"I am asking it could be embedded in my home page articles with a warning that you are about to see a penis. " until renderosity includes not just a nudity filter, but an X rated filter, i think that would be the best way and what i would do were i the creator of such a product. i have nothing against you or your product man - its well done and i realise theres a huge market for it, and hope you do well. i realise that at first glance this thread may seem to be 'bashing' you, but its not never was it intended to be - in fact it should increase your sales if anything. its just that even though i have the nudity filter set to 'off'.. theres some things some people would rather not see. just because i dont mind seeing renders of nude vicky 3 in a temple and have disabled the filter, doesnt mean that crotch shots fall into the same category. i think that hosting the images on your rosity homepage with a warning, or on a private homepage, would be a better way to go about it. posting some general, non-X rated shots in the product promos and then linking to more detailed images with a warning about adult content would satisfy everyone here - and its what i suggested in my first post. that way you wouldnt offend anyone, and you would also have detailed renders readily available for those who wish to see them. lets face it - if someone is looking for a realistic genital model for vicky (or the upcoming mike one), then they will not hesitate for a second to check out more linked images. cheers, -gabriel

hey baba good idea! oh yeah, if you offer more pics people will look, hands down. that goes for everyone, just cuz rosity has spots for 3 pics doesnt mean you are only limited to not linking to more. good idea, for everyone.

Marty, Bravo, excellent post. Here's the humor... how uptight did the Puritans have to be for the English to kick them out of their country?! ;)

Hello, first of all I have no bad feelings about any of you and your comments. I feel that their should be guidelines we should stay within. Maybe I went overboard with the detailed graphic pictures of what my model looked like, but I first emailed Renderosity and specifically told them what my model was and how it worked. They emailed me back with a very short message, which looked like form mail kinda, with a link to go to with guidelines for promotional material. Maybe they should have given more time in answering my question, but they hadn't, and things unfolded as they did. I have spent so much time on this project that I began became un-sensatized to it. I envy all of you who buy it and use it for fun or profit, and enjoy it. For me, I spent too many hours working on this project that I could have been out having fun with my friends to enjoy it. In other words, its just a product to me. When I did the advertising add, maybe I went too far, but I was only trying to show what the product looked like. I stayed well within the Renderosity Guidelines. I thought all those micro close ups wouldn't be so erotic to cause such a rukus. Just wanted to show what the product looked like. I don't think that my model being young is even an issue, she was nothing special, just a few morphs, goth make up, and some hair. Her breast are pretty huge also. I don't get this complaint. Oh, maybe its because she has no hair, well, if she had hair, you couldn't see the genital. By the way, most of today's younger woman, (or the ones that I know), shave. Its become sort of cleanliness thing. The woman I know wouldn't admit to having pubic hair. I know its country wide because I heard them discussing this on Regis Philborn a month ago where all the woman on the set were saying they shaved. (I am not making this up). As for what she looks like, she is a woman you could meet any day, she looks real. I guess I better start putting big Texas hairdo's on them and quit making their features so cute. By the way, I wonder how many of you are History Channel watchers like me. I always feel a little like a nerd for watching it and when friends come over I usually switch over to MTV. But I was over at a party on Forth Of July Eve, and my friends had on the history channel. Well they had a two specials about Hugh Hefner and the Playboy Mansion West. I was sitting around drinking beers with my friends and they had all these people walking around practically naked. There were tits everywhere hidden only by little bit of lace (you could see right through it). Not only that! They had a segment in the show where they were these artists were painting naked woman (i mean applying paint to young woman as young looking as in my add) and they were walking around naked through the party. Some were done up like cats and animals and some had clothing painted on. And they showed them, my jaw hit the floor, there was shaved full frontal nudity, Painted" I wish I could find a internet site that had this stuff. There was one girl standing in the bright light of the dressing room and I could even see her "conforming genital figure", hehehe, with a little paint on it. Anyway, I popped in a video tape and recorded the show on its next rotation so I have a tape in case anyone wants proof. WTF is the history channel coming to? Lets talk about that and get some of the attention away from renderosity who is only trying to do the best they can in these changing times. There are no clear cut lines between what is appropriate and what is not anymore. In the mean time, I will continue creating items that will sell. I look out there in the market place and ask myself one question over and over, what will a large number of people want. Then I will create it. I promise to use more discretion in my advertising in the future. marty-insomniaworks

Yeah, thanks Rio. I was torn as to whether to thank you for your comments re: language or to try and let this parrot have a decent burial, but... well, thanks :)

lol I saw that History Channel show. The bodypaint was beautiful! Here's a bodypaint artist- http://www.fleshandcolor.com/

Hey caly, some of those models at that site look pretty young, hmmmm.

grin In that business you're 'Over the Hill' at like 24. :D I have seen 18 yr olds that look 14. I have seen 14 year olds that look 18. It's really hard to judge.

