Staff thread. Ask. Suggest. Get info.
You can talk to staff here about general issues, but not about how to post! You can get that information here:
https://namethatporn.com/help/faq.html
For community rules:
https://namethatporn.com/help.html
Violation of rules may result in suspension or ban from the site.
For account related issues, please contact us via:
https://account.namethatporn.com/contact
For other specific issues by email:
http://namethatporn.com/help/about-us.html
For beginner stuff, check out Yonis thread:
For questions that can be answered by other members:
Do not ask porn related questions here! To ask a question, create a new post.
https://namethatporn.com/help/faq.html
For community rules:
https://namethatporn.com/help.html
Violation of rules may result in suspension or ban from the site.
For account related issues, please contact us via:
https://account.namethatporn.com/contact
For other specific issues by email:
http://namethatporn.com/help/about-us.html
For beginner stuff, check out Yonis thread:
The ultimate noob guide
44.1k
80
11
7 years ago
For questions that can be answered by other members:
Any "Name That Porn" QUESTIONS..?
111.4k
71
2,227
12 years ago
Do not ask porn related questions here! To ask a question, create a new post.
159.6k
136
4,367
·
Can YOU Name That Porn?
You can still post as anon. Reload after login
@gff88
I have seen numerous links posted from foreign sites with no issue. Having said that I think it is rarely necessary to post in the language of information.
Here is an example. You confirmed this post.
It included this link.
https://ita.xhamster.com/videos/mommy-does-it-better-ep-2-xhpFr5F
If I remove the "Ita." in the url, I get a link from the English version of the website.
https://xhamster.com/videos/mommy-does-it-better-ep-2-xhpFr5F
xhamster has numerous sites with things xhome or xdesi or xhamster2. Sometimes you you need to change from .Ita to .com.
It usually doesn't take much to recognize the foreign version of the site.
Another thing I do is remove everything at the end of a url after the .com beginning with the question mark. That is usually some sort of tracking info.
That is something that I outside of here as well. Google can be particularly bad about giving you a 23 line link to share.
Why worry about it? I have an unpaid account at xhamster and xvideo. Since I am from a state that requires ID verification I can avoid the ID requirements on some sites where I have a account or at least minimize the process. If I go to a foreign site they want me to go through the process all over again.
I have seen numerous links posted from foreign sites with no issue. Having said that I think it is rarely necessary to post in the language of information.
Here is an example. You confirmed this post.
what's the name of this blonde pornstar in a blowjob
77
1
2
1 year ago
AnsweredIt included this link.
https://ita.xhamster.com/videos/mommy-does-it-better-ep-2-xhpFr5F
If I remove the "Ita." in the url, I get a link from the English version of the website.
https://xhamster.com/videos/mommy-does-it-better-ep-2-xhpFr5F
xhamster has numerous sites with things xhome or xdesi or xhamster2. Sometimes you you need to change from .Ita to .com.
It usually doesn't take much to recognize the foreign version of the site.
Another thing I do is remove everything at the end of a url after the .com beginning with the question mark. That is usually some sort of tracking info.
That is something that I outside of here as well. Google can be particularly bad about giving you a 23 line link to share.
Why worry about it? I have an unpaid account at xhamster and xvideo. Since I am from a state that requires ID verification I can avoid the ID requirements on some sites where I have a account or at least minimize the process. If I go to a foreign site they want me to go through the process all over again.
I'd love to hear your opinions on a discussion I had via private messaging. I had posted some xvideos links, and the descriptions (naturally, only in the extended part) were written in the language of the country I'm writing from. The person I was talking to insists that I should only post links that are entirely in English, because that's what NTP rules require. He even said there's a way to have a post removed if it's not in English.
Now, it's obvious and totally fair that replies and descriptions should be in English—no debate there. But links too? Do I really need to go find the English-language version of the same link? What's the point? Links (like PH or xvideos) are usually posted in the language of the country the user is writing from, but when others click on them, the video typically opens in their own language automatically.
So personally, I don't see the big issue my meticulous friend pointed out—namely, that links not in English should be removed to avoid showing nationality or origin. Are we really at that point on NTP?
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Now, it's obvious and totally fair that replies and descriptions should be in English—no debate there. But links too? Do I really need to go find the English-language version of the same link? What's the point? Links (like PH or xvideos) are usually posted in the language of the country the user is writing from, but when others click on them, the video typically opens in their own language automatically.
