Monday, December 19, 2011

Is Anyone Up?

WARNING: Although you have previously agreed to proceed after a Blogger-based warning message, this post is of a more controversial nature than this blog's usual content. Furthermore, it is much longer than my previous opinion-based articles posted in the past.

Okay. I admit it. I can no longer sit back and simply bitch on-site about the site in question. I gotta do it publicly now. This will be tl;dr (Too Long, Didn't Read, for you non-Internet-savvy readers) to many of you but if you've ever followed or read my blog before, this comes as no shock. It's just a little more so than usual.

I'd have marked this article as NSFW except that my blog itself is, in its raw state, considered the same. To avoid the "You coulda told me!!" crowd, the site in question contains nudity. It shows boobs, schlongs, hoo-ha's, pimples, questionable bumps (most of which are almost always automatically considered herpes to many of the sites commenters) butts, buttholes (which spawned a new hash tag: #NBHNC or No Butt Hole, No Care), hemorrhoids and a whole host of other coulda-gone-the-rest-of-my-life-without-seeing-that's.

Is Anyone Up? is a web site in which jilted exes and the like, submit their former partners, past friends and acquaintances in all their glory (or complete and utter lack thereof [i.e. gnargoyles aka gnargs]).  On the flip side, wannabe players and models, delusional narcissists, up-and-coming bands/band members and e-celebs also submit their own nudes (also known as n00dz and other pathetic memes).

Now, hypocritically to some of you, I frequent the site in question so let me put that out there now. I tripped across it when I ran across a news story about hacked celebs and some female "rapper's" photos being leaked. When I found them, they had Is Anyone Up?'s watermark shamelessly stamped on them. The rest is history. I've gone back quite a few many, many times since.

So why in the holy hell am I writing an article slamming it if I frequent it?!? Would you believe, "for research purposes"? Yeah. Me either. I go because I like to see naked people. I like controversy. I like seeing Internet flame wars. I have a morbid curiosity about many things. I cave to them. Simple as that. That being said, I also have strong opinions and I despise lies and hypocrisy, which the site's creator, Hunter Moore, and Is Anyone Up?'s Terms Of Service are littered with.

If you're still reading, you have a lot of time on your hands and are either very open-minded or are looking for more ammo to slam me with. Either way, kudos! Being that I've been frequenting Is Anyone Up? (henceforth referred to as IAU) for a while, my diatribe is going to be entirely too long. I've had a lot of time to form my opinions and haven't voiced nearly enough of them openly so they kinda built up. You've been warned. Unlike many blogs and articles that slam IAU and/or Hunter Moore, this article is at least somewhat informed, if nothing else. I have not interviewed or otherwise spoken with Hunter Moore or any of his staff at Is Anyone Up?. My opinions, however much shared or not, are my own and anything seemingly presented as fact has become thus labeled through interviews I've heard and read and from deductions I've made from my own experiences. I may be wrong, factually, on some portions...and freely admit that. I'm not a journalist. I'm a guy with too much time and an opinion.

Geez. Where do I start? First I'll start with the site itself and what it contains, then move on to its owner, Hunter Moore, and his sheep, puppets, donors and most loyal followers. Let's start with parts of the Terms of Service: (Directly from their source and in italics)

Concerning The Site:

Early on, it states that "you must be 18 years of age or over to use this web site". Ding! Ding! We haaaaave bullshit! Countless times, in the comments of random posts on IAU, girls talk about being too young to self-submit or showing how eager they are to turn 18 and do so. If that isn't enough, Hunter Moore himself, on his Twitter feed, tells girls (to the girls themselves most of the time) to submit when they turn 18. Furthermore, just today, I saw where he was telling a 15 year old male to clear his cache so that the site's new content would then show up.

Now, I'm not a total idiot. I know that people lie about their age. I know teens are sexualized as hell these days. I know that visitor count means a lot when running a web site. The simple fact is, IAU only puts it in their Terms of Service to cover their asses. The responsibility lies, as well it should, with the parents when it comes to keeping their under-aged offspring from sites such as IAU. Where I have an issue with it is when it's undeniable that there are minors present and not a thing (seemingly anyway) is done to remedy it.

Content Posted On This Web Site
This one is likely the most laughable. ([Emphasis is mine]):  "In connection with User-Submitted Content, you affirm, represent, and/or warrant that: you won[sic] or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents and permissions to...[submit what you're submitting]". HA! Damn near the entire site's premise is based on the exact opposite! Hypocritical much?!?

Content Posted On This Web Site (continued)
"You acknowledge that is acting as a passive conduit of User-Submitted Content and that is not undertaking any obligation or liability relating to any content or activity on the website. As such, acts merely as a forum for the expression of ideas, thoughts, and information. is not responsible for any inaccurate, wrong, offensive, inappropriate, or defamatory content that is contained herein."