body painting rules!! they get so freakin creative sometimes its amazing, playin off anatomy and such <3...but yeah really, im kinda shocked theyd have something liek that on the history channel but i guess seein as it was painted over and a channel whose main audience are adults anyway, i dont see much offense i guess? body painting rules!! ;)

"not just a nudity filter, but an X rated filter" Great idea - until I thought of the row that would ensue as people argued over what constituted X rated and there we go again. I didn't get to see the original image but I'm sure that Insomniaworks read the TOS as advised and followed it. If that is the case, then the image was pulled, not because it was a violation, but because a few people raised enough of a stink about it. That's cool, they have a right to complain. But, when you start trying to avoid anything that offends anyone, you would end up with nothing but black squares - except someone would complain and want white. On a mercifully lighter note, many years ago there was a layout on painted vulvas in some fine publication. There was a great Castro, complete with beard and a Black model sported a scowling Mr. T. Sports Illustrated had a painted on swimsuit layout a few years ago. The female star of the new Pirated of the Caribbean described spending 45 minutes a day having cleavage painted on her less than ample chest.

What's worse. Censorship of pictures or censorship of words. Or are they just different sides of the same coin. "There's no need to refer to other peoples' children as brats". Oh my. Another word stricken from our vocabulary. Before long we won't be able to even THINK because we'll have no words left.

how about making an "ault-only" section with access personally regulated from the member options? Adult poser products is a reality we must live with (and i don't dislike them) but since there are particular situations in wich is better they don't exist (when i browse renderosity from work for example) I think that will be a great solution: if you don't want distasteful or obsene products you don't see them....

I find the repeated use of the word "F#%K" to be as disturbing as a cartoon picture of a dam TWAT

"...how about making an "ault-only" section..." Well, aside from the aforementioned problem of deciding what get's sent there, it is a good idea. If people could agree on the criteria, then perhaps the majority would be OK with it. It's true that "adult oriented" items are a reality. Renderosity makes money off them and vendors who want to make money don't want to be relegated to the much smaller market at Renderotica. I imagine that most people don't have a problem with their existence or sale. Some people have a problem with ad images but since thay can turn them off, I don't understand that complaint. For all those at wotk (on lunch or ligitimate business I assume :-), a "clean" config on the work PC should do the job. There are a few people who just don't like the stuff and want it to go away but I'd bet they are in the minority. I base that on the fact that everyone who complains in these situations is at pains to assert their lack of prudery, love of (tasteful) naked Vicky, etc. :-) So, an "adults only section seems reasonable to me. To the PTB though, it's probably doesn't seem so good. Having such an option might tarnish the family friendly image, a concern I can understand. It would also mean more work to administer it for perhaps no great increase in revenue. I don't know how many people sell at Renderotica but not here because they feel that Renderosity isn't friendly to their products. I suspect that kinky S&M appliances and such would never be accepted, even in an adults only section here. Since some are unhappy with some of the banners as well, it would be great to have a global setting in the profiles that would only serve up PG banners in addition to blocking "adult" content in the MP. I don't think that would be a great problem from the technical side but I haven't used the software so that's speculation. The problem, again, would be deciding which banners get the adult rating - one more job for the admins. It would also cause more threads with merchants complaining that thier banner shouldn't have gotten the "AO" rating. That's not a knock on Blackhearted - I don't see why in the world his banner was considered "obscene." It does illustrate the potential (probable) can of worms that would be opened. It's a very good idea from a standpoint of making money, giving customers products they want, artistic freedom and common sense IMO. As to whether everyone involved would be mature enough and practical enough to pull it off without a long, bitter and unresolved war, that, I'm not so sanguine about. Can you say image posting limits redux?

"I imagine that most people don't have a problem with their existence or sale. Some people have a problem with ad images but since thay can turn them off, I don't understand that complaint. For all those at wotk (on lunch or ligitimate business I assume :-), a "clean" config on the work PC should do the job. " thats the problem. everyones answer seems to be 'if you dont like it, turn on your nudity filter and filter it out'. i dont think that i should have to filter out ALL nudity (3/4 of rosity, lol) in order to not view money shots. the two are in completely different categories.

