If You Post Photos But Aren't Verified Why Not?

[Stratavos]

I was verified and then it was revoked. I haven't felt the need to re-verify since.

 

[vxie]

I was verified and then it was revoked. I haven't felt the need to re-verify since.

haha yeah same for me

 

[1376832]

Never thought about it that way but that's a good point . It keeps members from posting a penis belonging to someone else as their own

Ohhh OK that's why lol

 

[Hatched69]

I have been verified twice, and twice revoked. Once, "because" (I never really got an answer), and the second time I was told because I didn't show enough skin. So - I grew weary of trying.

 

[Hatched69]

I was verified and then it was revoked. I haven't felt the need to re-verify since.

Same here..

 

[Squirrel1]

I have been verified twice, and twice revoked. Once, "because" (I never really got an answer), and the second time I was told because I didn't show enough skin. So - I grew weary of trying.

Well the verification photo in your album shows no dick at all, just you in a tee shirt with your name on a piece of paper. The first post has the instructions on what is acceptable.

 

[bkmuscledad]

Well the verification photo in your album shows no dick at all, just you in a tee shirt with your name on a piece of paper. The first post has the instructions on what is acceptable.

And that's what's wrong with the verification standards. The men are required to show full frontal nudity, and the women aren't.

 

[Squirrel1]

And that's what's wrong with the verification standards. The men are required to show full frontal nudity, and the women aren't.

His photo could be a woman with hairy legs, if it came right down to it. No offence @Hatched69 .

 

[bkmuscledad]

His photo could be a woman with hairy legs, if it came right down to it. No offence @Hatched69 .

I would not tend to think so; by your same argument, photos of women in shirts could appear to be men with gynecomastia. My point is this: men can take photos of themselves that don't need to show full frontal nudity to prove it. I'd like to be verified but I don't feel I should have to exhibit my privates to do so.

 

[Squirrel1]

I would not tend to think so; by your same argument, photos of women in shirts could appear to be men with gynecomastia. My point is this: men can take photos of themselves that don't need to show full frontal nudity to prove it. I'd like to be verified but I don't feel I should have to exhibit my privates to do so.

Well it is a site about penises. Women don't have penises so maybe boobs or vag for them? There's really no clear-cut answer on this one. You can also just pay if you want gold.

 

[bkmuscledad]

Well it is a site about penises. Women don't have penises so maybe boobs or vag for them? There's really no clear-cut answer on this one. You can also just pay if you want gold.

I think there's a fair solution. The women need only show enough to prove that they're female. It doesn't necessarily mean they have to show their nakedness. I'd say it should be the same for the men.

 

[Hatched69]

His photo could be a woman with hairy legs, if it came right down to it. No offence @Hatched69 .

No offense taken. In my first verification photo, I did show my twig and giggleberries, along with plenty of other skin. But, the verification was yanked for an as-of-yet-undisclosed reason. So, I went with what you saw in the current photo. I am of the mindset that verification SHOULD require a photo of your "bits and pieces" - male AND female alike. Yes, this is a phallic-oriented site, but asking someone to reciprocate when exposing oneself isn't too much to ask, IMHO.

 

[semface]

I've been coming across a lot of great photos and albums posted by users that aren't verified. So I wanted to ask for those of you that aren't verified why not?

Also, did you know getting verified comes with a Gold Membership?

WHAAAAT? Really?

 

[bigmatt1983]

pretty sure i was at one point and it was removed, i still have the verification picture uploaded

 

[LankySam]

No verification pic implies that perhaps none of that user’s posted pics are of themself. At least one verification pic makes it far more likely the rest of that user’s pics are themself but of course not guaranteed. In my view any pic posted in a “show off” area of the site or any “exhibitionist” area should be verified, i.e. include the user’s LPSG userid.

 

[trigon00]

I didnt know there were any benefits to verifying until i read this. Now I guess Ill try and take a pic i like and try to get verified.

 

[grease]

I don't know, never really crossed my mind, or felt like I needed to.

 

[derrikcoba]

I've been coming across a lot of great photos and albums posted by users that aren't verified. So I wanted to ask for those of you that aren't verified why not?

Also, did you know getting verified comes with a Gold Membership?

I was a member for years before getting verified. I had no idea it came with a gold membership until another user told me.

 

[Goltzius]

Been lurking for a while. Joined today. That 'Gold' membership for verifying sells it to me. Cool. You'll get a verification photo in the week when I have enough privacy at home to get my cock erect and get creative with it.

 

[916416]

I was a member for a year or so before I verified. I did not know Gold status came with verification. Once I found that out I didn’t care how bad the photo could turn out I was getting verified lol.