Really? "...a passive conduit of User-Submitted Content...", "...not undertaking any...liability...", "...not responsible for inaccurate, wrong, offensive, inappropriate, or defamatory content..."? Are you serious?!? Again, HA! I dare say the site isn't intended to show people in a positive light (99.9% of the time) and for Hunter to act as if his site is all user-submitted has always irked me! He posts girls he's (supposedly) had sex with (or smashed, as he so eloquently words it), "fingered", "gotten head from", etc, constantly. At least once or twice, the girl in question has commented on the site and said he was as full of shit as he is illiterate.

On the same "...only User-Submitted Content..." and "third-party" front, users submit. Hunter and his "staff" review it. They verify the age of the subject. They upload it elsewhere. They make screen shots of the subjects' Facebook or Twitter profiles. They upload it to IAU's server. In short, he/they do indeed upload the content themselves even if only transferred. That's getting pretty darn technical, but I digress. (I could have a small detail of that process a little off) As far as verifying the age of the subjects, they've dropped the ball there a few times as well. Verifying one's age doesn't always verify ones age in the photographs in question. I've heard EXIF-data mentioned in part of that process as well. My gut tells me doing a screen shot of a pic, cropping it and making it a new photo, would render moot all that quasi-investigation. I reserve the right to be wrong here.

Content Posted On This Web Site (continued again) Not the complete list referenced and emphasis is mine:
 "A partial list of content that is illegal or prohibited includes content that:
Harasses or invades the privacy of another person" Bwahahahaha! You're killing me here!!! You do everything but post hyperlinks to their Facebook and/or Twitter profiles themselves and, when others do, I see none of those comments deleted by the "moderators".

"Promotes an illegal or unauthorized copy of another’s copyrighted work" This one could be argued that one who takes photos of themselves owns the copyright. A legal gray area. Its critics conclude that once the photos in question were passed to another, they relinquished their copyright. Another legal gray area.

"Promotes information you know is false, misleading* or promotes illegal activity or conduct that is abusive, threatening, obscene, defamatory** or libelous" *You mean like posts labeled "Herps Confirmed" containing poorly-photoshopped Valtrex medicine bottles with the subject's name made as if to appear on it, or going by little more (if any more) than the submitter's word? **You mean like using rape as a "funny" headline to the post? Labeling someone as a gnarg? Calling people "IAU-confirmed band whores" based solely on their own or others' words? Okay. I get you. (Most of this section's Terms of Service references are basically repeated in the Code of Conduct portion)

You also agree that you will not:
"harvest or collect information about the users of this website" Some of the subjects ARE users and commenters have claimed openly, many times, to the ol' "right-click and save". Granted, this is another example of "ya can't really control it but cover your ass with legalese".

Hunter Moore
"Hunter Moore is the face and one of the moderators for Hunter Moore does not steal, buy* or collect** any content posted on the site. Everything here is user submitted." Bullshiiiiiit! *Bounties are offered regularly. Not always by Hunter himself, however. (If he never has, then I sit corrected and hereby apologize....for that part). **He submits from time to time so, therefore has "collected content".

Concerning Its Owner: (Hunter Moore)

Believe it or not, as lengthy as the above (site-relevant portion) is, my biggest problem is more with the site's owner who is Hunter Moore. It's not a personal problem with him. I don't know the guy and have absolutely zero wish to. My beef is with his attitude, his lack of any semblance of respect for (most) others and his overall demeanor.

My opinion(s), as well as that/those of others, mean(s) nothing to him and that's fine. He shouldn't have to ask, "How high?" when someone says, "Jump!". I don't fault the guy for not caring what people think...but when those "people" are little more than nameless faces and sometimes the "victims" of his site's sole purpose, it becomes an issue for me. Whether he (or any of you) cares or not, I'm just voicing my opinion as many others have done. If, for nothing else, just to frickin' say I got my turn.

Hunter Moore is (as of this post) 25 or so and can barely form a sentence, much less spell the words therein. He freely admits (as if he had to) that fact. He is also endlessly drunk, stoned and coked out of his mind. He freely admits this as well...via his Twitter feeds (and any other medium he happens to be near, I'm sure).

Where I developed a "contempt" for the guy is when he asks for donations. Sure, donations, by their very nature are done by choice, but he makes it no secret that he frequents hookers, clubs, parties, "the scene" and loves his drugs and drinks...all of which normally cost money. (I have no doubt his pseudo-celeb status garners him some freebies) He claims these donations are needed for server costs. But he recently ran a contest where "he" was going to pay the nearly-entire bill for someone to "come out, do drugs and fuck" (to paraphrase) in Vegas with him. Hello?!? Every last donor that might have entered that contest, should automatically "win" because they basically paid for it! What were you people thinking? LOL

"You're totes jelly!" is similar to what some of his meme-filled minions would probably say to/about me. ("Totally jealous" to the more articulate folks) Regardless, it's not the case. I can see why you'd say that, but no...I'm not. Envious? Yes. (and yes, I know some could argue that jealousy and envy are one and the same but they are technically different) I'm envious that he has such a loyal and nearly-unwavering following. That's where the envy ends. If Hunter had worked and studied his ass off for what he now has, then yes. Then, I'd be "jelly". The fact is he did little more than stumble across an opportunity while trying another idea. The fact that he capitalized on the trust, privacy, reputations and possibly-ruined futures of so many unsuspecting "victims" (obviously not including those who self-submitted or send nudes to everyone and their dog) is why I have zero respect for the guy. Truth be told, as a fellow human being, I truly do hope Hunter gets cleaned up and makes a more respectable future and legacy for himself. He's working on an iPhone app that "could revolutionize social media". I wish him luck on that and hope it's at least somewhat respectfully-based. I hope it is successful enough to where he can abandon IAU altogether...which would be the end of life as we know it for many, many folks...more of just-a-bummer to me.