"i dont think that i should have to filter out ALL nudity (3/4 of rosity, lol) in order to not view money shots." Thus the option for multi-level filtering which I assume you agree with since you suggested it first. If you're at work, especially the way the workplace is these days, I think filtering all nudity is probably the safest and sanest thing to do. I'd really be worried that my idea of tasteful nudity would inevitably run afoul of the boss' or someone else's idea of taste and so save my naked Vicky viewing for home. I doubt the "It was only a naked woman, not her vagina," defense is going to stand up in any sexual harassment action. While I doubt the multi-filter will be implemented, I don't like your solution either. It has the same problem of deciding what to put where that filtering does with one key difference. With filters things go in general or adult. You seem to be saying (correct me if I'm wrong), that you want to be able to see nudity, but only the nudity you want to see - so its general or it's banned. I think we actually agree on what we'd like to see implemented but in the absence of that, I can't agree with banning images even if they meet the TOS, based on personal taste. And I don't agree with the "everyone in every place on the planet is going to be offended by X," argument as a reason either. First, it's not true. He sent me a copy of the image and not only was I not offended or shocked by it, I was actually even more surprised that it became so controversial, especially considering that it was a product illustration one had to intentionally go look at. There is a good reason the TOS are pretty specific about what is not acceptable and that is to avoid people being censored based on someone's personal taste or views on morality. If the site really believes in freedom of expression, then that means an image should have a place here, even if 10,000 members oppose it and only one is in favor of it. Having been a victim of overzealous censorship yourself, I would hope that you agree with that. I can sympathise with not wanting to go through an extra hassle. I'm sure that a lot of people won't be happy to have to go ask the librarian to turn off the filters either. Putting an filter on/off selector in one of those dropdowns would be nice. In the end though, I think the filter, however it's implemented is the best solution for protecting everyone's rights. And yes, being able to look at vaginas before buying one is a right, it falls under the pursuit of happiness :-)

i dont think what i suggested is so complicated. just as we have a nudity and violence toggle here, there could be a second (or third depending on how you look at it) one perhaps. ie: when you log into the site, like now, the nudity filter is off by default meaning you see two levels: non-nudity, and nudity. there could be a third option, disabled by default.. like an 'adult content' option. anything that goes beyond mere nudity into sexual content or highly suggestive or violent content could go in there, youd simply hit the toggle when uploading just like the nudity one. if someone wishes to view it, its their choice and would take 2 seconds to enable it in their preferences. if someone wishes to view no nudity or adult content, they could just set the filter on and would view neither. would make everyone happy, and would also open up the marketplace for more types of products and bring in more revenue. people that dont wish to view the adult content need not even know it 'exists'. cheers, -gabriel

Nope. If you don't want to see the product shots DONT CLICK TO GET THERE. Why don't you also ask for flags for: No images/products with any religious references No images/products of foods that can make you fat No images/products of anyone who is overweight No images/products of any ethnic group unless 100% authentic No products whose description contains any of 1,236,436 banned words No images/products depicting any entity who is poor No images/products of expensive toys for children No images/products for one sex only..they must be for both male and female No images/products containing any references to magic No images/products with any reference to evolution..this includes dinosaurs No images/products containing guns or other weapons :)

"Nope." dont believe i was asking for your approval. with your ingenious reasoning, i could post a picture in the galleries of anything offensive and/or illegal -- for example child pornography -- and it would be the viewer's fault for clicking on the thumbnail.

Wrong. If it's illegal it won't be here.

"i dont think what i suggested is so complicated." I agree and will not push my luck any further while we are in agreement. Now fire up the petition and I'll sign it. I also nominate you for the thankless but necessary job of being the categorization mod. I may not agree with some of your assignments but as long as I can set my filters to unrestricted and see everything, I'll be happy. Now Spit, Blackhearted and I are in some degree of agreement, the Palestinians and Israelis had a tenuous truce last time I checked - don't complicate things. Besides, your list is woefully incomplete we'd need: No images/products with fur or meat No images/products with gay/lesbian/transgender themes No images/products with swarthy folk (possible terrorists) No images/products with damage to the environment No images/products with nude animals No images/products with nude Vicki and no proof she is 18+ No images/products with intelligent non-human lifeforms No images/products with unpatriotic themes No images/products with Bush twins gone wild oil wrestling No images/products with Sadam unless bestiality is featured No images/products with "There was a young man from Nantucket..." I'm surprised that a good American like you would forget these basic taboos. But wait a minute, maybe you're not an American. Let me see your passport. I think Atty. Gen. Ashcroft would like to have a few words with you.

""There's no need to refer to other peoples' children as brats". Oh my. Another word stricken from our vocabulary. Before long we won't be able to even THINK because we'll have no words left."

Interesting that simple respect for others eludes so many.

Kendra: If it were just a matter of simple respect I wouldn't bat an eyelash. lmckenzie: My list is some of the actual items that are removed from textbooks and tests in America.

It seemed like a matter of respect to me - and still does looking back on the text... and I'm one of those who advocates "if you don't want to be offended by flesh don't look at nudity" and "parents have to take SOME responsibility for their children - this includes filtering suspect images where there's an option to do so". There's still IMHO no need to refer to other people's children en masse, without any information on said children except that their parents would rather keep the mental pollution to a minimum, as "brats" - there's no basis to suggest that the term is applicable. To suggest otherwise seem disingenuous. Oh yes - and I think I disagree with lumping "Adult" (above and beyond nudity) in with "Violence". There seems to be little correclation between the two to me, beyond restricting access by minors - in which case chnging "nudity" to a simple age setting (or a number of age settings if need be) in keeping with movie ratings might be the way to go. Cartoon "Tom and Jerry" type violence might still be problematical in "scoring" however.

