THIS doesnt violate the TOS? [ **link**](http://market.renderosity.com/softgood.ez?ViewSoftgood=20499&ViewImage=2#Image) i had two banner ads pulled.. one because it showed the SILHOUETTE of a woman's back (attached image), it was labelled as 'obscene'. i had a product promo image pulled because it had a render of an UNTEXTURED preteen with white mat settings about 100 pixels tall that looked like a plastic mannequin and was only enclosed to show a size comparison between vicky, the preteen and my Nia character. now im going to exercise some restraint here and not rant about the fact that the all-time hottest selling products at renderosity are morphing labia and female genitalia props (and i even recall seeing a character with a 'morphing anus' - god help me)... and what that says about the average buyer and the state of marketing here. im not commenting on the product, or the creator, at all here. what i am commenting on is that when im browsing through product promos i do not expect to see macro close-ups of female genitalia, nor the illustrated morphs for such genitalia showing the inside of a woman's anatomy or the open, 'stretched' state it would be in were objects inserted. even with the 'nudity' button toggled, this is a bit too much, and belongs in renderotica and not rosity... or in the LEAST in a separate, privately hosted page with a link to it from the product promo with a warning stating the graphical content. everyone here that knows me knows im far from a prude.. but this is just too much even for me... not because of the seemingly irrational and partial application of the TOS when it comes to dealing with 'obscene' content in banner ads, product promos and gallery images (ive seen gallery images get deleted by mods for showing less).. its because i dont want to see this type of thing in the rosity marketplace promos, nor would i want my mom, my kid, or any business contacts seeing something like this in a store that i sell at. racy is one thing.. macro 'money shots' another altogether. what is allowing this going to open the door to?

Yeah .. Not something I want to buy or see in the marketplace really ...

Wow, that is quite shocking. I totally agree with you Blackhearted and Ghostofmacbeth.

I IM'd Clint and asked about this. checked your link and WOW that's ummmm some picture. I thought only Renderotica sold those kinda things. (Goes to get a rag to clean up the soda off the screen and keyboard)

That is disgusting! And Quite shocking! Should be at renderotica not here! WOW! And the girl looks young to me. Sorry but thats going a little to far with the images!

Its gone...sorry about that. It slipped past me for sure. Thanks very much for brining this to my attention. Clint

Thanks clint! boy your fast!

RAther graphic... I don't mind that kind of stuff being sold here, but I think that there should be a link to an image saying "watch out this stuff is REALLY graphic, and some would consier it pornographic" or something of the like... definately better ways than simply popping up a great big shot of everything...

I have to agree..this item would be better offered in Renderotica. It stretches the boundaries of art to obscene and is not within what would I would expect to see at Renderosity.

I think this could have been handled in a more professional manner instead of being brought to attention in the Poser forum.. Isnt that what the merchants forum is for?.. anyway I'm going back to my corner now..lol

As if the title of the item wasn't enough of a clue for you. BTW I bought it,and it works well. for the purpose I require it. I suppose free thinking is only acceptable in confined terms

cherokee69, The image that was mentioned in Post 1 has been deleted. Clint

yep saw it be for it was off and it was NASTY lmao

Not the kind of stuff I buy, so I never even looked at it. But as far as Gabriel's promo's go, I have NEVER seen one that I thought was obscene, but instead tasteful to the extreme. While even I draw the line at some things, some of the stuff other folks think of as "obscene" really floors me, especially in a community of artists. Why something like this got thru when Blackhearted's promo ads were pulled is beyond me. Laurie

In calm rational letters, he types: Nasty? But so are products of decaying zombies and obesity morphs but I won't question their right to exist, at Renderostiy or Daz. Why in the year 2003 are we still so freaked out by pictures of genitals? Having done a fair amount of medical illustration involving operations around the "groinal area" (you probably don't want to know) that the product mentioned could have been used for purposes other than porn. Perhaps the ratio would be 10 medical illus. and 3000 would-be pornographers but who cares? It just a picture. What makes the dangling eye-balls and rotting teeth any less gross or objectional? Hoping we can all keep the peace, deci6el

Looking at the title of the offer it would seem to me that everyone who would want to go into this store site would know exactly what was being offered so I doubt most would be that shocked. It's a difficult area because people want to know what they are paying for before they buy not matter what the item is. Besides, if these are the best all time selling products, obviously there are a lot of Renderosity members that want it here.

