Hi.
I haven’t posted anything here in a long time. Today I want to show some inspiration from Black Ops.
Seriously? There was nothing wrong with it, I created everything myself. 2 days of work in my ass. Another robot like Google?
5 Likes
I think the name or description had some key word(s) which triggered the delete bot.
Its not good to mention any registered trade marks, no matter how closely or remotely is your creation related to them.
I think if you related it to something like covert operations in general, that might have worked.
4 Likes
Would I understand it with the name Call of Duty which I didn’t use but with the words Black Ops?
If I did it for a couple of hours I would wave my hand over it but I tried to win with it, so creating graphics, editing the font. It took me a day and a half to fit, because as is known on the creator it looks completely different than on the watch. shape lines don’t work. the creator constantly crashes no matter what browser I use and lastly there is then synchronization to the watch which needs to be done after each edit due to the aforementioned problem of how it looks in the creator and finally on the watch. synchronization when it didn’t work the third time, I had to open the phone application and only then the synchronization was successful. Unfortunately I didn’t make a copy.
6 Likes
Lesson learned my friend - always duplicate before publishing 
7 Likes
Call of Duty was just launched as a Brand so they are very touchy about it . I wonder how many faces will get taken down on that Account . Do Duplicate .
I added Call of Duty and Black Ops to the Banned Words list .
7 Likes
Marvin strikes again!
1 Like
It just sucks to have content taken down for using normal fracking English words! It should not be happening. So much for freedom. I’m not referring to registered trademarks or names. I’m referring to everything else.
2 Likes
@ekky.mi & @manuelcampos1
I have had watchfaces removed because of a word or two. The last one was a girls watchface that had a pink background. I described it as Barbie pink, and they pulled it because of that alone. It did not violate any copyright since it was just a digital watchface with a pink background.
I now only described my watchfaces using generic terms such as analog or digital and the information contained in them, nothing else.
3 Likes
They are deniers. I’m starting to hate Facer more and more.
If only it worked, they tried to ask the designers to improve the creator but nothing happens.
1 Like
I tend to agree with you. I am cancelling my Pro upgrade at the end before it automatically renews. I will probably start cutting back on the watchfaces I publish also. BTW right after I posted about how I describe watchfaces now, I opened up the Facer app and was greeted with this ad. Notice the forbidden “black ops” is mentioned in the ad right at the top along with call of duty. You mentioning black ops is what bit you in the posterior.
3 Likes
Yes, I noticed that too, and before I make or publish a watch face, I go through the Facer gallery to see if the watch face already exists, to what extent so as not to do something that is too much, then I also look at the names to see if it has passed and the like. So after seeing these paid watch faces, I decided that nothing should happen. Unfortunately, I was wrong.
I’m slowly switching to Facermaker where the pro license costs the same as here but it is lifetime and not just for a year, plus the support communicates and tries. The only problem is that Wear OS support is still in development but expected, plus it will be able to use the WFF format. Another thing is that you can sell watch faces and you don’t have to be a partner. Kreator… Facer is shit compared to it. Time Show seems more functional to me. 
2 Likes
Who is Marvin?
1 Like
@ekky.mi
Marvin is @russellcresser’s name for the bot that Facer uses to find copyright material on it’s system. It’s mostly a “tongue in cheek” reference. Speaking of copyright I am changing the way I publish my watchfaces. I’ve been dating them so I know exactly when I published them, but from now on I’m going to be using this as my date. More or less as a silent protest.
© Mr. Antisocial Guy 2024/11/6
4 Likes
I don’t think even a loud protest would help, let alone a silent one.
3 Likes
The problem is that people try to circumvent the filter by using “normal words” when they knowing infringe on protected content. One example would be a design titled “beverage” with the image of a Starbucks logo on a cup. Yes, filters need to be improved and their findings reviewed by human eyes, but until then the good, honest members have to suffer because the filter has to be over-aggressive and preventative. It’s a fact of life.
4 Likes
But why can not the filters, that pull down face right after publishing, be applied before publishing?
Problematic face would simply sit as unpublished draft, until it passed or became cleared. This could save ton of nerves for unaware users and also lot of unnecessary traffic for the staff.
4 Likes
I think it would be enough to just say it can’t be published because… even after publication, it can’t be deleted right away.
2 Likes
Maybe it is calculated move, they simply delete and if you are even right but unprepared your evidence is simply gone, so part of people simply swallows the bitter pill and moves away, leaving them in peace.
3 Likes
Of course I appealed. I’m curious when they’ll hear back.
2 Likes