Respect? No, I don't think so. It's a matter of being conditioned to look for offense whether it exists or not. "Brats" as a word is not offensive in and of itself since it's often used affectionately as well. It's not just the speaker who has to take responsibility, the listener must too.

well, ill have to agree there 'brats' was a term that originally referred to the children of career military servicemen (who lived on base, or were stationed abroad). it then became used to describe basically an 'unruly kid', or a mischievous one. given the context, id hardly find it offensive. noone said 'your kid is a little brat'.. hell i used the term in my latest gallery image, stating i had to hurry to take the picture because a bunch of little brats were coming up the steps and i wanted to snap it before they started running around all over the place. i dont think many parents got offended by the use of the word - thats taking things overboard. we can sit here and debate whats offensive and whats not for years and never get anywhere. this is the internet - you can argue forever and youll NEVER convince anyone that youre right or theyre wrong.. or get anywhere other than slowly deteriorating into a flamewar. i dont agree with the viewpoint thats being stated over and over that 'who defines what is offensive or not'... 'the word brat is offensive', 'cussing is offensive', etc. and comparing it to the image that started this thread. i dont think these are anywhere near in the same category - its like saying jaywalking and armed robbery are the same because theyre both crimes... and if stricter laws are put in place against armed robbery than jaywalking, some form of 'discrimination' or unjust subjectivity is taking place. pfft.

You have to consider the source. Look up the source in this thread and you'll see that insult was the objective.

Now that doesn't mean people have to take it as an offense, by no means. But that doesn't change the fact that it's, originally, a lack of respect no matter how you spin it.
My comment was a statement of fact. There is a lack of respect on many levels in this thread. Taking something public that could have been dealt with privately is one (although the image didn't belong, should have been pulled and I understand the outrage). Calling names (childish as it is) is another. Berating people who would like the nudity filter, something this site provides and people are used to having, used is yet another popular disrespect people exercise without thinking.

Everyone wants their way or the highway. But you have to consider Renderosity's position. Isn't the age for joining around 14? That means they have to keep around a Pg13 type of "rating" or content. Most of the gallery goes beyond that but despite the fact that the parents are the ones who should decide and control if their teens participate, Renderosity can't just jump to an X without a front page warning. And since R'osity has established a certain "rating" of a sort, people expect that. Originally it was said no nudity in product thumbnails (at least when I first logged on), that has changed and as long as the filter is used properly shouldn't be a problem. Simple nudity has become more accepted but graphic sexual nudity, if I understand the image Blackhearted described, is not suited here and someone complaining of such shouldn't be hounded for it. Banner ads we have no choice in and shouldn't contain the nudity I've seen lately without the option to filter it. And none of this has to do with anyone being a "prude" but rather wanting consistancy with the rating of content that this site has already established.

i dont agree with the viewpoint thats being stated over and over that 'who defines what is offensive or not'... 'the word brat is offensive', 'cussing is offensive', etc. and comparing it to the image that started this thread. I agree, there's a vast difference between imges containign nudity and offensive messages/words. I can filter out "adult images" that contain nudity with the click of a button. I cannot "filter out" offensive language or cleverly veiled insults. Although it'll be some time before this impacts me (my child is currently too young to read sentences) when it does I shall immediately find unfilterable offensive text more objectionable than the filterably nudity. Because only the text will be able to get through. No one individual is able to dictate what any other individual will or will not find offensive, or to what measure.

theres a lot of subjectivity in anything like this thread. if you want to play games, you can get by with loopholes in the TOS (like i see many people doing with their banner ads). so, for example, while according to the 'no nudity' rule in banner ads my banner at the top of this thread may be pulled because it shows the silhouette of a buttock, someone could render a nude woman with sheer lace over her breasts and claim that it is not nude, since shes wearing clothing (even though the nipples show through, or the bra is the size of a postage stamp). in the end i trust the rosity mods and admins and their judgement on things like this - even though ive been on BOTH sides of the issue (requesting an image be considered for TOS violations, and also having my own image pulled for it). i can understand both sides, and while i trust the rosity admins and mods and their opinion, i still think that the rosity TOS/policies need a bit of tweaking so that there isnt such debate every time something like this pops up. "Taking something public that could have been dealt with privately is one (although the image didn't belong, should have been pulled and I understand the outrage)" yeah, i agree. again, my apologies to insomniaworks for not taking this up privately, posting this thread was a big mistake. not because i regret the discussion that ensued - i think its more or less constructive... but because his product happens to be in the middle of it. its hard to post a thread without citing SOME examples, however, and my images/ads have been used as examples by many and i never get offended by that and just join in the debate. if i thought for a second that this thread would hurt his sales i would not have posted it - and i dont think that it did. its just an example.. but yeah i realise after the way it went, and the tone i started it on, that it could have been done far more tactfully and if i ever post anything like this again ill keep that in mind. as for keeping things private - i usually try (you would not believe the amount of crap i get sucked into in IMs and emails).... ive tried resolving things on a merchant-to-merchant, and merchant-to-customer level before through polite IMs, and have had some pretty negative experiences and total inaction. the last one i recall was after one of my products had been on the market for months, and i had spent considerable effort promoting it, another merchant (the majority of whose products bear uncanny similarities to mine) was going to upload a similar product with the exact same name... i discreetly and politely asked that they use another name in light of this, and they blew me off completely with a nasty response. so sometimes the 'discreet approach' only backfires. cheers, -gabriel