So personally, I don't see the big issue my meticulous friend pointed out—namely, that links not in English should be removed to avoid showing nationality or origin. Are we really at that point on NTP?
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
@EphraimGadsby
No, my comment about losing 25 points was not specifically about my recent negative points as if I had no idea why that happened (I already fully understood why even before my post 9 or 10 hours ago). It was a general statement about how the system works here with little to no explanation, where one could confirm a seemingly-acceptable answer only to find out later that, due to unpublished rules, it was in fact not acceptable.
And yes, when I spoke of a black box, I was referring to the auto-mod. But I now see that - again, because so little is actually explained - I assumed that actions taken were taken by the auto-mod, rather than a person. So some of what I wrote is attributable to the black box auto-mod, and some of it is attributable to unpublished rules (like, as you said below, tagging "Unknown actor" being disallowed).
To speak about learning the rules from actual people: I once wrote an answer where I tagged the correct name and explained that the actor was not another, more generic name, which I didn't tag. I was told to tag both, even though the second name didn't apply.
Another time, I answered a question that was a full movie request. I formatted everything correctly, provided a link to the full movie for purchase on its publisher's website as well as a site that sold whole movies, along with a note that the thumbnail could be confirmed by looking at the publisher website's image gallery for the film. This answer was marked something to the effect of 'impossible to be correct because incomplete' (I don't remember the exact wording). What was missing? I have no idea, but when I inquired here, others speculated that it might be because I didn't provide a free link to a film. This made no sense because I've seen plenty of answers accepted with a link only to a for-sale clip or full film. But I scoured searches for another 30 minutes or so to finally dig up a sketchy free source, added that, added a link to an X account about it, and it was left alone by the mods and eventually auto-mod accepted. I never did hear from a mod as to what was wrong with the first version of the answer.
All of this is to demonstrate my point: the process here is, frustratingly, devoid of actual documentation, whether about how human mods intervene in the day-to-day minutae of answering (I'm not talking about cases of unacceptable material; that's all well documented thankfully), or about how/when the auto-mod makes determinations. It's all mostly a guessing game. Even in your responses you're seemingly just sharing what you've gleaned from guessing over your time here. You say an old answer was perfectly acceptable, but that there's no harm in providing extra information. I'm guessing, because you've also said you don't know exactly how the auto-mod works, that you don't know whether providing the extra info has a beneficial effect in the auto-mod process, so you don't know if it's a waste of time to provide it or not. And that's what I'm trying to get at with my question here (from 9 hours ago).
No, my comment about losing 25 points was not specifically about my recent negative points as if I had no idea why that happened (I already fully understood why even before my post 9 or 10 hours ago). It was a general statement about how the system works here with little to no explanation, where one could confirm a seemingly-acceptable answer only to find out later that, due to unpublished rules, it was in fact not acceptable.
And yes, when I spoke of a black box, I was referring to the auto-mod. But I now see that - again, because so little is actually explained - I assumed that actions taken were taken by the auto-mod, rather than a person. So some of what I wrote is attributable to the black box auto-mod, and some of it is attributable to unpublished rules (like, as you said below, tagging "Unknown actor" being disallowed).
To speak about learning the rules from actual people: I once wrote an answer where I tagged the correct name and explained that the actor was not another, more generic name, which I didn't tag. I was told to tag both, even though the second name didn't apply.
Another time, I answered a question that was a full movie request. I formatted everything correctly, provided a link to the full movie for purchase on its publisher's website as well as a site that sold whole movies, along with a note that the thumbnail could be confirmed by looking at the publisher website's image gallery for the film. This answer was marked something to the effect of 'impossible to be correct because incomplete' (I don't remember the exact wording). What was missing? I have no idea, but when I inquired here, others speculated that it might be because I didn't provide a free link to a film. This made no sense because I've seen plenty of answers accepted with a link only to a for-sale clip or full film. But I scoured searches for another 30 minutes or so to finally dig up a sketchy free source, added that, added a link to an X account about it, and it was left alone by the mods and eventually auto-mod accepted. I never did hear from a mod as to what was wrong with the first version of the answer.
All of this is to demonstrate my point: the process here is, frustratingly, devoid of actual documentation, whether about how human mods intervene in the day-to-day minutae of answering (I'm not talking about cases of unacceptable material; that's all well documented thankfully), or about how/when the auto-mod makes determinations. It's all mostly a guessing game. Even in your responses you're seemingly just sharing what you've gleaned from guessing over your time here. You say an old answer was perfectly acceptable, but that there's no harm in providing extra information. I'm guessing, because you've also said you don't know exactly how the auto-mod works, that you don't know whether providing the extra info has a beneficial effect in the auto-mod process, so you don't know if it's a waste of time to provide it or not. And that's what I'm trying to get at with my question here (from 9 hours ago).