Its a "conforming genital figure," folks. Who in theior right mind is going to buy it without seeing how well it meets the stated purpose. If you click on the link, what you see is what you should expect. 'The girl looks young...' Again with the guessing ages of 3d models, we just went through that. Is she 18, is she 17-1/2 is she legal in Arizona? If the images disturb you and just knowing that they're there, even though no one if forcing you to look at them then go ahead and take the next logical step demand that such products be banned altogether, start a petition and let's burn the server while we're at it. Just because one completely irrational decision was made to ban the Selyne image is no reason to start around and...Oh never mind. I'm just a little fed up with the government trying to legislate morality to deal with it here. Look at what you want, just don't go looking at stuff likely to ofend you and then run screaming about it. Sorry, I just don't think that's the way we should do things. No doubt im in the minority, but such is life.

There's nothing obscene about the banner ad in Blackhearted's post. Erotic, perhaps, but very tastefully so. It's not even 1/2 as revealing as ads in your typical glossy magazine, or many on TV. I was really surprised to read that genital products are among the best-selling items here, but (slaps forehead) I shouldn't have been surprised.

The Government shouldn't be trying to dictate morality, sigh. That Selyn banner doesn't look bad to me. Then again, I wasn't outraged by the morphing genital image. Maybe slightly shocked, but no biggie. People like to see what they're buying.

If DAZ had made Vicky without a tongue to satisfy some strange taboo, I'm sure tongues would be a hot seller too. Found at Renderotica (I only go there to read the articles): US Attorney General Ashcroft is visiting an elementary school. After the typical civics presentation to the class, he announces, "All right, boys and girls, you can all ask me questions now." A young boy named Bobby raises his hand and says, "I have three questions: 1. How did Bush win the election with fewer votes than Gore? 2. Why are you using the USA Patriot Act to limit Americans' civil liberties? 3. Why hasn't the U.S. caught Osama bin Laden yet?" Just then the bell sounds and all the kids run out to the playground. Fifteen minutes later, the kids come back in class and again. Ashcroft says, "I'm sorry we were interrupted by the bell. Now, you can all ask me questions." A young girl named Charlene raises her hand and says, "I have five questions: 1. How did Bush win the election with fewer votes than Gore? 2. Why are you using the USA Patriot Act to limit Americans' civil liberties? 3. Why hasn't the U.S. caught Osama bin Laden yet? 4. Why did the bell go off 20 minutes early? 5. Where's Bobby?

1. it stated "conforming genital figure". what have you been expecting, a hat? ` 2. why go beyond 1st image if you are so grossed about it? 3. most people are born with genitals. v3 doesn't have them (but has fang morph, for eating sallads i guess) - as opposed to michael2, so this is only completing the figure. what's this fuss about?

Ohhhhh, the danger of women*s genitalia ... boys, beware - that can be very addictive. LOL Sorry, but I don't get it why some are so upset about it, really. But then I live in germany and nudity and other things are just natural over here, nothing to call nasty or porn.

I missed the baddie image in question, so I won't comment on that. What shocks ME is that blackhearted' beautiful banner ad (shown in his message) was pulled. And labeling it 'obscene' just staggers belief.

agreed!

Well, here's my personal thoughts. A lot of the Renderosity staff doesn't consult with others when they approve images. They should start, honestly. I see people who've blurred the genitals out on their figures. I don't, honestly, understand that. Having them /there/ isn't wrong. However, I don't particularly want to see a close up of them. I never looked at the genital set, for the same reason I've never needed the Ulf Penis prop or the Diginitals one, except for maybe on a comission (and that work never got posted here, either). Honestly, it upsets me that we can have naked women with their legs spread suggestively in the galleries, looking very much so 'come have sex with me /now/' but we can't have an erect phallus, and MOST artists are so intimidated they simply crop or censor it out. I find it rather telling that the best selling products are incredibly buxom women and the like... And Blackhearted, there was nothing wrong with your banner. I like it. It's better than the 'V3 Bodies' banner that I see. I don't have a problem with nudity, but a lot of other people do, and having a banner where a rather buxom upper torso is all that's shown... Eh.

