I've noticed over the last few days a number of devices of torture & execution have been appearing in freestuff, I thought we sent that sort of stuff to Renderotica or Thralldom?

They're well made props, but yeah, that stuff should be sent over, guys.

Wasn't there also some fuss last year with someone uploading a bunch of props from Dendras? Seeing as he makes rather a lot of "torture" tools I'm assuming the ones in freestuff here are originals. (Sorry haven't looked yet). Are they really unsuitable for here though? I know TOS guidelines prohibited torture, bondage or violent images but the props aren't distributed with more than a thumbnail of what they are. shrug.

so what's the difference between showing gun or sword vs torture and execution devices?

And actually, gallows and stakes have long existed... why pretend it's only for places like Rotica? And why would they be worse than bare-ass outfits for Vicky?

Tell you what, folks, when the thumbnails for the swords et al show them lopping off Posette's head in graphic, bloody detail, I'll buy your argument. If the figure model had been left off the thumbs with these props, I'd probably accept having them here myself. But images of torture -- even virtual ones -- are against the TOS, and that's what she wrote. So where's a mod when you need one?

Virtual. What thumbnails in freestuff for those pieces of equipment show anything except those devices? I've not seen any decapitated posettes. Maybe I blinked and missed it. However, isn't this just a little bit of double standards? It's ok to sell bondage wear in the store, but it's not ok to give away torture devices? Am I missing a point here? The TOS says you can't make naughty unpleasant images, ie for the gallery. But where does it say you can't make naughty unpleasant toys for freestuff? And if you can't, shouldn't that also apply to the store? Whatever. I'm a little confused over this whole thing to be honest. But it warrants another bookmark, if only to find out. :)

Thanks for bringing it up folks. Give us a bit of time to take a look, talk it over and get back to you okay? If nobody's got back to this thread in a day or so, feel free to give me a prod ;) Kev.

Illusions, a comment in an open forum is going to attract posts from other people, simple as that. If a person doesn't want other opinions or remarks then the question should be site mailed directly to admin staff don't you think? The double standards comment wasn't aimed at C1rcle specifically, hence not being addressed to that person. It was aimed in response to Virtual and expanding on the "this stuff doesn't belong here" attitude in general. And I'm sorry you don't feel that my question adresses the operation and well being of this site. But having bondage wear in the store does in my opinion reflect upon this site's operation and it's attitudes towards other items of a similar or related nature. Hence why I thought it worth mentioning. You may also have not noticed my earlier comment up there near the beginning. shrug Whether or not people are going to agree or disagree with the response is somewhat immaterial. People are entitled to their opinions on things. This is after all a collective of individuals. Until the name is changed to Borgosity then I personally expect to see conflicting opinions on issues.

What thumbnails in freestuff for those pieces of equipment show anything except those devices? The A frame and the x-cross both had figures in the thumbs. Personally, I have no issue with it myself (one man's sense of bondage as fun is another man's sense of "huh?"), but it does violate the TOS. The fact that none of the various sword props fail to show a decapitated (semi- or otherwise) Posette (or Vicky, for that matter) just says that swords et al around here are simply props for making their various warrior princesses look hot: you won't find them being plunged into bodies just to "prove" their existence. But putting a Posette or a Vicky in an A-frame? Sorry, but that's a different story, and let's not pretend otherwise. The thumbs aren't showing anything but a naked broad (and always a naked broad, which is sorta interesting unto itself, you have to admit) in a bondage cross, which makes any arguments about "oh, well, that's how it's been done throughout time" kinda specious, wouldn't you say? :)

It's the natural progression of things. They start with nude girls in innocent poses, but it becomes boring as they get jaded, so they graduate to torture to get more thrills. Just ask any big-city D. A. So if you want to promote that lifestyle here, ask yourself why. You will probably realize you don't want to promote it.

Thanks VS. I had missed those thumbs, and you're right, they do violate TOS. Guess that those pieces at least will be removed then. I'm curious to see if the rest go as well.

Hookay, I need to modify my reply now... all I had seen was the witch burning. I never even saw the frame with the naked lady... I can accept the TOS violation on that one. Personally, it still does not offend me as much as all the Vickys here who make like eagle in all their pixel glory. Or PT characters whose hair BARELY covers their flat chests and get away because they happen to have tiny wings. Want to talk TOS? If I was to post a render with a PT like the one in the store promo, I'd have my ass kicked so fast it would make my head spin. But again, we are all equal... some are just more equal than others.