@THROWAWAY5759315
You referred in your post to an answer you confirmed which was marked incorrect & resulted in you losing 25 points.
Co-incidentally, this particular answer is something else I mentioned on this thread.
I don't know if you mean the Auto_Mod when you refer to 'black box', but the decision to mark the answer incorrect was taken by a human being, almost certainly a Moderator.
This is a tricky one to answer, because it's possible the Moderator might have made a mistake, but I'll give you my opinion, for what it's worth.
The OP asked for the video, nothing more.
If the answerer provided this & nothing else there wouldn't have been a problem.
However, the answerer provided a name of sorts, formatted correctly.
If this had been the performers' name/names, there would have been no problems.
Unfortunately, the answerer gave the name as Unknown Amateur or, something of that sort.
If you are ever going to name a performer as unknown, don't ever format it.
Recently, there were a rash of answers on here where the OP was asking for a name.
Answerer was saying unknown, posting on the Confirm Thread, people were confirming & the Auto_Mod was marking them solved.
It's practically impossible for any of us to state with any certainty that a performer is unknown.
Someone could be unsolved on here for ten years, or, marked Solved (unknown) & then somebody comes along & provides the name.
I know because I've seen it.
Setting up tags like Unknown doesn't help anybody.
I'm certain that's why the Moderator marked the answer as incorrect.
You referred in your post to an answer you confirmed which was marked incorrect & resulted in you losing 25 points.
Co-incidentally, this particular answer is something else I mentioned on this thread.
I don't know if you mean the Auto_Mod when you refer to 'black box', but the decision to mark the answer incorrect was taken by a human being, almost certainly a Moderator.
This is a tricky one to answer, because it's possible the Moderator might have made a mistake, but I'll give you my opinion, for what it's worth.
The OP asked for the video, nothing more.
If the answerer provided this & nothing else there wouldn't have been a problem.
However, the answerer provided a name of sorts, formatted correctly.
If this had been the performers' name/names, there would have been no problems.
Unfortunately, the answerer gave the name as Unknown Amateur or, something of that sort.
If you are ever going to name a performer as unknown, don't ever format it.
Recently, there were a rash of answers on here where the OP was asking for a name.
Answerer was saying unknown, posting on the Confirm Thread, people were confirming & the Auto_Mod was marking them solved.
It's practically impossible for any of us to state with any certainty that a performer is unknown.
Someone could be unsolved on here for ten years, or, marked Solved (unknown) & then somebody comes along & provides the name.
I know because I've seen it.
Setting up tags like Unknown doesn't help anybody.
I'm certain that's why the Moderator marked the answer as incorrect.
@THROWAWAY5759315
I indicated how the Auto_Moderator worked in my answer #2325522, a little further down the thread.
From your second post:
"If an answer has sat for 2 years, and does not include the full details spelled out in the prompted example when creating an answer (name AND movie title, both formatted), then it's not unreasonable to think the auto-mod didn't already confirm the past answer because it could be more complete."
You seem to be a little confused as to answering.
There are two things that need to be formatted correctly:
1. The names of performers
2. Movie/Video titles.
You don't have to provide both for every answer.
Always read the OP's question to see what they're asking for.
You didn't have to provide the movie title because it wasn't requested, nor did you have to provide a link to the video (although there is nothing wrong with doing so).
The original answer was therefore perfectly satisfactory, so you should really be confirming that answer, not answering over the top (although a lot of users do it!)
I don't know exactly how the Auto_Mod works, but I do know it reviews answers submitted to the Confirm Thread.
It may possibly pick up new answers on site, which are confirmed quickly by a number of users, but it's not going to scan old answers.
The Auto_Mod probably never saw the original answer you're talking about until it was submitted by you to the Confirm Thread.
It probably wasn't submitted by the original answerer.
When you submitted that answer to the Confirm Thread the Auto_Mod doesn't play favourites.
The first answerer has 4.5 million points, they probably have a good reputation for correct answers & confirms.
In addition there was a new confirm from someone who confirmed both answers.
I suspect if that confirmer had only confirmed your answer you would have gotten the points.
I'll post this reply now & try to answer your question regarding the incorrect answer in another post.
I indicated how the Auto_Moderator worked in my answer #2325522, a little further down the thread.
