Asset Moderation Strikes Permanently Revoke My Access to UGC

My name is Lan/@Volgari, and I have recently received a permanent revocation of my UGC access, and I sincerely believe I am not insane to believe that it has been distributed unfairly.

I will copy and paste my pre-written analysis of the situation. I have contacted appeals numerous times, to no avail. Screenshots will be attached at the end. Questions are in bold.

My assets were struck for “cheating and exploiting”, consequently revoking my access to UGC permanently.

I’m taking this to forums because I cannot reach support with a definitive, clear-cut answer or solution. I have been repeatedly ignored and given misinformation from Roblox support, assuming that some of my appeals were not automatically denied due to my account status. Frustration is an understatement, and recently, it has felt impossible to make any progress on this platform without the fear of my account being struck.

Earlier this month, I faced a “Cheating and Exploiting” notice for a handful of my assets, due to a new head mesh I assumed was safe. It passed moderation and performed (visibly) in a way I sincerely believed was acceptable. I now understand how and why that is not the case.

However, I still do not understand how my assets fell into the category of exploits, as I’d never knowingly jeopardize my account. While that sounds like a platitude, it’s the truth. I have been repeatedly denied access to information about my inquiries.

After these strikes, my account was consequently suspended for a week, which I managed to lower to three days, through an appeal of two of the assets, a mistake I didn’t see in hindsight. I was acting on what I believed was a mistake, appealing, and not knowing the further damage it would leave against my account. While still under my suspension, those two assets were re-moderated, and my account was struck an additional two times. If I hadn’t appealed, would my UGC still have been revoked?

Three days pass, and I regain access to my account. I discovered that 50+ of my assets have been understandably removed. Not moderated, no strikes against my account, just removed, as if they’d never existed.

I’m alright with that. I later understood that these assets infringed upon the actively shifting dynamic head guidelines and were removed. I faced no penalty for those 50. However, I also discovered that due to those (now 8-count strikes), my access to UGC has been revoked indefinitely. I have never seen such quick decision-making, where in 1:1 circumstances, others, namely creators I have contacted, have faced zero penalty for the same situation. Why weren’t those simple deletions extended towards the initial 5 assets? Why was I so harshly punished? Can this be reversed, or at the very least, mitigated?

I have never received a notice, an email, a warning, or any prior revocations, let alone an asset moderation notice for a fair length of time.

For reference, my past dynamic heads have generated hundreds of thousands of sales. I was actively working towards rigging new dynamic heads prior to this, while still finding ways to coexist with my love for static faces, and I now learn that those ideas must be discarded. I deeply believe this was overkill at the hands of automated moderation.

I’d understand if I were revoked for a number of weeks or months, but permanently? Out of nowhere? Eight assets getting my UGC permanently revoked feels especially cruel, as many others faced little to no consequence for the same situation.

As many others on this platform do, I rely on UGC as a way to provide for myself, fund my schooling, and support my family. While I do not ask for sympathy, I sincerely hope this reaches someone who can provide me with an answer/solution.


Expected behavior

While this is a shot in the dark, I hope to see some corrections made to my account, a lighter sentence, something more reasonable than permanent revocation. I love this platform, and this has dampened my outlook on the future of my creator access.

5 Likes

Even the Roblox support staff weren’t ready for the consequences to be this harsh, because they said, “You will be able to re-upload the UGC items again after a certain period of time.” But if the UGC permission is permanently revoked, then you will NOT be able to re-upload after any period of time… (do they even check the revocation duration on the account before pasting that bot response? :skull_and_crossbones::folded_hands:t2:)


Normally I wouldn’t reply to threads on behalf of others, but a friend of mine was affected by the same situation. His UGC access was permanently revoked, and even though he went back and forth with support multiple times, he couldn’t get the resolution he wanted. In the end, he decided to leave Roblox entirely, and the funny part is, it wasn’t even his fault, since all of his uploads were made before the related policy change, and they said they wouldn’t administer any account consequences for that specific initiative.

A few of his bundles were removed from the platform after this announcement:
https://devforum.roblox.com/t/removing-partially-or-fully-invisible-heads-from-marketplace-inventories/4144175, because some heads were considered “invisible.”

They specifically said:

Yet he still lost his UGC permission.

We have to admit this is harsh. We have to recognize that even people uploading sexual content don’t have their UGC permission revoked; this situation is ridiculous :face_vomiting:

5 Likes

Appreciate the reply, feels like a breath of fresh air to read after what seems like dead ends and senseless back-and-forths with Roblox Support tickets.