The removed image had "things" sticking out. I saw it when it was first released in the Marketplace. Had to call my wifey to take a look. I won't go into her reaction.

A "morphing anus" is very difficult to find! Maybe we need to return to the "censored" banners again

Attached Link: http://womancare.crosswinds.net/anatomy_of_the__vagina.html

"The removed image had "things" sticking out." Whoa, that sounds scary! Just kidding, but really, what were these things? Unless he included some kind of alien morphs, these "things" have names like every other part of the body. Ar we talking labia majora, labia minora, clitoris, clitoral hood, vestibular bulbs etc. It's all just human anatomy, certainly no more evil, mysterious or frightening than the pharynx or any other bodily orifice. Perhaps if we looked at it that way instead of going into cardiac arrest, we'd all be better off.

Things sticking out? Hmm, maybe that was the O.B. morph with different removal cord lengths?

SCNR I better leave ...

We would be, but let's face it. Most of us grew up, probably, in "proper" homes. One simply does not talk about the clitoris in a "proper" home, except in the bedroom, or in the occasional mother-daughter chat. One does not, in the "proper" home, expose their children to nudity. One of my biggest gripes with Renderosity is that the TOS says it's a 'family' site, and yet stuff like this is sold. I have no problem with the female genitalia. I don't particularly care about it, one way or the other. It's there. It serves its purpose, just like the male genitalia does. However, if someone tried to sell 'erection' morphs, which is a naturally occuring state of the male genitals, you know all hell would break loose. But yet, we're supposed to sit here quietly, because it /can/ be used for educational purposes. Not is, can. In that same line of thought, a decent erection set could be used for much the same purpose. And yes, we should return to the censored banners again. I'm sick of being slapped with breasts every time I change the page. It's killing sales on products I might otherwise look at, like the afore mentioned V3 Bodies set. Not all of us are heterosexual males. Not all of us like being bombarded by blatant 'sex sells'.

Well, the Teen Magazine my daughter is reading (a Teen Magazine that is around since the 50' over here in germany) has several pages with detailed sex education, with photos of nude girls and boys, with a column where teenies can ask question about contraception, sex etc. Over here they start sex education at school in 4th grade (children are aged 9 - 10) - this is nothing unusual over here. Regarding Renderosity: I haven't seen a thing yet that I wouldn't let my daughter look at (except bloody violence). Nudity is ok, she can see it - she sees more nudes at the beaches or the swimbathes over here than she would see on a banner ad or in the galleries.

Oh, forgot to say: I was raised in a proper home and my daughter is too.

Like I said. "proper". Things are OK now that weren't even a few years ago. They started sex ed when I was in the 4th grade. But they didn't exactly give us detailed, graphic photos. They gave us anatomy drawings. Nudity is one thing. I have no problem with nudity. However? I don't like having it shoved in my face every time on the site.

And Puntomaus, you have to remember that generally, in Europe, things are more alright than they are in the US. We're a bunch of stuck up prudes, for the most part. Some people, most notably of my mother's generation, think of nudity in /general/ as pornography. It's art, to them, when it's a painting. When it's a photo, they start going "Oh god, get that porn out of my house!". I don't understand it. Like I said. Tasteful nudity is fine. But when it's intentionally... well, for lack of a better way, when it looks downright slutty and trashy, I really don't want to see it, male nudity OR female nudity. Even erotic art is still art, in my mind, but only if it's well done. It can be beautiful, if done properly.

By khrys reasoning then all we should make is pink ponies. I don't have ankle biters. NOT my problem- if you don't want to see it (nudity) then click the option to not see it. But I'll be damned before I stop making pinups because of your particular physiological problems. You want to protect your kids, fine, don't come online until they go to bed- take responsibility yourself for your own behavior. Again, a republican is in office and we have to fight the vocal moral minority. "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." - Bill Cosby - To my overseas artist brothers- not all Americans agree with the radical right that you hear from in these kind of threads. It make me embarrassed to me an American. Freedom my ass.