From your second post:
"If an answer has sat for 2 years, and does not include the full details spelled out in the prompted example when creating an answer (name AND movie title, both formatted), then it's not unreasonable to think the auto-mod didn't already confirm the past answer because it could be more complete."
You seem to be a little confused as to answering.
There are two things that need to be formatted correctly:
1. The names of performers
2. Movie/Video titles.
You don't have to provide both for every answer.
Always read the OP's question to see what they're asking for.
You didn't have to provide the movie title because it wasn't requested, nor did you have to provide a link to the video (although there is nothing wrong with doing so).
The original answer was therefore perfectly satisfactory, so you should really be confirming that answer, not answering over the top (although a lot of users do it!)
I don't know exactly how the Auto_Mod works, but I do know it reviews answers submitted to the Confirm Thread.
It may possibly pick up new answers on site, which are confirmed quickly by a number of users, but it's not going to scan old answers.
The Auto_Mod probably never saw the original answer you're talking about until it was submitted by you to the Confirm Thread.
It probably wasn't submitted by the original answerer.
When you submitted that answer to the Confirm Thread the Auto_Mod doesn't play favourites.
The first answerer has 4.5 million points, they probably have a good reputation for correct answers & confirms.
In addition there was a new confirm from someone who confirmed both answers.
I suspect if that confirmer had only confirmed your answer you would have gotten the points.
I'll post this reply now & try to answer your question regarding the incorrect answer in another post.
@Jouny56
You shouldn't be posting this question on the Staff Thread.
Your request should be posted on this thread:
You shouldn't be posting this question on the Staff Thread.
Your request should be posted on this thread:
Any "Name That Porn" QUESTIONS..?
111.4k
71
2,227
12 years ago
@gff88
You're right, again.
A Level 1 user can mark their question correct as long as somebody else has confirmed it first
You're right, again.
A Level 1 user can mark their question correct as long as somebody else has confirmed it first
@gff88
If an answer has sat for 2 years, and does not include the full details spelled out in the prompted example when creating an answer (name AND movie title, both formatted), then it's not unreasonable to think the auto-mod didn't already confirm the past answer because it could be more complete.
To actual staff/mods:
What's most frustrating here is that this website has very little published information about how decisions are made; it's essentially a black box. (Even in the little info that IS provided, such as the NOOB guide, the example for how to answer includes a formatted movie title.) It's frustrating to waste time on providing a more-complete answer, especially with what little information available seems to confirm that the reason a past one wasn't yet accepted is because it is missing something small, only to have the black box make some other decision.
Not to mention, if one DOES confirm an older answer in a scenario like this, only for the black box to deem it incorrect because it's partial, one runs the risk of losing points for having done so.
If an answer has sat for 2 years, and does not include the full details spelled out in the prompted example when creating an answer (name AND movie title, both formatted), then it's not unreasonable to think the auto-mod didn't already confirm the past answer because it could be more complete.
To actual staff/mods:
What's most frustrating here is that this website has very little published information about how decisions are made; it's essentially a black box. (Even in the little info that IS provided, such as the NOOB guide, the example for how to answer includes a formatted movie title.) It's frustrating to waste time on providing a more-complete answer, especially with what little information available seems to confirm that the reason a past one wasn't yet accepted is because it is missing something small, only to have the black box make some other decision.
Not to mention, if one DOES confirm an older answer in a scenario like this, only for the black box to deem it incorrect because it's partial, one runs the risk of losing points for having done so.
@THROWAWAY5759315
Regarding the technical matters about the auto-moderator, more experienced and knowledgeable users than me will answer you. I just wanted to point out that the OP's request was: "What's the name of this porn actor?" And that had already been correctly answered by the previous user, who also provided two source links and a video clip. The fact that you enriched the answer two years later by adding the full video and the title wasn't part of the OP's original request.
Something similar happened to me some time ago with a level 156 user or so, who replied after me but added the title and other details. However, the request was only about the actress's name. Even though he received many more confirmations than I did, in the end the auto-moderator assigned the answer to me.
Regarding the technical matters about the auto-moderator, more experienced and knowledgeable users than me will answer you. I just wanted to point out that the OP's request was: "What's the name of this porn actor?" And that had already been correctly answered by the previous user, who also provided two source links and a video clip. The fact that you enriched the answer two years later by adding the full video and the title wasn't part of the OP's original request.