My exact reaction to seeing such false hope in my inbox, lol. That’s the whole reason I reached out to support. I wanted to believe it truly wasn’t as permanent as my creator dashboard suggests it is, and Trish, who responded to my email, made it appear as though this was something I could wait out, in which I inquired about the duration of the revocation, resulting in the second attached image, a total lack of integrity and transparency.

While I can’t speak on your friend’s behalf, from your provided summary, I believe that his situation is completely ridiculous, and I deeply sympathize with him. It’s one thing to have it revoked momentarily, to understand your faults and take that opportunity to learn from what is often times a genuine mistake. In his case, something that was guaranteed not to have consequences against him, and still resulted in revocation, is genuinely disheartening; I don’t blame him for the decision he made. I wasn’t given an opportunity to correct my faults, and it does feel like I’m arguing a losing battle at this point.

A bit off topic, but I understand. For people who actually DO exploit UGC creation, I rarely see consequences held against them. I imagine you’re speaking on emotes, which I go nowhere near if I want to preserve my sanity, lol.. I do my best to report them when I see them.

3 Likes

Hi Volgari,

Can you please provide me a list of the asset IDs that were deemed cheating/exploits? We’ve removed a significant number of assets with the removal of partial or fully invisible heads in December, and the rollout of the updated head policy.

To be clear, partial or fully invisible heads uploaded before the DevForum post should have been taken down without consequence. Any partial or fully invisible heads uploaded after would receive consequences. Additionally, any and all heads found to be attempting to use an exploit to circumvent the updated head policy are to be taken down with consequences.

If there’s been a mistake in application (or not) of consequences, I’ll make sure we resolve it! Please do share the asset IDs at your earliest convenience.

Best,

yungzrk

1 Like

Hi Yavuz, (editted to spell name correctly - apologies!)

If your friend is open to it, please have them DM me with specific asset IDs that were taken down, we can make sure to resolve any erroneously applied consequences (if they were uploaded prior to the post).

Best,

yungzrk

2 Likes

Thank you for taking the time to answer me so quickly. I appreciate your response more than I can express.

My assets, unfortunately, do not fall under the first category, which is why I am a bit discouraged reading this at the moment.

I made an initial dynamic head that animated fully, but remained static enough for it to be utilized by people who prefer the look of static faces by removing the default mood (a bit unrelated), but that was where I started, and as far as I am aware, those heads remain up and do fit the guidelines.

Later on, throughout the following week, began seeing others on the marketplace upload something adjacent, a face, but with flipped normals. If this is considered an exploit, I sincerely was not aware; I thought it was an innovative approach to the new guidelines, it fit the criteria, and unfortunately, passed moderation for a short time, so I began reuploading my best sellers with this new mesh. I am deeply regretful for having even gone through with the idea, as I thought it was safe to do, seeing countless other creators going through with it. While I can accept that moderation was taken, a permanent revocation feels deeply excessive. I’m looking forward to understanding your side and what I could do differently in the future. I am still unaware of the status of my UGC revocation, as I never truly got a clear answer from support.

1 Like

OK, I told them to DM you on DevForum, and if they see my message, they will probably follow through. Thank you for helping them, since I lowkey want to work on a bunch of models with him again. :money_mouth_face::hand_with_index_finger_and_thumb_crossed:t2:

Also, my name is yaVuz, not yaKuz (it’s a Turkish name, not an anime character’s name :folded_hands:t2::sob:)

Hi Volgari,

I’ve reviewed your assets.

I hesitate to believe that the heads you’ve uploaded were meant to adhere to the updated head policy in good faith.

This was not one or two assets, and the marketplace policies are not guidelines - they are clearly defined rules. You have stated yourself that you’ve uploaded more than 50 assets, that, clearly, were attempting to circumvent a head policy via an exploit.

I’ll discuss further with my team in the coming week. I’ll leave this ticket open until we’ve reviewed.

For any and all Creators reading this post, I strongly recommend being thoughtful before uploading UGC assets that are attempting to circumvent any Marketplace policy. We’re continuously improving validation to enforce Marketplace policies, but the policies themselves are the ultimate determining factor, not whether or not you can find a way around validation.

Best,

yungzrk

2 Likes

Hi yungzrk,

I can’t help but notice that the current head you are wearing appears to have cat ears, which goes against the marketplace policy on heads having external accessories.
https://create.roblox.com/docs/marketplace/marketplace-policy

This head also appears to be partially transparent, which seems to ignore marketplace rules on heads being fully visible.
https://devforum.roblox.com/t/removing-partially-or-fully-invisible-heads-from-marketplace-inventories/4144715?

Is this an attempt to circumvent official Roblox policy by using a non compliant head? Please pick something suitable for the future of the metaverse.