" And Puntomaus, you have to remember that generally, in Europe, things are more alright than they are in the US." Yes, I know. Some things are sometimes hard for me to understand.

If t wasn't for BOOBS, rosity would not exist, the pervs and underage boys that come here, just to look at naked women, would no longer come here. So now we have a big fuss over genitalia, if you can look at boobs all day, you might as well see the whole package.

Don't put words in my mouth, geoegress. I don't appreciate it, and I won't tolerate it. I /will/ take it up with staff if you continue to try to publicly demean me. Pink ponies my ass. "Even erotic art is still art, in my mind, but only if it's well done. It can be beautiful, if done properly." Can you read those simple little words? See...? If you want to take that attitude with me over what I said, I can and will take it up with staff, because I refuse to let myself be bombarded and attacked yet again by witch hunters. I'm not saying don't do pin ups and don't do nudes. I do them. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm not right wing. I'm a loud mouthed gay male who simply gets sick of having breasts shoved in his face constantly. There's a difference between an artistic pin up and a trashy five minute poser image. We all know the difference. We're all adults. Don't assume to know my psychological problems based on /two/ posts. I do not agree with the 'radical right' that you see in these threads. Hello. Homosexual male. I can't even get MARRIED where I live, even if I want to. Maybe when geogegress learns to read instead of skim, they'll figure out what I just said. But I doubt it. I fully expect to be attacked by the raging, frothing mob yet again. The US, generally, is /much/ more prudish than Europe. I'd honestly prefer to live in Europe. But that requires money to move. I have no problem with nudity, or with pornography, for that matter, but each have their place. Pornography and /detailed/ examples of genitalia belong in Renderotica. If someone wants to put genitals on their female figures, please, by all means, do. Just don't, for example, do a close up of it and make it your thumbnail image and/or banner ad. Saying 'don't look at it' isn't that simple. You can't /turn/ the nudity off on banner ads. There used to be a rule about no nudity. There should be, again. It made the site seem more... I don't want to say mature, because there are some banners that look great, even nude. More professional, I suppose, but that's not quite right, either. I don't want to be surfing the forum and have a close up of someone's vagina on my screen anymore than straight people want to see two gay men having sex. I've got a perfectly proper image that, while highly suggestive, shows no genitalia or actual sexual content. I won't post it on this site, because it's homosexual and I don't feel the people here would like it, and I don't feel comfortable sharing it on this site. As for the boobs comment... Sure. Just don't make it your banner image. Blackhearted's banner is perfectly fine. Some of the others aren't.

Clarification: Rule about no nudity in banner ads.

please do post your image here. you won't be the first nor the last to post image with homosexual content. if you continue to do it only at 'rotica then, lol, i'm afraid you'll never get married in the usa. ;) btw, there's a slight difference between the picture of vagina and a picture of two (or more) gays (or not) having sex.

I'd actually rather not. And I don't post to 'Rotica, either, because I'm not comfortable posting there, either. I only post to www.gayposerart.com as Ganymede, and I don't post there, often, because /there/, unless it /is/ pornography, few people leave comments. It's a catch 22.

