For the most part, dialyn, I agree with just about everything you say when you comment in threads. But I can't agree with you this time. It's not like I disagree, either...it's more like I think my point was not presented well enough or else it got lost in the fervent shuffle above. The only thing I really disagree with is, "And I haven't done one naked Vicky in the Temple picture, so you owe me an apology...we don't ALL do them" I don't think I need to apologize because, though it may be hard to "catch" it without benefit of speech emphasis and inflection, it was sarcasm: "the Poser forum (since ALL we do is NVIATWAS renders)" I was speaking to the reputation Poser people are branded with. I was attempting sarcasm. I realize not every image is a NVIATWAS in the gallery as much as I realize that everyone (including you AND me) don't do them. But back to the point I was trying to make. Ahem (clearing my "throat") Someone posts an image with a female nipple showing and doesn't check the nudity flag. That's wrong. Or if a penis is dangling and no warning in the form of a nudity tag. That's wrong. Someone posts an image like geoegress did with all the "shamful" parts covered up by camera placement and hands. But, admittedly, unclothed. Yes, the figure in the image was nude but you can't really see anything. My opinion, no nudity tag needed. But some people complain because she is unclothed. Take the same image and cover the same parts with a bikini. Again, no need for a nudity tag. And, I suspect fewer people complaining about the lack of a nudity tag (because NOW, she is clothed). BUT, someone MIGHT complain because THEY consider too MUCH skin the same thing as nudity. So, should we cater to those people and flag such an image with a nudity tag? THAT'S my point! IF we bow to ANYONE who is offended about the amount of skin shown, then pretty soon, female (yes, I know I'm dwelling on the female image) images will need to look like the Taliban dressed them. Because, believe me, there will always be someone who is offended and if people are "forced" to move the "line" that separates nudity and non-nudity to the more conservative side of the definition each time a complaint occurs, pretty soon, we won't be able to post images of humans at all. Is my argument TOO outrageous? Perhaps. But the problem with "creeping" censorships is that one day you look around and see that it has gone too far (because it happened a bit at a time). After all, federal, state and local governments have seen fit to dictate what my wife and I can leagally do in the privacy of our bedroom (yeah, I know it's not an example entirely related to the topic proper but it is an example of how some people think they have a right to inflict their ideals and beliefs about things to other people they will never even meet).