Sadly I ahve to agree that sometimes private is pointless - or worse. the one benefit to public exchanges, however ill-advised they may sometimes appear, is that one MIGHT get an open hearing/debate on whatever the issue is. While that can sometimes be clouded by canny (not to say outright sly or combatant) members, it seems to usually resolve amicalby-ish and fairly. At least, from what I've seen (and I'd so LOVE to see a public reaction to some of the IM comments I've received!)

I agree 100% that the non-verbal/non-visual nature of this form of communication leads to many misunderstandings. It's also just difficult to determine whether someone you really don't know except though this medium is joking or who might be upset by the joke, however well intentioned. I don't know about the brats thing but I've on occasion referred to children as 'little buggers,' without meaning to imply that they were sodomites. As they say, to err is human... "My list is some of the actual items that are removed from textbooks and tests in America." Heck spit, half the ones on my list probably are too. Add talking animals as well. Somewhere people wanted 'Charlotte's Web' pulled because, well I guess because talking spiders just ain't right. illusions, my nomination of Blackhearted was semi-humorous (forgot the smiley face). I was serious though in saying that the categorizations don't matter to me. Given my skill level, any gyno-goodies I made would be so incomprehensible I dare anyone to be offended by them. If they want to label it 'Pervert's Paradise' and stick lace nighties in there, as long as I can see it. From my PoV, it's a reasonable compromise. I'm sure it's not the ideal for either side but it sure beats the alternative of not being able to see what I'm buying. Only once in a blue moon does anyone complain about an image being too violent or racist etc. but s e x. oy vey, it's a constant smouldering bed of ashes that flares up regularly. If Poser didn't do people, the problem wouldn't exist but then most of us probably wouldn't be here. People's emotions on the subject are strong and varied which is why, ultimately, I have to disagree with the jaywalking v. bank robbery anology. It's a continuom and making an ex cathedra pronouncement that everyone certainly must see that X if offensive and Y is not just isn't the way people operate. Saying that it is, at best, devalues the right of others to have their own opinions and feelings and at worst, it really does come off as rather an insult. At any rate, you dudes and dudettes keep at it if you like but bring in another horse, the original one is starting to smell quite rank now, and the flies are probably a health hazard.

"No one individual is able to dictate what any other individual will or will not find offensive, or to what measure". This is true. But at least with pictures there is some kind of definition involved. Lines are blurred only as to which of these belong to which offensive category. But being offended by words is different. Every word is fair game for the chopping block, not just a few. And the assumption lately is that everyone has the right to demand not to be offended even when the words aren't part of a personal attack. Taken to its logical conclusion we'll have to practically stop speaking.

To change the subject slightly: {It slipped past me for sure.} How does an image of one of the top-selling products "slip by" the testers AND the admins AND the people here... only to be "seen" when the product hits the top-selling slot? It reminds me of a debate awhile back about some "adult" pose sets for sale. Those were approved by testers (presumably they looked at the sales images) and uploaded for sale. These pose sets also made it to the top selling slots... until someone complained that they were too "adult" for the site. The product testers didn't think the set was too "adult" and the admins were happy to have another top-selling item (and all the money from the sales). So, why are these products only pulled when someone complains? How can they make it so far into the sales process if they are against the TOS? Answer: they're not. As long as the product sells (and sells well), the admins will keep the product in the store until someone complains. Don't believe me? Keep a very close eye on the top-sellers. Soon, there will be another "adult" product... which will be removed immediately after someone complains... and, again, raising the question about how it got to the top-seller list in the first place.

