[ghosthostblue]

The woman is a just freak of nature. And I mean that in the best possible way.

[southy]

Just a quick comment, and don't take it the wrong way. Be careful how much we post from her website, we don't want to get banned.

[gonZo]

Just to clarify our policy a little... since there's no prohibition against posting pictures from chloevevrier.com, nobody will get banned (or even warned) for posting one per 24 hours. But as Southy says, there is some risk that if too many pictures from the chloe site get reposted here, their webmaster may insist that we stop posting them. So it's probably a good idea to slow down a little and/or post some pictures of Chloe from other non-prohibited sources.
_
gonZo

[luvdemwhoppers]

happy birthday Chloe.

[Zealot]

Saw this and simply HAD to post it --

I am disliking the studio pics more and more;with the makeup her eyes have an unsettling "android" look to them.Pics like these are way  better.In the more "candid" pics she's usually smiling or looking like she's laughing out loud.And of course I love glasses;the brains-and-beauty combo is my weakness.

[DJPFC]

It's not the makeup, it's the retouching.  I love Chloe to death but I do think she overdoes it now and then on her photos.  There's ways to retouch without completely wiping away all dimensions in a person's face and that's what you are referring to.

[pedonbio]

 

[luvdemwhoppers]

.

[pedonbio]

 

[moffe]

I think she has gotten even more beautiful with time.

[Palomine]

With a bunch of different users all posting pix of the same model from the same site, fate is being tempted... this keeps up and we're going to get a cease-and-desist letter about it and then another prohibited subject in the rules. No one wants that, right?

PLEASE you guys: if you're going to post Chloe all the time, AT LEAST use some OTHER/OLDER pix that aren't from her current/commercial venture, OK? A little common sense and discretion goes a long way!

[DJPFC]

If you actually do get a note from her, let us know and we'll talk to her.  She would be foolish to do something like that and I honestly cannot foresee her doing such a thing.  She knows about this place and we have told her it's a great place that she should actually come and visit and participate in from time to time.

[pedonbio]

If you actually do get a note from her, let us know and we'll talk to her.  She would be foolish to do something like that and I honestly cannot foresee her doing such a thing.  She knows about this place and we have told her it's a great place that she should actually come and visit and participate in from time to time.

You know how to give us hope, DJPFC.

[Palomine]

If you actually do get a note from her, let us know and we'll talk to her.  She would be foolish to do something like that and I honestly cannot foresee her doing such a thing.  She knows about this place and we have told her it's a great place that she should actually come and visit and participate in from time to time.

Though your offer is appreciated, based on a decade and a half of receiving C&D letters (and other even less pleasant legal musings) the BEA Owner seems to prefer to proactively avoid these things from happening at all. He put the 1-1-1 rule into place years ago specifically to reduce the frequency of those exact problems (flooding resulting in legal threts resulting in new/total bans on specific models/sources). Despite ALL the user complaints when 1-1-1 was first put into effect, it DID produce the desired results: the frequency at which legal demands were being received dropped off radically ...as a result of that, additional prohibition rules have had to be added much less regularly since then.

But half a dozen users all routinely posting pix from a single still-commercially-active source essentially negates the point, protection and peace-of-mind afforded by the 1-1-1 rule. Before gonZo posted about this problem, we sent out some PMs to individual users asking for their restraint. My recent echoing of his suggestion was prompted by the bunch of pix posted since his public request.

All we can do is ASK users to understand the point of the rule and exercise some restraint so that it never becomes necessary for the BEA Owner to deal with this down the road (with whatever consequences that might entail for all of us). Given that Chloe has done so much work in the past for so many other sites, it's not like her current site is the only place that pix of her can be found. So we ask everyone again: please exercise some discretion and don't all post pix from her current commercial venture, ok? Mix it up a bit (and maybe even post some other images from some other sources instead once in a while) so that we can all keep enjoying Chloe here for years to come, alright?

Thanks!

[DruulEmpire]

Palomine's advice is the best course -- no matter what the particular instance, it's the general policy and can always use practice by all of us.