Bearchive .com down ?

[NimrodClover]

Yes, the BEA forum appears to be closer to its previous responsiveness.

Yes, when the BEA shifted more items (some previously free) to behind pay walls there was an impact.

Yes, the early BEA was rather different than what one sees today. Much more BE than now. Also, much less support and discussion of all manner of BE.

I will say that the whole 1-image, 1-post, 1-day thing has never seemed to be a real problem as the VAST MAJORITY (like 93.75%) of users do not post any images.

Well, now that it appears to be working a bit better. Let's go see if we can make it a bit more like the good-old-days.

[Prinz Eugen]

Originally Posted by NimrodClover

Yes, the BEA forum appears to be closer to its previous responsiveness.

Yes, when the BEA shifted more items (some previously free) to behind pay walls there was an impact.

Yes, the early BEA was rather different than what one sees today. Much more BE than now. Also, much less support and discussion of all manner of BE.

I will say that the whole 1-image, 1-post, 1-day thing has never seemed to be a real problem as the VAST MAJORITY (like 93.75%) of users do not post any images.

Well, now that it appears to be working a bit better. Let's go see if we can make it a bit more like the good-old-days.

I have always maintained some of my work over there... Then they messed up my membership...sigh.... I fondly remember the good old days..

[fredzor]

Originally Posted by NimrodClover

Yes, the BEA forum appears to be closer to its previous responsiveness.

Yes, when the BEA shifted more items (some previously free) to behind pay walls there was an impact.

Yes, the early BEA was rather different than what one sees today. Much more BE than now. Also, much less support and discussion of all manner of BE.

I will say that the whole 1-image, 1-post, 1-day thing has never seemed to be a real problem as the VAST MAJORITY (like 93.75%) of users do not post any images.

Well, now that it appears to be working a bit better. Let's go see if we can make it a bit more like the good-old-days.

I agree that not many people were affected by the rule, and the issues didn't really stem from the rule at all, just how it was enforced. It honestly should have been a software/server side restriction and not something that needed to be policed by real people. The way the mods would aggressively go after people who also were the biggest content providers was kind of insane.

[Lightfoot]

It might just be me, but it's SSOOO slow. Like click on a link and wait 15 minutes for anything to load. I don't remember it being this slow even back on dial-up.

[NimrodClover]

Hmmm. I have not tried to go there in a while. The browser is taking about 60-90 seconds to resolve. They were doing some housecleaning these last few weeks so it is possible that somebody messed something up again. I know they were trying to expunge all the Chelsea Charms content, which may make up about 10% of the site!

[Blake Isaac Gordon]

Originally Posted by NimrodClover

Hmmm. I have not tried to go there in a while. The browser is taking about 60-90 seconds to resolve. They were doing some housecleaning these last few weeks so it is possible that somebody messed something up again. I know there were trying to expunge all the Chelsea Charms content, which may make up about 10% of the site!

That sounds like a killer story. I wonder why?

Hmmmm

[Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by Blake Isaac Gordon

That sounds like a killer story. I wonder why?

Hmmmm

She retired and asked them to remove everything. And they seem to be removing everything, even morphs.

[NimrodClover]

Yes, it is a little unprecedented in its scope and extent. Other models have requested that no copyright images be posted, or that no new content added, or that threads specific to them be removed. But in Charms' case, it appears that it goes well into derivative works, discussions, and those things related. With the forum acting the way it is, it has been a bit difficult to see what is disappearing. There was either some legal aspects involved or someone just messed up in tinkering with the forum.

Anyway, taking Charms out of the BEA is a bit like taking peanuts out of a Snickers candy bar, it can be done, but tends to mess up the bar along the way.

I still can't think of another example of this much capitulation to a person's request.

[Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by NimrodClover

I still can't think of another example of this much capitulation to a person's request.

I also don't know what it accomplishes. It's not the biggest site on the internet, and there have to be pictures and stories about her everywhere. Is she going to try to take down every picture of her everywhere? I mean she had a Wikipedia page, a page on IMDB, and news stories about her on big news sites.

Do posts about her on the BEA forum matter? If you do an image search for her you find tons of pictures, none of them from the BEA. It seems a little silly considering her fame.

[NimrodClover]

There is a bit of speculation that first appeared when the BEA mods first mentioned that the Charms mega-thread and related postings were removed or being removed per her request. This is actually about all we know. For some other reasons, Charms targeted the BEA specifically, made a request (or requests), and the Forum Masters responded to a degree far beyond what they have ever done for any other person. It essentially goes against what the site agreement says any user can expect in terms of content control. They really have given her special service by going to such lengths to remove her content at the BEA. It is unprecedented. My frustration is that in their zeal they may have damaged the forum.

It feels like they drove the truck off the road, somewhere they have never, and should never have gone, and are now stuck in the mud, only because one of the passengers said they wanted to.

There has to be some reason why the BEA was on her radar and why they have gone to such lengths to remove most anything about her. My theory is that, out of all the real world BE people out there, Charms parallels the BEA's existence. In truth, she is really just that, BE. That is all she is known for and what makes her distinct. The attention and scrutiny and critiques of her at the BEA are inexorably linked to her augmentations and are were woven through both bodies. (literally)

Now that she has had reduction or in truth removal, it does seem she is removing one of the more conspicuous sources of history, analysis, admiration, and criticism regarding that phase of her life. It is not that the BEA is rather minor on the internet it is that the BEA happens to be almost exactly what she is trying to cut out of her history.
Unlike most of the other adult sites that have her content, the BEA actually dealt specifically with the one item that made her special. Now that she has had to physically remove that, she is removing the BEA content. The two are linked.

She is not going after one of the dozens of generic porn sites that has her waggling her chest at some convention, claiming some preposterous chest size, or being titillating with some drooling fan but rather a site that has discussed in great depth her reasons, career, motivations, her ACTUAL SIZE, her personality, and changes over time. That is what the BEA does.

It may be that she has defined herself for so long by the former thin superficial that it is a little unsettling for her to know there was a long-running site that scrutinized her at a much deeper level while using the very vehicle (her chest) as the focal point. When she cut out the one she had to cut out the other.

Now it could be total coincidence that the Charms request and systematic removal of chunks of the forum (including a multi-decade thread with interspersed attachments and cross-links) just happened to coincide with one of the few major problem/crashes of the BEA forum. But, it is difficult not to remember earlier examples or get the feeling that someone just drove the the truck into the mud.

The BEA was still super slow today...

[Blake Isaac Gordon]

Originally Posted by NimrodClover

...But, it is difficult not to remember earlier examples or get the feeling that someone just drove the the truck into the mud.

The BEA was still super slow today...

Mercy-- this gets better and better, thanks for the very cool read.

[Prinz Eugen]

takes a very very long time to load...something is really wrong