigation and could not find any duplicate "files" that were his. His clips were rejected because they were duplicate "scenes" that we already had (in a different file format). JW then made ridiculous claims that those wmv clips must be coming from his AVI files....and I had to break the news to him...that there are 60 million people living in the UK...and he is NOT the ONLY person living in the UK who is able to tape uk tv shows....and we could provide him with a list of 50+ other uk people we know who have capture cards and ALSO tape those SAME uk shows as he does. So...for JW to assert that all UK tv clips must be his....regardless of what the file format may be....is arrogance beyond credulity. His statements on this forum we were baseless and slander...and I demanded that he post an apology or retraction for making those totally baseless statements...and he has not done so....so that says a lot about his character. His statements about us were totally baseless and devoid of any facts.

>That's a big flaw

There are some flaws....but they are not our flaws. The flaws are with those people who make clips who do not put their logos or markings on them....cos we are able to detect all the wamtec gold and actung ws wetlook and ecgunge clips and reject those...and we can also detect most of Steve's WIR clips too. We already told JW that he needs to watermark or logo his clips in future....cos it is much harder for our moderators to detect a clip that has zero markings on it.

Myspace and Youtube clips are easily detected....i.e. they are really crappy pixelated clips with artifacts and strobing (low frame rates and do not play smoothy_ so we have been deleting all Myspace and Youtube clips in our pending review area and none of those get onto the site.

>So it doesn't really count, who made dthe clip, but who uploaded it first.

Not true....the only person that counts with us...are the original people who made the clip. We are doing the best job we can...to reward the original creators of clips...and to block and reject the recyclers of clips. We may not be perfect....because some people do not give us any signs or markings to look for.....but our moderators try to scan the clips as best they can to look for obvious signs of recycling.

>So IMHO for the WamBank to work nicely each clip should be checked with the well-known clip providers for years (there are not many of them)

You arre 100% correct...and we have already done that BTW. We have already contacted most of the other major clip sites.....and we have offered them an "open audit" whereby they are granted 2000 credits so they can check anything they want on our site, and we will remove all items they find that match the same file attributes as their file (i.e. same byte size, file format, bit rate, screen size, time-length etc). Our site is an "open book"...for any wam producers or clip-maker to check on us any time they like...and we will remove any errant clips that have slipped thru the cracks. We have already established a new media-sharing agreement with the WetinRed site...where they will be allowed to take any of OUR clips they want ...each month...and to place those on the WIR site for WIR members to see.  We have granted the WIR site a totally one-sided deal...i.e. we are REJECTING any wir clips that come to our site....but we are GIVING a new batch of free videos to the WIR site each month....so we are getting nothing from them...and they will be getting LOTS from us. The same thing will apply to other clip sites too...we do not want anything from them....but we will provide lots of free clips for them to show their people on their sites. We can't be more fairer than that.

>The way it is now, the person who uses someone elses clip gets another one for free, the provider doesn't.

>That is highly unfair.

Our policy is the total opposite to that. We have assembled a team of 7 people who are are highly knowledgeable of the wet and messy world and they KNOW all the producers and their media....fyi...2 of the 7 moderators are none other than a) Liberatorwam...who is also the chief moderator for the UMD forum...and so nobody knows the UMD fans and producers better than he does...and b) From this forum there is AnthonyX...who as you know..he his own wetlook sites and he knows all the movies and because he also works for WETINRED and his site too....and I deliberately hired moderators who have ties to the UMD forum and WETINRED site....so...I hired the best 7 pit bulls I could get to moderate things.

You guys on this forum are already convicting us with all these unfair assumptions and false remarks. I am not going to waste my time trying to convince you all that we are trying to do the best job we can to respect the other wam producers and other clips sites and clip maker.

>And also tells us much about our community.

It is just human nature...not this community...and human nature is....."boys will be boys"...and there will always be a rogue element who just like to take other peoples clips and recycle them. I already have 7 top moderators....and even if I have 100 moderators....there will always be the odd clip that sneaks onto the site and should not be there.  FYI our site is managed 7 times better than this Wetlook forum is....because we have 7 moderators and this  forum has no moderators at all....it is "Dodge City"....it only has a Sheriff who is out of town most of the time and who does not check the site for days. Youtube have a staff of 200 people and they are constantly removing thousands of clips every week. FYI...last month Youtube had to remove 30,000 tv clips from Japanese tv stations (mostly tv dramas and music video)...and last week the tv channel "Comedy Central" filed a complaint with Youtube and now Youtube has to remove all clips from Comedy Central tv shows.  We are doing best job we can...and we will remove all errant clips reported to us on the same day. No other website in the wam world has a management team of 7 people like ours site has.

regards

WBM