• Content

  • Updated and re-uploaded videos

Philip

Philip Is there any way to find out why the POV version of this scene was taken down?
https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/aloys-shelter-voyeur-5012

It's one of my favorite scenes. Luckily I had kept a copy on my hard drive and I couldn't see anything about it that was nonconsensual or pissing, etc for the compliance rules. Now I'm worried about deleting any of my faves in case they get randomly removed from SLR without warning.

      12 days later

      anordr No, it's the notification system that is still not perfected.

      It's been several days that I've been receiving a lot of notification updates for videos that have already been out for several weeks/months.

        CyberVR Just downloaded the 4K H.265 and it was still only 43 mins. Downloaded it again immediately after and it was the full 57 mins file. Seems like an issue with CDN caching old data.

          4 days later
          9 days later
          4 months later

          anordr Looks like this particular scene was removed for compliance purposes. More info here.

          You can always try requesting the status or possible reinstatement in either of those threads. Sometimes scenes can be brought back, though sometimes they can't - but no harm in asking.

              6 days later

              Thanks for that, can’t really remember what it was about, just saw it on my watch later list and was going to check if it was worth a download but obviously it’s gone. Hopefully we can get it back.

              It seems this one got caught in the initial compliance net because something which may or may not be alcohol was in the frame. I've set it live again.

              Just come across another one in my watch later list that has disappeared https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/dp-vip-room-22317?playlist=438287

              This is clearly set in a bar so I am assuming it’s some alcohol related thing. Just curious what the compliance level is. Can there be no alcohol in the frame? No consumption? Or is it only if the character in the story is clearly supposed to be drunk and therefore unable to fully consent?

              I can understand the latter if one or both participants are acting drunk, staggering around etc. as that kind of puts consent in doubt (although movies and tv shows can seem to freely portray people getting drunk in a bar and having sex without fear of censure).

              It would be limiting though if it’s either of the first two options. If we’re talking ‘Sexlikereal’ nothing more real than picking up a girl in a bar/club and taking her home. I don’t mean getting her paralytic drunk but having a couple of drinks where everyone is still sober and in control doesn’t seem to be too controversial.

              The scene is on POVR so I can get it from there if it’s any good but I'd be disappointed if we can never have scenarios where we hook up with a girl whilst in a bar/club. That’s the most natural thing in the world, it’s why most people go to those places.

                petermc

                Just curious what the compliance level is. Can there be no alcohol in the frame? No consumption? Or is it only if the character in the story is clearly supposed to be drunk and therefore unable to fully consent?

                Sooooo..... this is not an easy question to answer, I think at some point I'm going to write a detailed blog post or make a podcast about how we make these decisions. @ApolloSLR Want to become a podcaster with me?

                Here is a completely theoretical example. Completely. Theoretical.

                Imagine the childhood game of telephone. At one end of the chain you have law makers and the card networks, at the other end there is us. Someone with legislative or regulatory power will make a rule, for example "you must not host material depicting non-consensual behaviour."

                That rule will get amended and expanded further down the chain, the next "whisper" might be "you must not show any material where people have reduced or no capacity to consent." As different banks, acquirers and payment processors get involved in the chain the rules evolve and are interpreted differently. "You must not show people who are drunk." "You must not show people drinking." "You must not show alcohol." "You must not show a can of liquid which someone squinting might mistake for a can of beer."

                To make things even more fun, the people interpreting and setting the rules don't necessarily show their working, or explain why they have come to a particular decision.

                We try to be more open here. The general rules we follow are in this thread

                In the case of this specific video it was caught in the initial compliance sweep for containing alcohol. The characters portrayed do not appear to be intoxicated or lack the capacity to consent so I have reactivated it for now.

                Restrictions in this area are getting tighter though. Maybe send your bank a copy of this article.