There is a lack of respect on many levels in this thread. Taking something public that could have been dealt with privately is one (although the image didn't belong, should have been pulled and I understand the outrage). this is so wrong. there was nothing to be dealt with privatley, no one was asking that it be removed, so much as discussing WHY it is there to begin with and WHAT that means in the MP, that was the point of the thread. the forum is a place for discussion, the point of this thread was to DISCUSS the morals or ethics or whatnot of adult content, and its extent, both shown and viewed here at rosity using a couple examples. you are way exaggerating, there is NO outrage. no RAGE, at least on gabe's part, at all. just mere concern as members, and as merchants. ya'll gotta stop twisting things and changin subjects and take a freakin chill pill before these posts continue. there is no need to be nasty. DISCUSS! not FIGHT! BEHAVE! or i will come and EAT you!!!

Hey, Gabrial, no apolgies needed. Don't want to be a jerk, but this debate increased my sales significantly. I don't really think my product was really in the middle of this...I don't see it that way. It was just the spark that lit this fire. I am a modeler as I stated before and most of my time is spent on study and creation. Don't be surprised that this previously unknown modeler, becomes one of the top merchants here. I deserve to be because I am putting a lot of work into it and lots of creative thought. In other words, I would be too busy to even read a thread such as this, but it involves me and I really don't understand a few things, people are saying though and I wanted to point them out. First of all, I didn't get sneak through any loopholes. I also have to add that I am new to the 3Dmodeling world and I am getting to know this community for the first time. So, keep in mind that I am a new merchant also. I have no past experience to really draw from. As, I said before, I emailed ClintH with the product plans and asked him for the guidelines. He refered me to the TOS and, make no mistake, I followed them to the T. There was nothing in the TOS to warent the removal of my image. Secondly the picture in question was submitted at the time I submitted the product, it passed through product testing. You have to understand, I made this product to meet the expectations of my testers. I ended up making this product capable of doing "much much" more than I would need for my own personal purposes. After making this figure capable of doing so much, I wanted to post and image of just how much this product would do, because to my knoledge, there is no other genital so realistic. I simply chose to build a product that would be highly popular and be the best of its kind. I have never said anything distasteful in my advertisment. I explained the products attributes, thats all. As for that picture in question, it was not a setting that I would call erotic or sexy. It was clinical, like it or not. Some even assume that this was some attempt at artwork, it was not. It was the most effective way to portray my product's many attributes in one 800x800 pixel image. It wouldn't have made any difference if I had used a doctors wall for a back drop for the images. No TOS violations were made by this product or it's advertising. Someone said in reply to my last message in this thread that it was okay for History Channel to show naked woman walking around Hugh Heffner's house with out being greyed out, because children would not be likely to be watching the History Channel. Well, how likeley then that children would be looking around the Renderosity market place. If I had a child, hope to someday have someday, I would't let him/her into Renderosity to begin with. Its already an adult site, accept it or not, but we are all adults here, why can't we all accept it. Renderosity is an adult site. No, it's not hardcore or bad as that, but, with out question it is for adults. So why do poeple follow volunterly follow my little thumbnail within the market place(there are no banner adds as of yet), when they are told in advance that it is genitalia, object to seeing the product????????????????? There are plenty of products that I never look at each time I look into the market place because I have no interest in them. My product though in some people's opinion, shouldn't be aloud to be in the market place because it violates their values. So instead of ignoring the little thumb, because it does not interest them, they go and look at it and complain that they got to see it. Don't blame Renderosity for this! Don't blame me for this! TOS was not violated. My product is not rude or crude, its is a realistic part of the anatomy that has been masterfully modeled. It is only because it violates some people's values that my product can no longer be portrayed in the advertising. Thats all, don't try to make it more than that. I hope I don't make any enimies here, but its about time I did say something in my own defence. I probably should just let this fire burn out with out stoking it up again, but, I couln't help but voice my own opinion. God Bless America thank you, marty-insomniaworks

Well good news for you all the few poeple that have complained. I just got an email from ClintH, he was nice but, he said the male Genital that is almost finished will probably not be aloud in the market place. I probably will not market it anywhere else either. I think I could use some support here. Did anyone send ClintH letters that supported me or were they all bad? thank you, marty-insomniaworks

Oh, thank you so much for your support illusions, and the praise you gave my product. It was really a lot of hard work and I am proud that I made it. I had planned to build G3II in the next 6 months, this one would be twice as good as the first, but don't know anymore. marty-insomniaworks

no i doubt anyone here sent any letters to clint. even if rosity is deemed an adult site due to content up already, thats not the image i think rosity wants of the site. its hard for us artists to see that images like that and certain banner ads etc, may seem innocent to us as being 3d and all, but to people who dont use this medium or know little about it and its uses its very easy for them to think them as pornographic...esp with such realistic textures nowadays some might find it hard to determine 3d from photos, etc.