"Borgosity" hehe....that's pretty funny. :o)

Illusions: uh...oh...you aren't gonna start one of those "too much nudity" debates again are you??? Nope, just how boringly predictable this place is. Zzzzzzzz.

Illusions: I don't have the slightest, but no doubt you'll enlighten us.

Attached Link: http://www.renderotica.com

Wrong. I NEVER defended ANYTHING that looks like a 12-year old. I think people who paint naked or semi-naked children in lewd setting ought to be hung by their perverted nuts. How is that? I was merely trying to say that we cannot SAY what a fairy looks like because they do NOT exist, so it would be insane to claim, hey, she has got wings, a fairy, a fairy! Bullshit. What does it have to do with torture? I already admitted to not having seen the frame but only the witch. And I still don't understand why it is okay to get away with one perversion or murder by sword or gun (and there are some VERY bloody pictures in these galleries!) and not with a tiny thumb of a nude hanging in that damn frame. That doesn't mean I approve of either. But ban all or none.

I contacted the creator of one of the props in question to let him know about the controversy going on here, and he's decided to pull his items out of freestuff.

His choice, of course, but pulling them because he can't have a naked broad in as a demo seems a little silly, IMHO.

Although I have been guilty of using erotica props in non-erotic pictures:- - Some of my diving images show old boat mooring chain lying on the bottom. I have seen this many times while diving. In my images, this originally came from a bondage prop, since that was the only place I could find chain at the time. - The posable restraint table seems to have possibilities of being used (after alterations, including a self-release switch in reach of his hand) as a spaceship pilot's acceleration couch and nothing to do with sex. Don't ask me to make erotic images: my skill as a pornographer is absolute zero = NIL = 0. That is why I sometimes get impatient at seeing sexy stuff getting all the best ratings.

Actually I wasn't saying it's not ok to give away the things just that some of the thumbnails are a little too close the mark for a "family" site. I do agree that it does seem like double standards when there's so many swords, knives, guns & other instruments of torture & death available but none of them has posette spiked on them or being shot by them as the thumbnail. I wasn't trying to start a war so I'll go back to being quiet again, oh by the way illusions I'm a he lol :)

my, aren't we all suddenly tos-preachers... i'm not a bondage/torture fan myself (nothing wrong with it imho as long as both parties agree with it) and couldn't really care less about it, but saying that swords & guns only make a chick/guy look hotter - s/m fans would say that for torturing devices - and ignoring that all of them are made to make people suffer or die is, well, at least questionable. as if anyone with iq above parrots would have difficulties imaging people inside them. tos or not, let's leave this things either to mods & admins or deal with them privately. this thread has a slight big brother taste.

http://market.renderosity.com/softgood.ez?ViewSoftgood=4277 http://market.renderosity.com/softgood.ez?ViewSoftgood=15543 If these are cleared by TPTB then can't see any probs with the free stuff.

"Guess it all depends on whether or not your imagination wants to lay in the "gutter" or "soar into the sky". correct me if I am wrong but are you saying that, in your opinion,images of a sexual nature mean that the minds of the people who produce them are in "the gutter"?

Guys (and gals ;)) aren't we getting a bit far afield here? Someone pointed some stuff out that bears a second look. Let's not blow it out of proportion huh?

<<I do agree that it does seem like double standards when there's so many swords, knives, guns & other instruments of torture & death available but none of them has posette spiked on them or being shot by them as the thumbnail.>> Oh no? The first artist who comes to mind is lundqvist right here. Do some diging, and you'll find plenty more. So it's not Vicky there or Posette, but female, male, where is the difference when it comes to gore. Then you had the couple with the maimed babies, one of which even made AoM... No torture there, according to the mods here. Again, if one can publish that, wtf is a nude hanging in a frame, especially since there is NO physical contact, no arousal, no blood, not anything but a tiny doll. Again, I am not saying it's right or wrong to make pictures like that,. just when you start pointing fingers, you'd better be prepared to do a LOT of weeding in the galleries, the MP and FS.

Well, thank GOD the self-appointed TOS police have successfully bullied a freestuff contributor into pulling his evil bondage props. I, for one, feel much safer.