Something similar happened to me some time ago with a level 156 user or so, who replied after me but added the title and other details. However, the request was only about the actress's name. Even though he received many more confirmations than I did, in the end the auto-moderator assigned the answer to me.
I'd like to ask for information about how auto-mod works. Here is the thread in question
I submitted a new answer rather than confirm the one already provided because it was incomplete, as it didn't have the name of the video. I also added a link to a free version of the video.
Auto-mod confirmed the older, less complete answer, despite mine quickly receiving double the number of confirms as the 2-year-old one.
Is this the correct outcome? If not, where does one go to have it corrected and to receive the points?
What's the name of this porn actor?
284
2
3
10 years ago
AnsweredI submitted a new answer rather than confirm the one already provided because it was incomplete, as it didn't have the name of the video. I also added a link to a free version of the video.
Auto-mod confirmed the older, less complete answer, despite mine quickly receiving double the number of confirms as the 2-year-old one.
Is this the correct outcome? If not, where does one go to have it corrected and to receive the points?
I think I’ve answered myself. I remembered that when I signed up on this site a year ago to submit a request, I received a reply shortly after and I was the one who resolved it, and I was at level 1. But I was probably able to do it because another user had confirmed the response I had been given. I think that’s why. So I suppose that when level 1 users receive one or more confirmations to their answer and don’t resolve it, it’s either because they don’t know they can, or more likely, because they’re not interested in doing so.
I thought (but evidently I was wrong) that level 1 users couldn’t confirm answers. But then I saw several answers marked as solved by level 1 OPs. Can they confirm answers normally, or are there specific conditions that allow them to do so? Thanks to anyone who replies.
Hello guys i looking for free website or app or a way to make from photo of girl not gif a short porn video this is trendy now
The website i looking for same but free is
https://motionmuse.ai/explore?utm_source=referral&utm_campaign=invite&utm_content=gh92nn65
https://motionmuse.ai/explore?utm_source=referral&utm_campaign=invite&utm_content=gh92nn65
I just want a free way or app or website with no credits to make this videos from photos
The website i looking for same but free is
https://motionmuse.ai/explore?utm_source=referral&utm_campaign=invite&utm_content=gh92nn65
https://motionmuse.ai/explore?utm_source=referral&utm_campaign=invite&utm_content=gh92nn65
I just want a free way or app or website with no credits to make this videos from photos
@EphraimGadsby
Okay, got it. So in this case, the user replying would’ve been better off just linking the video without mentioning 'Unknown Amateurs'—two words that really don’t belong together! :-))) Thanks a ton, as insightful as ever. Take care!
Okay, got it. So in this case, the user replying would’ve been better off just linking the video without mentioning 'Unknown Amateurs'—two words that really don’t belong together! :-))) Thanks a ton, as insightful as ever. Take care!
@gff88
I would agree that the answer as regards the video is correct.
However, answers stating Unknown or Unknown Amateurs, etc, should never be tagged.
People have done this before, the answer has been accepted & then later somebody comes along & provides a name.
I suspect this is what triggered the Moderator to act.
I would agree that the answer as regards the video is correct.
However, answers stating Unknown or Unknown Amateurs, etc, should never be tagged.
People have done this before, the answer has been accepted & then later somebody comes along & provides a name.
I suspect this is what triggered the Moderator to act.
@calypso31
As user D-Mac already pointed out, in the rejected responses you made the mistake of not tagging the name of the protagonist(s) correctly, writing it normally instead of enclosing it in square brackets.
As user D-Mac already pointed out, in the rejected responses you made the mistake of not tagging the name of the protagonist(s) correctly, writing it normally instead of enclosing it in square brackets.
Anybody got her name or a video?
147
3
1
4 years ago
Who is this brunette masterbating in the passenger seat?
188
2
3
10 months ago
AnsweredWho is she? What's her name?
346
2
1
12 months ago
Hello. I would like to understand why the answer linked below (which I had confirmed) was considered incorrect. The OP asked where to find the video (they did not ask for the full video) and did not ask to know the identity of one or both actors in the scene. Since I’m quite certain that the video linked by the user who responded is the one requested, I’d like to understand where the mistake lies. This is to avoid making it in the future, not only when confirming similar answers, but also potentially when giving such an answer myself. Many thanks in advance to anyone who can provide some explanation.
Where can I find this video?
436
1
1
10 years ago
AnsweredHi, many of my answer are mark "Answer can’t be marked as correct to due missing or incorrectly used tags." i don't understand what is the probleme, can u help me ?
SPONSORED
Other solved questions