"Sorry, but I don't get it why some are so upset about it, really. But then I live in germany and nudity and other things are just natural over here, nothing to call nasty or porn. " christ i knew someone would bring that up, and several people did. 1. i am not a prude. i have nothing against nudity. i have seen plenty of the female anatomy. if anyone thinks i do have something against nudity, one look in my gallery or store promos will prove otherwise (im trying to cut down, really, i am). 2. i grew up in europe myself, so the 'bah, prudish americans' approach isnt going to work with me. yes, they are far more tolerant of tasteful nudity in the media in europe - youll see breasts in commercials, primetime tv and most magazines and even newspapers.. oftentimes even full nudity.. but dont try and make it out like there are women spreading their legs in the morning newspaper and everyone is so laid back and 'cultured' that even grandmothers will just stare at it approvingly over their morning coffee and mutter 'ooh, she has a nice hymen'. puhleeze. 3. there is artistic nudity, and pornographic nudity. ive always spoken up against pornographic nudity in these forums, ever since i became a member here (and made more than my share of enemies for it). there is a lot of tasteful, artistic nudity in the galleries. but theres also a lot of pornographic nudity thats under constant debate - im sorry, but 'money shots' do not belong here. i find nothing artistic or tasteful about a macro shot of a woman's innards, let alone detailed images of how they would morph were a penis inserted or if they were stretched open. before anyone starts flaming me - im not talking about pointless nudity.. hell, im guilty of it myself. im not speaking up against 'nude vicky in a temple with a sword' images here, or trying to have your right to post them taken away, so dont get your panties in a bunch... those will always be here to stay. 4. medical illustration? yes.. valid point. although i didnt get the 'medical feel' when i was looking at those promos. again, there is a way to do things tastefully. theres a reason Daz doesnt want to touch this sortof item. its accepted here, and i have no problem with that, because apparently the market is clamoring for morphing genitals that are higher resolution than the entire vicky 2 figure (genital props/morphs have always been the hottest selling items here). before someone brings it up (or if it already has been, havent read every post yet) i am not damaging anyones sales by pointing this out.i have nothing against the creator, or the product, really, and obviously it should be sold here since its doing really well and thats good for the community and will promote growth and traffic. if there are promos like this necessary to sell a product, the merchant could host them on a private site and link them from his/her product page with a simple highly graphical nudity content warning. if anything, this thread will bring in extra sales for the merchant. its just that id rather not see rosity become any more liberal with pornographic content and should draw the line at some types of promo images. i mean whats next? morphing condoms? dildos? butt-plugs? anal beads? where do we draw the line? cheers, -gabriel

"I missed the baddie image in question, so I won't comment on that. What shocks ME is that blackhearted' beautiful banner ad (shown in his message) was pulled. And labeling it 'obscene' just staggers belief. " ack.. im sorry, bad judgement call on my part in posting that. it was late, i had just got home after driving for two straight days, and i was a bit tired (i actually regret starting this thread, im sure ill make another assload of enemies for it). anyways, clint explained to me why it was pulled and that he probably made a bad judgement call on it but in the early implementation of the banner ad deletions there was some confusion and some borderline ones were deleted, while others werent. i guess it was a bad example, but all i could find at the time to illustrate my point. my apologies to clint. i WAS fuming mad at the time, because i spent a lot of time on my banner ads and particularly liked that one. as for the 'baddie image in question'.. i was thinking about posting it in the thread, but honestly i found it too offensive and didnt want to get chastised for posting it in the poser forum so i posted a link instead. surely someone has it still in their cache and could post a thumb so people know what this thread is about?

I live in a "proper" home so I can't allow that my children or my grandmother never see the Satan's invention like tits, vag.. (I even can't nention it), so all my cats look like this

rolls his eyes Cute. Very mature.

I'd like to answer a few of the issues raised in this thread if I may. I'll try to be as correct as possible, but since I'm not MarketPlace staff there may be an error or inconsistency. If I do slip, I'm sure that Clint or one of the other MP staff will put me straight. The difference between banner images and MP promo images. Regardless of what your profile settings are with regard to nudity, you will potentially still see all ads in the current rotation. So the threshold of, for want of a better term, 'nudity tolerance' in banner ads is very low. On the other hand, when you visit the Marketplace the images you see are controlled by the nudity setting in your profile. If you have nudity switched off, you should see an eye icon instead of the actual image. So for Marketplace images the nudity threshold is much, much higher since you have the option of switching it off. That still doesn't allow for images to break the rules though. And it sounds like this one was over the line and subsequently got pulled. (Clint and the other store staff are only human, some things slip by unnoticed.) Why the hell is Renderosity selling a gen morph item anyway? Why not? It's just anatomy. Without some kind of add-on, I can't get a nude to look real even from a distance. I'm not suggesting that we all need to be able to manipulate 20 or 30 different settings to make heaven knows how many different looking vulvae, but for a realistic nude (where you can see the crotch area at least) you need a gen morph of some kind. I agree that on this occasion the promo image may have been too graphic, even considering a nudity filter, but credit where it's due please, Clint rectified the problem as soon as he became aware of it.