Well, we don't normally mention private communications here in public, but in this case I think it serves a positive purpose. There were a couple of thumbnails which did indeed contravene the TOS, and we've asked that they be changed. As for the member who removed his Freestuff, I've explained the situation (i.e. that the items themselves are okay since there are many uses they could be put to, not just torture but that thumbnails shouldn't include actual torture scenes) so they might be back. Kev.

You're very welcome ;)

since there are many uses they could be put to OK, OK, I have heard of the rack being used as a treatment for back damage. I heard that Francis of Loyola who founded the Jesuits, his back was damaged in a battle, and afterwards he spent a long uncomfortable time in a rack, presumably willingly, to try to keep the bones in line while the injury healed, and during that he went religious. - To avoid any confusions hereinabove, in all my images with chain in, the chain was lying loose on the seabed and not tethering or restraining anything.

Sad to say I've seen some of these threads used for Torture & Execution. I don't mind when orcs are bludgeoned and hacked up and spew blood and guts all over in the movies (or even in the galleries) but it's kinda sad to see us do it to each other - real people. And NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, a THOUSAND times NO, I'm NOT referring to any particular individual(s). It's just a general observation based on hanging out in the forums over time.

ummm... something ate four sentences from my post #31, lol! i was wanting to say that one doesn't need thumbnails to guess what the torturing devices was made for, so having someone in there wouldn't change the nature of it, same as swords and guns have only a simple purpouse: to kill. just wanted to say that i feel it's a bit of double standard allowing this stuff without the figure and not allowing it with a figure... F***! i meant "Fine"! or what did you thought?

F***! Figs? Bloodsong made figs... and chocolate chip cookies...

With a swift overhand swing, the opposition is sent reeling in defeat. Game, set, and match to Cheryle. :) :) :)

With a swift overhand swing, the opposition is sent reeling in defeat. Game, set, and match to Cheryle. Depends on what you mean by "opposition", I suppose. She's making a much deeper point that few around here care to acknowledge.

Well,I dont have a problem per se with removing the thumbs or changing them to suit TOS. BUt the double standard is alive and well. There is a thumb on the FRONT PAGE for a sale in the Marketplace for Bondage gear, depicting a woman with a ball gag in her mouth. Does it offend me? Nope, B&D people do what they want, but is it within TOS? Well if a rack isnt then neither is a ball gag. I guess if moneys being made it's a different story from freestuff?

I dont have a problem with that illusions, but if the thumbs were a problem in freestuff shouldnt a thumb on the FRONT PAGE be held to the same standard? Or are Marketplace items above TOS?

ahh... finally... :)

The ad in question about pot is an animated GIF and hasnt been present here in its full format. Its talking about Pottery. We make sure all thumbnails and banenr ads fall within the TOS before we approve them. Thanks, Clint

No Spitirbro77, MP items are not above the TOS. That's one of the reasons why there is an admin specifically in charge of the MP itself. As to the specific item you're referring to, it's clearly labelled as "fetish accessories", not "torture equipment". Now I'm well aware that the dividing line between what is BDSM and what may be considered torture is very blurred, but among the (admittedly small number of) BDSM folks that I know there is always consent involved, therefore by definition it's not torture. In fact it's almost always the person on the recieving end who is ultimately in charge. Getting back to specifics: burning someone alive is clearly torture in just about anyone's book I would hope as there can't be any consent involved. Using a ball gag is very different and on the scale of things is really quite harmless. So. Pictures of people burning at the stake=torture : against TOS. Pictures of people wearing ball gags so long as they're not being tortured or raped: not against TOS. Hope that clears up a few things. Kevin.

The only time I sawe a man gagged with cloth in real life (not in films), it was in my street and he was spray painting a car and he wanted to keep the spray out of his lungs. Another time I went to an alkali indistry museum and the exhibits included a tape and in it a workman complained about having to work gagged all day to keep alkali dust out of his lungs.