with this in mind, you have to understand how rosity is growing now, much more publicity, and so many new memers and just visitors who know little to nothing about poser art/products. a banner ad with the word erotic and sexy, let alone with pics of such description, could easily cause some frowns on people who come here thinkin its a "family" oriented art site. And ive actually seen/met a number of people under the age of 15 around here..but the point is, it really doesnt matter what the ages are or what you as parents would allow your child to see or not to see, its about the image rosity wishes to portray of itself. They dont mean to ban certain things as a personal attack on anyone or anyone's products, they are just looking out for their best interest...if rosity's own are complaingin about a certain thing, imagine what other visitors and new members who arent used to seeing things liek this around here might be thinking.

this has been a long debate and we've all read posts where people are complaining about what bosses/wives say when they are looking over shoulders... i remember someone sayin their wife was asking what they were doing at a porn site...People whove come here to join, but see certain ads/images or whatever and changing their minds... As artists used to seeing these images and products, knowing they are just 3d etc, we dont see these things through the same eyes as others, so that doesnt really make us fair judges. and again, in the end, it all comes down to rosity's image.

so in that, i dont think it would be a bad idea to exclude sexual organs from the store from now on, if that came to be...doubtful, but hey- image is everything, whether these products make the most money for the site or not, if people are getting offended or confused about what the site is really about then i would think that would take priority.

I think what gabe was getting at in starting this thread is this: Yes we all know that sexual items are always top sellers here, so what does that say about the site's orientation and how it is viewed by the public, whether members or not? it has little to do with just this specific product, more about all of them in general, this just happened to be an example. i mean really its not even just the picture, a product like that will cause frowns and get people complainin no matter what, just because of what it is and that it is here, whether you go to look at the pics or not. Because whether you agree or not, there have been people who have thought rosity was associated with pornographic material because of this type of content, and i really dont think rosity wants an association like that. its nothin personal.

If these products sell so hot then im sure they will elsewhere as well. For example, im not sure of the popularity of the rotica store now(esp when people are buying sexual items here), but if rosity were to exclude these items from the MP so people would have to put them up elsewhere like rotica, they will still sell. and i would think rotica is just the place to shop for things liek this.

again i doubt it will come to that, i mean they are top sellers so they are makin rosity the most money, thats hard to say no to. but at least that way no one could be offended by anything and rosity can keep up its PG-13 image.

This shouldnt be turned into a war over who thinks it is offensive or not, or that some people would find vulgar language as if not more offensive or not..we've all been brought up differently in different areas around the world and will all have a different idea of what is offensive to us or not. There are just some things that are still not publicly acceptable, ok wrong word, "likeable", "overlookable", whatever in any culture... you'll get a different reaction hearing the word fuck on a street than you would seeing a person walking down one holding up a poster of a close up genital shots. theres a reason why naughty mags are covered over on newstands. and why DAZ refuses such products.

as long as such sexual content is allowed here there will always be wars and rants over why we cant have this but we are allowed to do that, constant fighting and debate, all comin down on the admins. its here in the first place because this is a community and rosity is way guilty of always trying to make everyone happy. but as long as its up there will always be this debate, and the majority of us are sick of it. If these types of sexual content are removed then i see little for people to complain about- other than "wah wah thats not fair". you have plenty of places to sell elsewhere, rotica to cater to that specific audience esp, so your products will still sell... little left to be offended by at rosity, rosity keeps up a nice image, wars over offensive material and people getting frustrated at complaints will die down.

Marty knew that his product would probably offend people, and hed probably get complaints, even tho he tried his best to stay within guidelines. guidelines or not that type of material, and i dont just mean the promos, i mean the product themselves no matter how much work went into them, will always end up offending a good number of people, members or not.if somethin has the slightest chance at being labeled pornographic, someone will do it...and rosity takes the blame for havin the material up, more than the creator does.

rosity wants a certain image maintained of itself, and i think a lot of members/merchants here would like the same.

Well, Marty, you've made me break my personal vow not to contribute anymore to this badnwidth hog. I have to say that you have certainly been a gentleman throughout this and I think you summed it up about as well as can be done. I know that there are many people who will regret losing the opportunity to purchase your products here. I hate to fault Renderosity, but it does seem suspiciously like they are content to make as much money as possible off a product and then yank it when someone complains. As in your case, the TOS are meaningless if you fold like a cheap wallet at the first sign of dissent. Animotions is a "family" site, always has been. I think Renderosity is caught in an identity conflict, trying to be all things to all people and folks like you end up getting screwed. I think really, this is a site for adults and older children who's parents don't mind them seeing any more than they'd see in an art museum or at the beach when they have the filter set. Realistically though, there will always be some who still use any reason for limiting what the adults can see to their own level of comfort. I don't understand that, never have and probably never will. I suppose those on the other side of the argument are equally perplexed at my attitude. It's like Jerry falwell sitting down with Anton LaVey (founder of the Church of Satan) to discuss religion - pretty much a waste of time. I really hope that you take a break and consider your options. Certainly you can sell at Renderotica, Thralldom and probably other sites as well. Heck, find a cheap business host and set up a PayPal account - sell the stuff yourself and keep most of the money. Whatever you do, don't keep your talent to yourself. If you do that then you've truly let other people impose their values on you. As I now find myself frequently quoting... "Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." - Emiliano Zapata