---

Gabe, I don't think anyone would call you a prude ;) Not if they'd taken even the most cursory look at your gallery or store. As for a more liberal line with store images, I think this thread has demonstrated that we're not becoming more liberal. At least I hope not; I think we have the balance pretty much right at the moment. And can we stop having a go a Khrys please? Whether you agree or not with what he said, taking the piss isn't helpful. Thanks, Kev.

"And can we stop having a go a Khrys please? Whether you agree or not with what he said, taking the piss isn't helpful." that image he just posted was fucking rediculous. how on earth can you even conceive of comparing censoring the nipples of a cat to showing a collage of macro-rendered spread female genitals? when people go completely overboard like that and lose track of the discussion at hand, they forfeit all credibility in my eyes. in my opinion, its him thats taking the piss here. im sick to death of every discussion like this being twisted into a 'no nudity' discussion in order to drum up support from the pro-nudity masses. if you even pay cursory attention to this thread youll notice that it has NOTHING to do with nudity, it has to do with the way pornographic nudity is presented in renderosity marketplace promos. "As for a more liberal line with store images, I think this thread has demonstrated that we're not becoming more liberal. At least I hope not; I think we have the balance pretty much right at the moment." and thats why i stay - because i think renderosity has its head on pretty straight about issues like this. less tolerant than rotica, more tolerant than daz.. its a happy medium. im just wary of people setting up precedents.. because theyre the real backbone of change: 'if he did that, why cant i do this?'. cheers, -gabriel

Excuse me, Blackhearted? Read again. You just attacked ME and I was DEFENDING YOU. kawecki was the one who posted the image of the censored cat, not me. Get it right before you go off cursing and attacking people next time. Frothing mob and all.

I was discussing the object in the image, not the person who posted. I've been attacked enough in these forums in the past to know the difference. The image itself was not mature.

Just a friendly reminder, if you see an image that seems ... not appropriate for Rendie, it's best to IM a Mod or admin. We do respond to IMs. Threads like these have a tendency to careen out of control. Kick back, enjoy the end of the week. (Some of us get to enjoy a holiday as well.) The world isn't going to end because of a disagreement on what's "realistic" vs. "pornographic." Cheers!

"Excuse me, Blackhearted? Read again. You just attacked ME and I was DEFENDING YOU. kawecki was the one who posted the image of the censored cat, not me. Get it right before you go off cursing and attacking people next time. Frothing mob and all. Sometimes if you're angry, it pays to wait 24 hours before posting...kawecki is the one that posted the cat image not Khrys, he posts it often in dicussions over nudity/pornography. After a while, only the newbies think it's cute." jesus people relax, it was a typo. both names start with a K too, its an honest mistake that can EASILY be understood if you drop your torches for a second. i was obviously referring to the person who posted the picture of the censored cat. "It was Khrys that posted this comment regarding kawecki's image: "rolls his eyes Cute. Very mature." Which could be taken as a personal attack, which is a TOS Violation. As things are "heating up", it might be a good time for the Mods to remind everyone to discuss the topic and not the people! " lol.. if thats a personal attack then all of rosity is guilty of it at one time or other.. perhaps mass bannings should ensue. disagreeing with something and saying its immature is nowhere near a TOS violation, its just a mild comment. id even say its also bloody rediculous and completely irrelevant without the slightest fear of it being taken as a personal attack. note these are EXAMPLES only and do not refer to anyone in this thread: personal attack: fuck you. you are a raving idiot. youre a load that should have been swallowed. your mother is a hamster and your father smells of elderberries. not a personal attack: i disagree with your posts because they are senseless and moronic. youre acting irrationally and immaturely. if were to regard every statement of disapproval or disagreement as a personal attack, there wouldnt be very many of us left here at rosity. Khrys, really sorry.. havent had my morning coffee/cigarrette yet so my brain was still in low gear when i typed it. honest mistake.