Best,

break4bad

1 Like

Hi busted,

The Creator of the cat head not only updated the head to be larger and more visible, as to not attempt to create a partially invisible head (the original design was actually taken down during the December initiative), and updated the head to adhere to the new head policy - the cats eyes and mouth meaningfully animate, and the cage mesh is aligned. Also, not to debate too much here, but cat ears on a cat.. aren’t external accessories?

And hey - taking pot shots at me may feel good, but I’m here to help and try to make sure the policies and actions as stated (such as non-punitive takedowns from the December post) are applied correctly.

All fun and banter aside, we’re working hard to allow for and support creativity across all UGC assets - this cat head being an example! Assets that are clearly attempting to circumvent policies, like hiding animated regions, using inverted normals, etc. do not fall in some interpretable gray area, and will be moderated with the appropriate consequences.

Best,

yungzrk

1 Like

I appreciate you taking the time to clarify the intent behind the update and the changes made to bring the head in line with policy. It’s good to hear that animation regions are now meaningfully utilized and that the mesh alignment concerns were addressed. That kind of iteration is exactly what keeps UGC healthy.

That said, I think there’s a broader design direction worth considering here.

If the long-term vision for avatars is realism, expressiveness, and forward-facing immersion, then leaning into an Rthro-style approach may be a stronger fit than continuing to refine stylized floating-head concepts. Roblox has clearly been steering toward more proportionally realistic, full-body expressive systems — especially with dynamic heads, layered clothing, and animation mapping.

An Rthro-aligned cat avatar could:

  • Integrate ears, facial structure, and expressions directly into a proportionally coherent body.
  • Use dynamic head tech to drive eye/mouth animation naturally.
  • Avoid ambiguity around “external accessories” vs. anatomical features.
  • Align with Roblox’s push toward cinematic, expressive identity systems.

From a platform vision standpoint, it feels more future-proof. Instead of optimizing around policy edge cases (visibility thresholds, animated region compliance, mesh orientation technicalities), the design would inherently fit within the ecosystem Roblox is building — one centered on immersive, expressive, next-gen avatars.


1 Like

Hi busted,

Happy to hear the feedback, either via DM or through a DevForum channel that isn’t a bug report. Appreciate your passion and thoughts around the design!

Let’s keep this thread clear and focused on Volgari and Yavuz’s bug reports moving forward please.

Best,

yungzrk

I completely understand your hesitation; it’s warranted, and I’m certain you’ve heard people claim negligence countless times before. I apologize for the poor wording, guidelines are far too vague. I understand that the policies are structured to be followed, NOT circumvented, and that was what I was genuinely attempting to do in the first place, following the migration. My ignorance got the best of me, and I uploaded a wave of assets that I see now fell under that category, which I am deeply thankful were removed without harsher consequences.

Whether or not my sincerity is believed, I genuinely did, for a time, believe that what passed validation had (for the majority of the time) the appropriate policies attached to it, and that is the only reason they’d pass, if they complied. It was entirely foolish of me to believe that, and your replies have given me deeper insight into how to approach UGC.

Behind the reasoning of the sheer amount I uploaded, I will admit, it was done in a panic, and was a severe blunder. Given a bracket of time between what was then late January and now, upcoming March, to have these heads updated to comply with the new policy felt Sisyphean. I had over 200 heads before this, all of which would have fallen into the gutter had I not done something. While the marketplace is actively shifting and changing, it still feels deeply unfair to expect everyone to differentiate between right and wrong as soon as these regulations are given, what will or will not get your account suspended indefinitely. While that might be subjective to my own experience, I still would like to believe something less severe can come of this report. I have learned my lesson and continue to reach a deeper understanding of what is now tolerable on the platform.

While consequences are necessary, I agree, and I am not exempt from consequences, do they truly have to dictate my future on the platform, having my access revoked entirely, indefinitely? I don’t mean to harp on about the same points, but I’d like to reiterate that for a good while, I prided myself on being able to provide people with unique faces, a way of expression I knew that not only I, but apparently hundreds of thousands of others could enjoy.

I deeply hope you can see what I am trying to express here. I do not want to be written off as “an exploiter who should’ve known better but didn’t.” Please let me know if something less permanent can be reached.

1 Like

Hi folks,

The takedowns and moderation actions in question here stand; exceptions won’t be made for exploits or misusing Roblox systems.

To repeat: for any and all Creators reading this post, I strongly recommend being thoughtful before uploading UGC assets that are attempting to circumvent any Marketplace policy. We’re continuously improving validation to enforce Marketplace policies, but the policies themselves are the ultimate determining factor, not whether or not you can find a way around validation.

Best,

yungzrk