If I'm understanding correctly, there are a number of folks who want the standard raised. Not the quality of the image, but the subject of the image. The standard right now is no porn, no touching private parts, etc. There are others who think the standard is fine right now and still others who feel its too high and want to go lower. I am of the group that would like the standard raised. That means the most tasteless of images that is currently allowed would come up a notch or two. But I also see it is a complex subject and sitting here thinking about how to write a rule is really taking my day away from rendering. So if the admins and mods have some discretion then I'm all for it. A TOS that warns about a where that line is drawn is a good TOS, but no TOS can draw the line accurately in every circumstance. A rule can only guide. It takes wisdom as to when to apply that rule and when not to. I'm all for a TOS that gives the PTB's discretion in pulling an image and stating why to the artist. In that way, 'Osity can become a really neat site to visit and won't degrade into something that many of us care not to participate in. I'm seeing threads and comments on unbridled discretion and no consistency, or folks who honestly just don't see how their image crossed a line. Perhaps along with the rule there could be a page with the "purpose" of the rule. Oh, some are self explanatory and well written and need no explanation, but some do. For example, we deal with this in real life rules. A State statute is a law, its a rule, and its a line not to cross. But every statute has purpose behind it and that's why there are sometimes hundreds of court cases interpreting the statute and reading the legislative history and legislative intent. It is always wonderful to be able to read what the politicians said when coming up with a bill that would one day be boiled down to a simple statute. I ran across an interesting thing one day - a statute that makes it illegal to slow down when another vehicle is close behind. Really, the purpose is aimed at stopping those who jam on their brakes for tailgaters and cause accidents. An odd accident where a lady shifted gears at the same time someone was passing too closely caused that statute to be challenged. Who was at fault? The lady who's acceleration was changed during the shift and perceived as slowing or the motorcycle that tried to speed around her unsafely? Gee, what happened to common sense? You'd think the parties could figure it out. But they couldn't. It took an appeallate court to come out with caselaw interpreting the statute to allow an exception for shifting gears. After all, the statute cannot mean that people are not allowed to shift gear. And really, a motorist has a duty to maintain a safe distance ahead of them and control their vehicle. So the purpose of that statute was very important in determining whether to apply it to that particular situation. If the purpose was to create a duty on the part of a motorist for those behind them, then yes, she would be at fault. But that was not the purpose. Yeah, I know, but it shows how difficult it is to write a rule to regulate a type of behavior and not have absurd results. Ok, so, maybe one way to handle this TOS issue is to keep the rules strong, and state what the purpose is and let the admins make their own decision in their own discretion. In that way the standard can be set without writing a rule for every little circumstance and yet still give people fair warning. To the artist that wants to step right up to the line, ignore the purpose, and push for a loophole or absurd result, expect to get whacked. There's no sense whining about it, just take your whack with dignity and leave a little more room next time. By giving the admins and mods discretion they can chose to leave a crucifixion image or pull it, leave a nude or pull it. They can enforce a purpose and standard for those who go right to the line. I'm all for that and the "suitability" of an image really is something that should be enforced.