"Marty knew that his product would probably offend people, and hed probably get complaints, even tho he tried his best to stay within guidelines." Honestly, I didn't forsee complaints, especially after Perfect G has been out there for about 4 months. I also didn't have to to my best to stay within guidelines either, because I did stay within guidelines. There was no effort involved. I don't really believe that anything was overlooked by the Renderosity Staff either, such as the product type or the advertising. My guess is that they were willing to take a risk on it just as I was and new full well what it was being marketed and what was in the advertising material. But, I am also sure that the Staff at Renderosity don't want this controversy, I know I wouldn't. My guess is they will let this product stay in the market place and be extra cautious of what they let into the market place in the future. I don't blame them for that now.

Hey, Emiliano Zapata I am not going to stop modeling for Renderosity. By no means, afterall, there are ownly 2 sex organs to model. There is soon to come out a series of clothing for vicki3. I am having some UV mapping issues to iron out before you see them out there though. Give me a week or two. I will consider what you said about a different market place for sex organs, but for now I am putting all my effort into the getting some quality clothing in the MP. marty-insomniaworks

theres a reason why naughty mags are covered over on newstands.

They really do that????

"I think it was simply a case of Gabe pointing it out to Clint...and Clint removing it realizing it should have never gone up in the first place." i take offense to that since it implies some sortof behind-the-scenes communication between myself and the admins. i havent spoken to clint in over a month, nor have i IMed or emailed him. i havent spoken to any admins all year. so guess again... anything i had to say about this issue i said in this thread. you make it out like rio and i are the only ones disagreeing with you on this issue.. youre either very imperceptive, or deliberately trying to make it out like its only us two arguing against the entire body of rosity members by constantly stating it in every post of yours. scroll up and see how many people support the decision and think its inappropriate... and also keep in mind that the advocates of content such as was removed will always be more vocal. take candy from a baby and it will scream bloody murder. "Those that become offended or don't like the direction the site is taking will run to other communities as they have in the past. " those few who are so offended that a collage of spread labia was pulled can join the other disgruntled ex-rosity members at poserpros and spend their days bitching at what a horrible oppressive place this is because it has a few rules and standards. "theres a reason why naughty mags are covered over on newstands." yeah theyre usually in plastic baggies, or behind the counter, or on the top shelf behind other mags... all tactics to keep them out of the hands of those who shouldnt have access to them - namely underage kids. im far from a prude -- when i have a kid i dont care if he looks at playboy mags, its pretty much just softcore, artistic admiration of the female figure. but there are some mags out there that are highly inappropriate for the underaged. ermm.. so i hear :)

dude. enough. DIE THREAD! DIE!!!!

"ya'll gotta stop twisting things and changin subjects and take a freakin chill pill before these posts continue. there is no need to be nasty. "

Since you were quoting me when you wrote this I'll respond as such.
I'm not twisting anything around. It has been a productive conversation because it has dealt with the consistancy of this site. Luckily the subjects sales have gone up but that could have easily gone the other way. Gabe was outraged enough over the banners going back under the non-nudity rule months ago to insult customers, whether he knew it or not, and had banner ads that didn't really fall under the "too nude" category pulled. His reasons for posting this public and using one of his banned ads tells me he compared the two issues. AND I said I understood it!
Because the issue is consistancy it should be discussed but there is still someone in the middle who should be considered. This time it worked out fine but taking product issues public is still, in my opinion not the best way to handle something. And believe it or not, I agreed with Gabe in this more than I wanted to.

marty,Must say you have acted and responded with a great deal of class and in a very professional manner through out this issue.It's good to hear you say you will continue your work for the MarketPlace. Too many good merchants,artist,and members have been driven from Renderosity by "the vocal few". Renderosity is a good place...work with and deal with the admin/management.... ...accept threads like this for what they really are. SWAMP

Marty; I agree with SWAMP on that. Just got your gen set a couple of days ago, and am starting to play with it. Some potential there when doing nudes, that's for sure. And can't wait to see what the tackle for Vincent is like. I have Digiport's stuff, but the more the merrier.... :)

Well, I am still waiting for the "no banner ads" filter to be implemented. I've been begging for THAT one since they first put the stupid, annoying, useless things up there at the top of the screen. mumble, mutter, gripe Kate (Death to Banner Ads!!!! especially ANIMATED ones)

Might as well hope for add free television, newspapers, magazines, radio, elevators etc. Withn the internet, the cost is minimal and even though most people hate them, I'm sure enough sales are generated to make them profitable. Spmeone must be buying those email penis enlargement scams or they would have died by now. At least the banners here are artistic, except for the ones that are obscene :-)