I also (genuinely) worry for his future and safety if he continues as-is. His life very well could be taken as a direct result of his and his web site's actions. It only takes one nutcase. I don't respect the guy but I wish death on no one. (Well...except my ex-....okay....fuck it! You know what I mean!!)

Right or Wrong? Too often you'll read from both Hunter Moore and his more loyal followers, "If you didn't want to be seen naked, you shouldn't have taken/sent the pics!!!" By their rationale, one should never, ever, ever document, photograph or film their intimate moments or nude body. That argument is not only tired but fucking insane. That would be like saying, "You left the house knowing there was a serial killer still at large out there, so you deserved it!!" or "You knew people die every single day in traffic accidents so you have no one to blame but yourself for starting your car and leaving the driveway!!!" or "She was wearing a half shirt so she was asking to be raped! She wanted the attention!" Get my drift? These analogies may seem far-fetched to some of you but if they are, I assure you that they aren't off by much. Don't give me the whole "apples and oranges" argument.

Those that use that asinine argument are in essence saying that no one should ever be able to use anything but their imaginations and/or memories when remembering an intimate moment or a bygone love...or even just a one-night stand...again. Hell, some ask for them or take them simply to have while separated from their partner for an extended period of time. To follow those who use the aforementioned argument's logic, no one should ever trust anyone again...ever...with anything. Good luck on the rest of your lives with that line of thought running rampant in your skulls.

...don't even get me started on the idiots who get "#NBHNC" (or any other IAU-related) tattoos. I'm laughing at you. I'm laughing hard at you. Not so much for the subject matter of the tattoo itself as much as for the fact that you got a TATTOO....of a fucking WEB SITE.

...or those girls and guys stripping down and/or spreading their ass cheeks wiiiiiide....all for a free t-shirt....of a web site! A t-shirt!

...or the girls who can't wait to turn 18 to self-submit. They have their entire futures ahead of them and are taking the chance that a lapse in judgment (or not just a lapse) "back in their younger days" absolutely ruined any chance they ever had of a decent career above that of a stripper at Bucky's Booby Barn! Newsflash: Most reputable employers now check the Internet for perspective employees' backgrounds.

...or the countless fucking idiots who send in so-called "support pics" featuring them fully-clothed, nearly-naked or fully-naked with "#NBHNC" written on their bodies....but not showing what "BH" stand for!!!

...or the photos taken in a fucking mirror, rendering that text backwards! (facepalm)

(breeeaaathe, Cliff. Breeeaaathe!) Okay. I'm good now.

About fucking time, right? Look...I don't have any problem whatsoever with questionable web sites making money. I've been to many that could be defined as "questionable" and my very presence gives the sites in question that very chance. I get that. Where I have a problem with questionable web sites making money, is when the money is made off of the possible real pain they can cause others. Yes. I'm fully aware that this article's very existence will drive at least three entire people to Hunter Moore's site and I'll have to live with myself for that. Much more legitimate writers and news sources have driven far more to far worse.

Until next time...

I have implemented a new commenting system. Sadly, in doing so, I inadvertently lost all comments made prior to December 28, 2011. My deepest apologies to those this adversely affected. If it's any consolation, it makes my blog here look pretty darn unvisited over the years.
If this article is still online, I'll still reply to any and all comments that warrant it. Never feel like an article you view here is too old to bother with. Comments are always welcomed!
Scroll down to comment
If you attempt to comment and it fails or you see an error message, please email me immediately.


Emily said...

Great article :) you're a good writer
Ya Im the same as you where you say, "I go because I like to see naked people. I like controversy" and "a morbid curiousity about many things" lol. Me too.

CliffyTX said...

Thanks, Emily. I was beginning to wonder if anyone would ever comment on this article.

Your compliment about my writing makes writing all the more worthwhile. I love doing it.

P.S. I write for hire as well. Feel free to spread the word. ;o)

Post a Comment

I will allow any and all comments if they are relevant and done at least somewhat respectfully. I may occasionally allow some that aren't respectful, but expect the same treatment in return if I'm feeling frisky.

Those who, in my personal opinion, seem to have little to no respect for others, will have their comments deleted. Attack the idea, not the person.

Regardless of the age of the post you're commenting on, if you can still see it, I'll still reply to you if applicable.