egafd.com

The following actresses, that WHERE PREVIOUSLY listed in EGAFD
have now dissappeared from EGAFD (gone for good, they did not
become aliases etc etc).

- Christine Beaugrand ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2463638/ )
- Cornelia Schiemainski ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1018875/ )
- Loretta d'Andrea ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0195226/ )
- edited by moderator
- Ornella Picozzi ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0682032/ )
- Ronny Rosetti ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2458853/ )

Most of them had screenshots in EGAFD and the respective IMDB entry
that confirmed their films

What gives?

If an actress objects to her inclusion here the policy is, in
order to avoid possible legal action, to comply with her wishes.
This tends to be much rarer an occurrence here than on bgafd,
where because of the relatively localized and symbiotic nature
of the UK industry girls: a) are more likely to be aware that an
entry on them exists; and b) seem to have rather more [too
much, IMO] power.
The usual motivation is probably embarrassment in later life at
'youthful indiscretions', as it were; there have also been rare
cases of unpleasantness with overenthusiastic 'fans' [to wit,
stalkers]. There are also cases where an actress' children have
been given a hard time by their schoolmates on account of
mum's erstwhile activities.

I'm not unsympathetic but my personal opinion is that, barring
exceptional circumstances, both sites should have more backbone
and tell them to stick it- we all have to live with the choices we
make; that's life- but the mods have explained here before that
they feel their decision is the best one for the continued survival
of bgafd/egafd and basically, there's an end on't.
End of discussion.

In short, the consequences, in the [IMO highly unlikely] event
that any such legal action should actually succeed, have been
judged to outweigh the relatively minor diminution in the
information-content of the database entailed in the removal
of those who do not wish to appear therein. In practice, of
course, their existence usually remains an open secret [your
friend 'Valerie', for example] and there may still be the
occasional reference to such individuals, albeit largely by the
judicious use of appropriate circumlocution.
If it's any consolation even the mighty iafd has occasionally
bowed to a particuarly resourceful ex-performer. For example
in the case of Heidi Kat they decided that eventually the
game just wasn't worth the candle. As you can see, though, the
rather more solidly-financed imdb just told her to fuck off [img]http://www.egafd.com/forum/smileys/grin.gif[/img] [img]http://www.egafd.com/forum/smileys/footie.gif[/img]

The picture we had on the original page for Christine Beaugrand can be found on the page for Catherine L?no. I'm not sure that this means that Christine Beaugrand = Catherine L?no as there could have been a mis-identification or other confusion. I can't remember and can no longer check that far back in e-mails. Anuway the listing for La Grande mouille is more accurate without that name.

The nam Cornelia Schiemainski was removed because, from information received, she almost certainly could not have appeared in a sex role in the film listed for her.

Loretta d'Andrea was removed because it could well have been a fake credit or it was less misleading to remove it until more was known.

The name Ornella Picozzi was removed for similar reasons. Italian 80s films are very inadequately listed here, it must be acknowledged. This is partly because of the prevalence of fake credits.

'edited by moderator' - the original name and picture were removed upon request of the performer concerned.

We were informed that Ronny Rosetti is a man.

Alec, could you tell us why you comply to such removal requests. Do the performers actually threaten with legal action? And do you have any indication they actually have solid legal basis for such requests? I'm not a lawyer it just sounds ridiculous to me.

I know I'm just a lowly contributor to this site but I find this practice of secretely removing names quite annoying as there is no indication if the information is missing or if it was removed.

Now for example if you would just replace their picture with a standard 'removed upon request' thumbnail, the 'information' would not be harmed and people would know they don't have to contribute pictures for the actress in question.

Do you maybe suggest this as a compromise first or do you immediatly remove the name when you get a request.

candela wrote:

> Alec, could you tell us why you comply to such removal
> requests. Do the performers actually threaten with legal
> action? And do you have any indication they actually have solid
> legal basis for such requests? I'm not a lawyer

Neither are we. It's not worth the hassle.

> it just sounds
> ridiculous to me.
>
> I know I'm just a lowly contributor to this site but I find
> this practice of secretely removing names quite annoying as
> there is no indication if the information is missing or if it
> was removed.

In the case of pictures there is.

>
> Now for example if you would just replace their picture with a
> standard 'removed upon request' thumbnail, the 'information'
> would not be harmed and people would know they don't have to
> contribute pictures for the actress in question.

We do, but sometimes the names have to be removed as well and there is no useful alias. See above - it's not worth the hassle.

>
> Do you maybe suggest this as a compromise first

Yes.

> or do you
> immediatly remove the name when you get a request.

How about you replace the name in the style of the unknowns

XNKxxxx -> RBRxxxx (Removed By Request nr. xxxx)

Therefore it would still be possible to browse the performer's filmography without showing her name and picture.

candela wrote:
> Therefore it would still be possible to browse the performer's
> filmography without showing her name and picture.

But it would only be the work of moments to download a boxcover
of one of those titles, subtract the 'known' performers, and hence
deduce the identity of the 'unknown' [img]http://www.egafd.com/forum/smileys/sherlock.gif[/img]

....if a boxcover is still available of their work on-line somewhere.
But with time these boxcovers will disappear and no one will recall whether "Jane Doe" was in the movie or not..... except those in the know...

Pure hypocrisy or a bad attempt to steal money from people working hard to create a useful database.

But the most absurd thing is that they can't do anything cause the movies (and their FACES) will be around till the end of their days.
I wonder how could they hide it for a long time.
Someone must tell them we have internet now.

What I consider infuriating is that EGAFD has become an "easy target", whereas all these performers' entries stay intact in other related sites (IMDB, IAFD etc.)! And let's not even think of the numerous results of their names' queries a simple "googling" will offer... But on the other hand, we must all respect and protect everybody's right of personality.

Still, I strongly support candela's suggestion of the need to find a way to make the "removed" information available once again in the database.