The Pot banner's intention is deceptive. When you first see it, the reaction wanted is the one that you gave. It's an animated gif, but the cycle time is such that by the time the second cycle comes up showing it's for pottery, the user in most cases has moved on- leaving the impression that ad was for something other than what it's intention was. (may be considered deceptive advertising practices?)And it was done knowingly, using a hippy with a peace symbol (the stereotype of a pot smoking hippy) with the verbaige " hey baby, got any pot?" leaving the impression that it is for marijuana, not pottery. Yep i can see how having a hippy stereotype would get me to click on that when i am looking for vases etc. Marajuana use is considered an adult theme. All the banners shown above and the other banner ad composit in another thread are all adult themed. In topless restaurants and bars in my area, just because a waitress has paisties on covering her nipples does not make it family oriented, one has to show proof of age to enter. Regular bar and grills one does not have to show proof of id to enter, even when there is liquor served. Children are allowed in bars as long as they are accompanied by an adult. So sticking little x's over nipples does not make this family freindly. Saying this site is family oriented is not true. There are explicit adult themes displayed. Yes it says when joining that there are adult themes, but what you see above is viewable by all who hit this site even before being forewarned that there are adult themes in the gallery. One cannot turn off those ads with the nudity filter. One is subjected to them no matter what one has set in the filter. My point? This is not a family freindly site whith advertisements like the ones shown above and on the front page with no way of filtering them out.

In case it's slipped your attention Illusions there might be 100,000 plus members but the larger majority of those come here for the freestuff and galleries, there certainly isn't 100,000 people posting in the forums. Plus there are several other busy forums as well. Look through them sometime and you'll see the same names over and over again talking, helping, offering ideas and yes, bitching about stuff. Why is Poser forum more vociferous in places like Team Contact about the site? Well, probably because the store is pretty much 95% Poser oriented, as are the banners and front page adverts, magazine etc etc etc. Getting tired of it? Well, you could always stop reading it. Seems pretty simple to me.

"Have any of you watched TV lately?" No i gave up on it a long time ago. "How the heck did this discussion go from whether or not the Torture and execution devices belong here to whether or not this is a family friendly site?" it was mentioned in one of the above posts. "to re-make this site over into their own image of right and wrong." Nah - just hoping for some consistancy is all ;)

Illusions wrote: Now, I never said I was tired of reading it... Ahh, my mistake then, I took the wrong inference from your "tiresome" comment. As regards the opinion of the larger majority of site members. Seeing as they can't be bothered or (due to language barriers) can't read the forums, what good would a poll do? There are polls on the front page from time to time, very few people bother to vote in them. Any idea why? I'll give you a clue. When this site first formed I had no interest at all in the politics and bitch fest that was going on so I set my favourites marker to the freestuff area. It's the only place I went. A friend of mine set his to the poser gallery. neither of us saw the forums, nor the front page. What poll? I know other people who are bookmarked at their favourite forum and when they click the link to 'rosity it takes them there. Front page? What Poll? Then allow for foreign nationals who come here to look at pictures and snaffle freebies and a percentage of them won't even know that there is a poll because they can't read it. Allow also that a percentage of that 100,000 are clone accounts, some people have many, others only one and allow that another percentage of that 100,000 are dead accounts (because you can't delete your membership here) and all of a sudden that number comes down even further. Poll of members? Only if you force everyone to sign up again. And even then I'd say a good chunk of them wouldn't be able to read well enough to find out why they have to sign up again. So, a poll? I predict you'd be real lucky to get 150 votes. Illusions wrote: And the inconsistency is what...Renderosity is not Disneyland? No, the inconsistency is much larger than that, but Renderosity does often try to pretend it's Disneyosity when patently it isn't. :)

Nah the inconsistancy is: we have a filter button to filter out what we do not wish to see (ie: nudity) yet it is forced upon one as soon as they hit the site. Various times this site has stated it's a learning site, its an artists site, its a professional site, it's all about the art. Yet when one hits the front page and is greeted by banners such as the ones above and in the other post... that is not the impression i am given. You already know part of why i removed my gallery from here. i have been very open about it. "Maybe you should take another look at tv." I have a tv- i watch certain shows, i monitor my tv. I have the choice to watch or not watch what i want. When i hit this site i have no choice but to view the banners.

I was under the impression that nudity in any form was not allowed in banner ads. Well that was the situation awhile ago. Has it changed?

Telling somebody to watch T.V. to find out what's right is like telling somebody to go dumpster-diving for dinner. If they do it on T.V., it's aimed at the lowest common denominator, so why would you use that as an excuse? Wouldn't that cheapen and degrade everyone who willingly participates?